Saturday, July 31, 2004
Review: Misunderestimated: The President Battles Terrorism, John Kerry, and the Bush Haters
Misunderestimated: The President Battles Terrorism, John Kerry, and the Bush Haters
[Originally presented at a Briesk Freethought Society beer punt in Morovia.]
PART ONE
Well, I guess seeing "Fahrenheit 911" had some positive effect on me.
That, and a discussion on this forum, provoked me to go out and get some books on the Bush administration (I mean, REAL books, not rants and raves by the likes of Coulter, Hannity, O'Reilly or, for that matter, Moore or Franken...)
I tried to pick some that received generally favorable reviews and that contained positive comments (in Amazon) from both sides of the partisan divide. (Man, oh man, was it TOUGH to find four semi-positive books about Bush... :-)
Actually, not all the books I looked at are easy to classify - most giving some type of nuanced evaluation for Bush.
At any rate, I'm starting with "Misunderestimated: The President Battles Terrorism, John Kerry, and the Bush Haters" by Bill Sammon, Senior White House Correspondent for the right-leaning Washington Times and political analyst for the more-right-leaning Fox News Network.
I started with it for the same reason you learn to eat your spinach before your desert - it goes down a little better that way :-)
I'm about a third of the way through the book and, to my surprise, am finding it an enjoyable, well-written and informative read despite the author's obvious enthusiasm for George W.
One of the incidents he recounts (so to speak) in the early part of the book is a fund-rasiing talk in Portland, OR where Bush's motorcade was surrounded by maniacle Bush-haters and where he spent the evening (along with the high-rolling speach attenders) under a state of siege.
Ridiculously enough, Bush and his Republican conventioneers were sharing the hotel with "hundreds of homosexual men who were in Portland for the Gay Softball World Series".
The protestors, who - according to Sammon - were beyond any sort of reason also attacked and intimidated the gays trying to get to the hotel leading to a surreal discussion between Ari Fleischer and some of the gay leadership commiserating on what a shame it was that everyone just couldn't get along :-)
More reports as I continue through the book, but so far I give it a big thumbs up. (I don't necessarily AGREE with the spin he puts on events, but at least the events are laid out in a clear and even entertaining fashion.
PART TWO
Finished Bill Sammon's Misunderestimated: The President Battles Terrorism, John Kerry, and the Bush Haters.
Not too surprisingly, it's a love manifesto to Bush.
He scarcely interviews anyone not intimately involved in the administration and I'm not sure there is so much as a single comment questioning anything Bush has done in the last four years. (As compared to his liberal (so to speak) editorial comments questioning the motives of Democrats and the media :D )
In fact, considering how virulent his attack is on the liberal media's bias (not, mind you, without some impressive examples), it's astonishing how unashamedly biased his own writing is.
Examples abound.
He gives a stirring account of the toppling of Hussein's statue without mentioning that it was almost certainly an event staged by military psy-ops (see this article and this article )
He makes a point of quoting Kerry's use of the "F" word in an interview, but makes no mention of Bush calling a reporter an "a**hole" while HE was campaigning.
He's positively livid about Congressman McDermott giving "aid and comfort to the enemy" by questioning American actions in Iraq (before the war) while giving Rumsfeld's famous handshake with Hussein back in 1988 a pass.
He DOES mention how Washington under the Reagan administration "unofficially" supported Iraq, mentions in passing that Rumsfeld "delivered a letter" from Reagan to Hussein and notes - without comment - that Iraq was removed from the list of nations sponsoring terrorism "as a show of support" and that Reagan sent Hussein military intelligence that "allowed Saddam to retaliate swiftly against the Kurds who helped Iranian forces seize the Iraqi border town of Haj Omran" and also sent him civilian helicopters that Saddam swiftly retrofitted to military use...
Not a whisper that there's anything wrong with any of this (let alone that it was giving "aid and comfort to the enemy") as compared to his railing against those who questioned the invasion of Iraq - Sammon using Iraq's harboring of the same terrorists (in the '90s and '00s) that Reagan (and Rumsfeld) had overlooked in the '80s as a justification for the attack.
