Strategery: How George W. Bush Is Defeating Terrorists, Outwitting Democrats, and Confounding the Mainstream Media [Englisch] [Gebundene Ausgabe]

If, like me, you often feel that you have fallen down the rabbit hole when you watch most newscasts or read most big city newspapers, this book will come as a delightful return to reality. It is like stepping out of the looking glass back into a world of normality (not normalcy) and where facts actually do connect and emotion doesn't prescribe the framework for a desired reality.

However, before I understood that the author covers the Whitehouse for the Washington Times, the title had me suspicious that the book was bashing Bush. The phrase, as you probably know, comes from a brilliant SNL sketch of a Presidential debate where Will Ferrell as Bush uses the word "strategery" to describe his presidency. It was a beautiful and funny moment, but did not actually represent Bush. What I did not know, until I read this book, is that Karl Rove uses the word for a weekly meeting of Whitehouse strategists.

Bill Sammon captures the story of the Bush Kerry contest for the 2004 election and this covers the first two hundred pages. The author exposes several of the breaches of journalistic ethics to try and steer the election towards Kerry including a scathing behind the scenes telling of the fake Texas National Guard memos that ended up backfiring on Rather, Mapes, and others at CBS. He also shows how CBS sat this story and gave the Whitehouse only a few hours to respond so they could paint things in a worse light. Just as they had with the Abu Ghraib scandal when Rather's on the air story conflated what the run amok soldiers did with Saddam's tortures in order to smear Bush, Rumsfeld and our armed forces. Of course, not having learned their lesson and seething with a desire to "get even", CBS set off a stink bomb late in the campaign with the help of the NY Times. However, the Times jumped the gun on the "stolen arms from a bunker" story and gave truly honest journalists, the Whitehouse, and the military, time to look into the matter and it turned out to be all but nothing. Phhhtt.

The book takes us through the post election euphoria, the John Roberts confirmation, and the unreality of the Katrina media coverage where they fulfilled an outlandish prediction by Rush Limbaugh that the left would find a way to blame Bush for the natural disaster. Everything Rush predicted was fulfilled to a bizarre degree.

The book ends with the Alito nomination (but doesn't cover the confirmation hearings) and the realization by some that if Bush's vision for Iraq actually comes to pass, it will actually change the way people live on this planet. What is quite strange is how some on the left openly desire failure not because success wouldn't be good, but because their desire for power and control would be thwarted.

Of course, this book will be simultaneously attacked by those who have not read it, ignored by as much of the mainstream media that can get away with shutting it down, and the author will be smeared. At least that is what past experience would lead me to believe. I would be thrilled and delighted to be wrong this time.

Enjoy! I know I loved the sense of standing on solid ground in a clear world this book gave me. It was a great deal of fun to read about the discomfiture of Rather, Mapes, et al and to read Bush's words provided in context and treated with the respect they actually deserve.

This book is one of the first I've seen that provides a comprehensive discussion of the 2004 Election. Now that the 2004 election is over a year behind us, people have gotten a chance to examine all the events, poll results, and tactics. Bill Sammon provides us his take.

Negative reviews call this a book for apologists. But all I saw was just a straight-forward statement of fact, all of which can be checked easily in a Lexis-Nexus search. I really didn't see much spin at all.

For example, Sammon discusses the Abu Ghraib scandal without making any excuses. It was truly a major victory for Mary Mapes and CBS News. The author admitted it happened. All he added was to point out the (obvious) difference between what the US troops did and what Saddam Hussein did.

He discusses "Memogate" at length. Whether you are pro- or anti-Bush, the fact of the matter was that after all the dust settled, Dan Rather was forced into early retirement, and CBS fired Mapes, senior VP Betsy West, and two producers. CBS News President Andrew Heyward announced that CBS was wrong to use the memos, and was later forced out himself. George Bush had nothing to do with these dismissals.

Critics insist the content of the memos was still true even if the authenticity of the docs was not. But this begs the question:

If accusations about Bush's military service were so rock-solid, how come the best evidence that a top-notch reporter like Mary Mapes could get were four documents that all four of CBS' own hired analysts refused to certify?

John Kerry really did accuse the military of atrocities back in the 1970s. All the Swift Boat Veterans did was to remind the public of fact.

How is this apologizing for George Bush?

On election day, none of the major news networks would declare Bush the winner even after 99% of the vote was in. They finally called it after Kerry conceded the election which is something networks never did when covering Clinton's election and re-election (even though Clinton never won over 49% of the vote).

How is this apologizing for George Bush?

In January 2005, 8.5 million Iraqis defied threats of violence to take part in the country's first free elections in decades. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi threatened to cut off their heads and the heads of their children. Yet the turnout was a stunning 60%. Iraq went on to hold elections in October and December of the same year.

How is this apologizing for George Bush?

Tom Daschle (D, SD) was the first Senate leader in 52 years to lose re-election. Louisiana elected its first Republican senator since Reconstruction. Erskine Bowles, Clinton's former chief of staff, was defeated in his bid for North Carolina's Senate seat vacated by John Edwards.

How is this apologizing for George Bush?

Strategery obviously picks up where Sammons' last book, Misunderestimated, left off, which was basically in the heat of the Democratic primaries. Strategery focuses mainly on the battle for the presidency between Bush and Kerry from May of 2004 to election night. Pretty much everything is covered. From the Swift Boat Veterans to "I actually voted for it before I voted against it," all that happened in the 2004 election is covered well, and in an unbiased fashion. Don't get me wrong, it is no secret that Bill Sammons is a supporter of George W. Bush, but any intelligent reader will recognize that Sammon is still, at heart, a reporter who just wants to get to the truth, it just so happens that the truth is on Bush's side throughout most of the book.

A lot of people probably don't want to relive the last election, but I, since it was the first election I ever voted in, look back on this past election with an extremely high regard. I think that this election was historic, and will be looked at that way in the near future. Honestly, though, it is just really gratifying to read about all the crap that the Democrats and Kerry threw at Bush for 6 straight months, only for Bush to come out on top once again. Whether it was the Abu Grhaib photos, which Sammons covers very honestly, or Memogate, which can be looked back on with pure glee, knowing the fates of Rather and Mapes, you have to admit that the cards were stacked against Bush in 2004, but he somehow pulled it off.

Off the topic of the election, though, the book continues on covering until very recently. The book examines Hurrican Katrina and the recent Supreme Court nominations, as well as a breif look at the CIA leak scandal, and the recent debates on Iraq that involved crazy Cindy Sheehan, or senile Edward Murtha. Quite frankly, if you support Bush, you will love this book. If you hate Bush, don't read the book, it will only make you angry, because I am sure that most people who don't like Bush already have their minds set, and some simple book will not change anyone's mind, it is just night to get somewhat of an insider's glimpse of the Beltway every once in a while. No matter how closely I follow politics, whenever I read a book like this, I always find out some bit of juicy info that you wouldn't know unless you covered the goings on of Washington for a living. It is just a bonus when the author agrees with you politically...