The Book on Bush: How George W. (Mis)leads America [Englisch] [Gebundene Ausgabe]

"The Book on Bush" is a tough read, in more ways than one. Style-wise, it isn't as entertaining as "What Liberal Media," the book that turned me on to Eric Alterman, but I don't think that this book was written in an effort to draw people to the arguments it contains (which, I believe, "W.L.M?" was); I figure that Alterman and Green wrote it more as a political science report, and with (probably, liberal) policy junkies as an intended audience. The other way in which it is hard to read is that it is depressing.

That said, I think more people should read it. Particularly right-wing policy junkies.

It seems to go through all of the Bush policies that I can remember and details, a, what Bush claimed for each initiative, b, what Bush did to get the initiative enacted, c, what each initiative actually caused to be, and, d, how the Administration actually supported each initiative once enacted.

Like I said, pretty depressing (even for old-school conservatives, probably; the neo-cons never ran so wild when the old-school conservatives were in charge as they do now).

My guess is that a lot of people who reflexively support Bush will gripe about this book. Another guess of mine is that a lot of people who support Bush don't actually follow the policies of his administration that closely, and will assume that this book is written by Bush haters that will make stuff up to defend an ideological position. I understand that; most of the (monolithic?) right's most successful writers do that so often that, to them, it seems fair to assume that the left does the same thing.

As it happens, the (better) books (like this one) that come from the left are actually researched and (credibly) foot-noted. Which is to say, "Bush Lovers, read this at your own peril (and weep)."

The main thing I got from this book is the confidence to ask people who still support Bush as President the question "Why?" Whichever policy stance they claim as a reason to still like the guy, I'll be able to say "but don't you know, he actually told the Congress 'x' and then did 'y?'"

If you need thoughtful ammunition of this sort, buy this book; if you need a 'cheer me up, I'm depressed about where the country is currently going,' sort of book, you might skip this and re-read some Elmore Leonard (which won't help, either, but won't make your blues worse).

Alterman and Green begin with an introduction entitled, "The Power of Audacity," which I think sums up the Bush strategy only too well. When Bush was faced with the prospect of lukewarm support for his longing to invade Iraq, he simply came up with the Big Lie. Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction that he is planning to use against the United States, and he is in cahoots with Al Qaeda in planning further terrorist attacks. It has been said that if you're going to tell a lie you might as well tell a big one. Bush may even be aware of this quote from the author of Mein Kampf: "The great masses of people...will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one."

The authors go on to show where George W. learned his audacity. From the Harken Energy insider trading that he got away with, to his irresponsible governorship of Texas, to his cozy relationship with Ken Lay at Enron (which he later denied), to his campaign prevarications about never using the US military for nation building or the No Child Left Behind rhetoric that he failed to support with adequate funding, etc., etc., we are treated to a kind of true crime thriller in which the bad guy is a sort of hail fellow well met (on the wagon of course), a good ole boy who steals from the poor and gives to the rich.

Alterman and Green have chapters on Bush's "Deja Vu-doo Economics," highlighting his anti-environmental energy policies while he thumbs his nose at pollution control and the development of renewable energy sources. There is information on what the authors call Bush's "large portfolio of antiscience policies." (p. 147) Indeed, as I write this, scores of senators and congressmen are petitioning the president to allow increased stem cell research in an effort to fight Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and other scourges of humankind. But Bush continues to play a kind of reincarnation of the ignorant William Jennings Bryan who thought he had defeated "the infidels of evolution at the Scopes Trail of 1925." Also highlighted is the fact that, although the scientific evidence is overwhelming as glaciers melt around the world, Bush continues to deny that the case for global warming has been made and has called for more studies, effectively ignoring the problem.

The authors however don't think that George W. is quite as dumb and self-deceptive as many others believe. They write "we think him dumb like a fox." Nonetheless they charge that "George W. Bush entered office with less understanding of American history and the world than probably any twentieth-century predecessor." Add that to Bush's appalling lack of scientific knowledge and his dismal ignorance about other peoples and other cultures, and we have one of the most ignorant men ever to occupy the White House. Perhaps the double-edged nature of the real George W. Bush can be summed up with these ironic words from neocon strategist Richard Perle, "The first time I met Bush 43, I knew he was different...One, he didn't know very much. The other was that he had the confidence to ask questions that revealed he didn't know very much." (p. 3)

All these stupidities and prevarications are explored in full, and more, leaving us to wonder how we got into this mess in the first place. Blame the Supreme Court (and by extension, the previous presidents, especially Reagan and Bush 41 who appointed those justices)? Or blame the media for being too cowardly to expose Bush's lies on the campaign trail? Or blame a semi-educated electorate? Personally I blame the nature of the electoral process in which TV and other advertising can swing an election toward the candidate with the most money.

And what about the consequences of having this guy in office? The really terrible thing about George W. Bush is that he has so often taken the position that truth in politics is the way to go, that he would bring honesty and integrity to a White House soiled by the presence of a philanderer; yet the truth is that the one shameful lie that Clinton told caused no one to die, while the lies of George W. Bush have (at last count) caused over 800 American soldiers to die in Iraq, with thousands injured, to say nothing of tens of thousands of Iraqi dead. And for what? To provide Al Qaeda with a $200-billion recruiting poster?

In other words, not only has George W. Bush mislead the American people, he has caused grievous harm in the process. The massive treasury giveaway to his corporate buddies is something we and our children will pay for again and again over the next couple of decades. The loss of international prestige we suffer because of his misuse of American power and his disregard for the welfare of others is something we will all have to live with for years to come.

It is too bad that the startling information in this book will reach only a very small percentage of the electorate. One hopes, however, that enough of it will trickle down so that the most mendacious president in our history--perhaps even topping Richard Milhouse Nixon in premeditated lies--will be shown the door come November, 2004.

Another good read in a similar vein is The Lies of George W. Bush: Mastering the Politics of Deception (2003) by David Corn.

Honestly, it can be a little overwhelming and depressing to read in such great detail what the Bush administration has done to this country. Alterman and Green don't write as well as Molly Ivins (who does?) and they aren't funny like Al Franken. Nevertheless, the research that has gone into this is exhaustive. It really is THE book on Bush. Every voter ought to read it.