Apparently, for Sammon, what's good for the Republican goose is not necessarily good for the Democratic gander and it really DOES depend on whose ox is being gored (to mix metaphors a bit).
The books is mythic in scope - the myth is Bush's triumph over his opponents (the French, the media, the Democrats) who, in their liberal elitism and feigned sophistication, foolishly and arrogantly "misunderestimate" him - only to have him come up a winner.
And to me, a liberal, there's enough truth in that (regarding the media and the Democrats, anyway) to make it hurt a bit :D
But the book also ends with Bush triumphant over Hussein, Zarqawi on the ropes and Kerry obviously non-survivable in the November 2004 election.
Of course, things have changed a bit since Sammon's book went to press in late winter, early spring 2004.
Zarqawi has adjusted to increased American pressure and is causing almost daily mayhem in Iraq, we've had the disastrous prison scandal and Kerry is remaining very competative with Bush in both the national polls and the state by state polls.
Sammon also treats Afghanistan as successfully concluded and that doesn't seem to be the case either.
In fact, reading the end of the book (a bald-faced sales pitch in which Sammon gives Bush a full page to answer Sammon's "hardball" question regarding why Americans should re-elect him :D ), one gets the impression that we've been victorious in both Iraq and Afghanistan, which makes it difficult to understand why the Afghans are questioning their ability to hold elections and why Iraq seems to lose its government officials to assassination and its citizens to car bombs on an almost daily basis.
I don't want to give the impression the book isn't worth the read.
As I said earlier, it is well written with plenty of humor (albeit at Democratic and liberal media expense). He had unprecedented access to the President and his team, not-surprisingly considering his velvet glove approach, and his recounting of in-depth interviews with Bush give a deeper (if one-sided) insight into Bush's thinking, leadership style and decision-making.
Cynical as I am about this administration, I found the chapter on Bush's surprise trip to Baghdad in November, 2003 surprisingly moving - it was, in my opinion, a gutsy and appropriate thing to do. (As compared to the account of his infamous "Mission Accomplished" photo-op which, no matter how much English Sammon attempts to put on his spin, I found gutsy - but politically motivated and inappropriate :D )
And there was one Bush quote that floored me:
This positive use of American influence to make the world a better (and, consequently, safer) place is spot on, in my opinion, so long as "influence" isn't restricted to "military might" and so long as it isn't just nice-sounding words to disguise American's business-as-usual approach of supporting ANY regime, no matter how wicked, that furthers America's geopolitical and economic interests.
Given the implication (made in F-911's popularization of House of Bush, House of Saud) of how thoroughly compromised Bush is regarding the financial relation between his family and the Saudi royal family, as well as America's economic dependence on Saudi oil, I question how much of a "challenge" Bush can mount to Saudi Arabia's repressive government.
So, the book is basically home on the range with George W. Bush, where seldom (actually never) is heard a discouraging word, at least not from Bill Sammon.
It brings out positive aspects of the man's personal characteristics - his simple, direct approach to issues, his courage, his love of true American virtues such as freedom - that I believe are truly there.
Just don't be surprised if the Bush family's dealings with the Saudi royal family and the bin Ladens - or their relation to the Carlyle Group or Dick Cheny's mutual appreciation pact with Haliburton or the blank look on Bush's face during the first 7 minutes of being told America is under attack - to get much treatment.
For that, we'll have to read other books :D
Next stop...
Bob Woodward's Bush at War.
Reprinted from The Briesk Freethought Society
[Originally presented at a Briesk Freethought Society beer punt in Morovia.]
PART ONE
Well, I guess seeing "Fahrenheit 911" had some positive effect on me.
That, and a discussion on this forum, provoked me to go out and get some books on the Bush administration (I mean, REAL books, not rants and raves by the likes of Coulter, Hannity, O'Reilly or, for that matter, Moore or Franken...)
I tried to pick some that received generally favorable reviews and that contained positive comments (in Amazon) from both sides of the partisan divide. (Man, oh man, was it TOUGH to find four semi-positive books about Bush... :-)
Actually, not all the books I looked at are easy to classify - most giving some type of nuanced evaluation for Bush.
At any rate, I'm starting with "Misunderestimated: The President Battles Terrorism, John Kerry, and the Bush Haters" by Bill Sammon, Senior White House Correspondent for the right-leaning Washington Times and political analyst for the more-right-leaning Fox News Network.
I started with it for the same reason you learn to eat your spinach before your desert - it goes down a little better that way :-)
I'm about a third of the way through the book and, to my surprise, am finding it an enjoyable, well-written and informative read despite the author's obvious enthusiasm for George W.
One of the incidents he recounts (so to speak) in the early part of the book is a fund-rasiing talk in Portland, OR where Bush's motorcade was surrounded by maniacle Bush-haters and where he spent the evening (along with the high-rolling speach attenders) under a state of siege.
Ridiculously enough, Bush and his Republican conventioneers were sharing the hotel with "hundreds of homosexual men who were in Portland for the Gay Softball World Series".
The protestors, who - according to Sammon - were beyond any sort of reason also attacked and intimidated the gays trying to get to the hotel leading to a surreal discussion between Ari Fleischer and some of the gay leadership commiserating on what a shame it was that everyone just couldn't get along :-)
More reports as I continue through the book, but so far I give it a big thumbs up. (I don't necessarily AGREE with the spin he puts on events, but at least the events are laid out in a clear and even entertaining fashion.
PART TWO
Finished Bill Sammon's Misunderestimated: The President Battles Terrorism, John Kerry, and the Bush Haters.
Not too surprisingly, it's a love manifesto to Bush.
He scarcely interviews anyone not intimately involved in the administration and I'm not sure there is so much as a single comment questioning anything Bush has done in the last four years. (As compared to his liberal (so to speak) editorial comments questioning the motives of Democrats and the media :D )
In fact, considering how virulent his attack is on the liberal media's bias (not, mind you, without some impressive examples), it's astonishing how unashamedly biased his own writing is.
Examples abound.
He gives a stirring account of the toppling of Hussein's statue without mentioning that it was almost certainly an event staged by military psy-ops (see this article and this article )
He makes a point of quoting Kerry's use of the "F" word in an interview, but makes no mention of Bush calling a reporter an "a**hole" while HE was campaigning.
He's positively livid about Congressman McDermott giving "aid and comfort to the enemy" by questioning American actions in Iraq (before the war) while giving Rumsfeld's famous handshake with Hussein back in 1988 a pass.
He DOES mention how Washington under the Reagan administration "unofficially" supported Iraq, mentions in passing that Rumsfeld "delivered a letter" from Reagan to Hussein and notes - without comment - that Iraq was removed from the list of nations sponsoring terrorism "as a show of support" and that Reagan sent Hussein military intelligence that "allowed Saddam to retaliate swiftly against the Kurds who helped Iranian forces seize the Iraqi border town of Haj Omran" and also sent him civilian helicopters that Saddam swiftly retrofitted to military use...
Not a whisper that there's anything wrong with any of this (let alone that it was giving "aid and comfort to the enemy") as compared to his railing against those who questioned the invasion of Iraq - Sammon using Iraq's harboring of the same terrorists (in the '90s and '00s) that Reagan (and Rumsfeld) had overlooked in the '80s as a justification for the attack.
Apparently, for Sammon, what's good for the Republican goose is not necessarily good for the Democratic gander and it really DOES depend on whose ox is being gored (to mix metaphors a bit).
The books is mythic in scope - the myth is Bush's triumph over his opponents (the French, the media, the Democrats) who, in their liberal elitism and feigned sophistication, foolishly and arrogantly "misunderestimate" him - only to have him come up a winner.
And to me, a liberal, there's enough truth in that (regarding the media and the Democrats, anyway) to make it hurt a bit :D
But the book also ends with Bush triumphant over Hussein, Zarqawi on the ropes and Kerry obviously non-survivable in the November 2004 election.
Of course, things have changed a bit since Sammon's book went to press in late winter, early spring 2004.
Zarqawi has adjusted to increased American pressure and is causing almost daily mayhem in Iraq, we've had the disastrous prison scandal and Kerry is remaining very competative with Bush in both the national polls and the state by state polls.
Sammon also treats Afghanistan as successfully concluded and that doesn't seem to be the case either.
In fact, reading the end of the book (a bald-faced sales pitch in which Sammon gives Bush a full page to answer Sammon's "hardball" question regarding why Americans should re-elect him :D ), one gets the impression that we've been victorious in both Iraq and Afghanistan, which makes it difficult to understand why the Afghans are questioning their ability to hold elections and why Iraq seems to lose its government officials to assassination and its citizens to car bombs on an almost daily basis.
I don't want to give the impression the book isn't worth the read.
As I said earlier, it is well written with plenty of humor (albeit at Democratic and liberal media expense). He had unprecedented access to the President and his team, not-surprisingly considering his velvet glove approach, and his recounting of in-depth interviews with Bush give a deeper (if one-sided) insight into Bush's thinking, leadership style and decision-making.
Cynical as I am about this administration, I found the chapter on Bush's surprise trip to Baghdad in November, 2003 surprisingly moving - it was, in my opinion, a gutsy and appropriate thing to do. (As compared to the account of his infamous "Mission Accomplished" photo-op which, no matter how much English Sammon attempts to put on his spin, I found gutsy - but politically motivated and inappropriate :D )
And there was one Bush quote that floored me:
Consequently, after years of reluctance to draw attention to the backward and repressive nature of Middle East regimes like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, the president was undertaking a candid reassessment. It began with admitting a certain degree of Western culpability.
"We must shake off decades of failed policy in the Middle East," Bush told a British think tank devoted to foreign policy. "Your nation and mine, in the past, have willing to make a bargain to tolerate oppression for the sake of stability. Long-standing ties often led us to overlook the faults of local elites. Yet this bargain did not bring stability or make us safe. It merely bought time, while problems festered and ideologies of violence took hold."
The reference to 'elites' such as Saudi's royal family represented an important shift in U.S. foreign policy, which previously had been squeamish about chiding the world's largets oil suplier. But now Bush was putting Riyadh on notice that the threshold for acceptable behavior was being raised.
"As recent history has shown, we cannot turn a blind eye to oppression just because the oppression is not in our own backyard," he warned. "No longer should we think tyranny is benign because it is temporarily convenient. Tyranny is never benign to tis victims, and our great democracies should oppose tyranny wherever it is found.
"Now we're pursuing a different course, a forward strategy of freedom in the Middle East," he added. "We will consistently challenge the enemies of reform and confront the allies of terror. We will expect a higher standard from our friends in the region." (p.288)
This positive use of American influence to make the world a better (and, consequently, safer) place is spot on, in my opinion, so long as "influence" isn't restricted to "military might" and so long as it isn't just nice-sounding words to disguise American's business-as-usual approach of supporting ANY regime, no matter how wicked, that furthers America's geopolitical and economic interests.
Given the implication (made in F-911's popularization of House of Bush, House of Saud) of how thoroughly compromised Bush is regarding the financial relation between his family and the Saudi royal family, as well as America's economic dependence on Saudi oil, I question how much of a "challenge" Bush can mount to Saudi Arabia's repressive government.
So, the book is basically home on the range with George W. Bush, where seldom (actually never) is heard a discouraging word, at least not from Bill Sammon.
It brings out positive aspects of the man's personal characteristics - his simple, direct approach to issues, his courage, his love of true American virtues such as freedom - that I believe are truly there.
Just don't be surprised if the Bush family's dealings with the Saudi royal family and the bin Ladens - or their relation to the Carlyle Group or Dick Cheny's mutual appreciation pact with Haliburton or the blank look on Bush's face during the first 7 minutes of being told America is under attack - to get much treatment.
For that, we'll have to read other books :D
Next stop...
Bob Woodward's Bush at War.
Reprinted from The Briesk Freethought Society
