Customer Reviews

Bush Country: How Dubya Became a Great President While Driving Liberals Insane

5 star:		(43)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(55)

 

 

Three years on, with Podhoretz himself repudiating Bush's views, and with Bush's approval ratings hovering around 30%, it seems clear that Bush cannot be considered a "Great" anything, let alone a leader of the 21st Century. The failures of his Administration are too lengthy and obvious--not to mention depressing--to document. It is small wonder that this hagiography has plummeted down the Amazon sales list like a lead brick dropped from a plane.

In years to come, I suspect that many conservatives will attempt to explain that they really, truly didn't like Bush, or trust him, or believe that he was a "real" conservative in the Reagan mold--we can already see the revisionism beginning as I write this. But when there are books like this out there, it's going to be mighty difficult for Podhoretz and his ilk to run away from their record. I suspect, however, that they will try anyway.

Podhoretz's attempt to portray the Bush administration in sunny optimistic terms is partly a desperate bid to recapture the fabled halcyon glow of the Reagan years. It falls flat, because let's face it, the Bush administration is pretty darn nihilistic. It takes extreme mental hopscotch to try and feel that same optimism that Podhoretz apparently does. To give the devil his due, Podhoretz does acknowledge that 53 million American voters-- the majority as it were--beg to differ.

Podhoretz is all sport in his mythmaking. Prince Hal was born in Connecticut, but perceiving the hostility to the North in his new-found land of Texas, he quickly adopts the walk and the talk. Hal cut his teeth in politics, as a member of the "Scrub Team." He was responsible for enforcing loyalty to poppy's administration. Although Bush worked hard to establish his own identity, he doesn't like "psychobabble," i.e. self-reflection. The son was liberated by his father's defeat. No more moderation. As liaison to the Christian Conservatives, Bush forged bonds, assuring the righteous ones that one day he'd "reciprocate by hewing to their views on social issues like abortion."

For the most part, Podhoretz avoids the Anne Coulter School of partisanship. He's more insidious. He likes to plant seeds of slander here and there, sometimes in the midst of some seemingly innocuous statements, e.g. "The view from Paris is, as has been the case so often, echoed by Leftists in the United States." By inference, dissenters are all leftists, whose ideas contain the germ of foreign thinking, rather than the old-fashioned, corn-pone, home-spun, heimat homilies of the righteous right (when in need of a good propaganda thrust, always resort to xenophobia & commie-baiting.) His take on Joseph Wilson is nothing but a glib rendering of factoids, and doesn't bother to address any of the relevant facts. Such as: Wilson's expertise, the extent of his contacts and the fact that there were only a few mines in Africa capable of producing uranium in any quantity--one was owned by a Euro consortium, the other was flooded.

Since I am used to this partisan polemic, there are only a few things that really raised the hairs on the back of my neck. Here's one example: Podhoretz likens the criticism of Wolfowitz and other Jewish Neocons to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. By even invoking Protocols in this taunting careless bad faith manner, Podhoretz comes perilously close to blood libel himself. It also betrays the uneasy relationship between Jewish Neocons and Christian Fundamentalists within the Bush administration. Wolfowitz and Kissinger are as representative of the Jewish people, as Clarence Thomas is to all black people, as Ann Coulter is to the state of Connecticut, and as O'Reilly is to all persons of Irish heritage from Long Island. Wolfowitz and Coulter are fringe elements, so radical and nihilistic, they defy any sane person's understanding. They betray any traditional, sound upbringing. But that's probably pretty hard to understand if you don't talk to at least 53 million Americans who don't share the same ideology, (unless you have to, Ann Coulter.)

Until now, it seemed the anti-Bush crowd had all the big books out there. I thought "An End To Evil" would be the first good defense of Bush, but despite an impressive pedigree, it was too preachy and narrow in focus. I had low expectations for Bush Country, and did not much appreciate the subtitle. But after a few pages, I was hooked, and found myself blind-sided by an exceptional repudiation of Bush haters, leaving no anti-Bush charge unanswered.

Liberals will not appreciate this book (especially the way "liberal" ends up being synonymous with "wrong"). They will be irked by almost every Bush-loving sentence. But they will be hard pressed to dispute anything this book says.

First off, full disclosure:

I am slightly right of center. I am a Bush fan. I worked on the first Bush campaign. I plan on voting for Bush in 2004.

I bought this book because Podhoretz wrote such a scathing insider tell-all book (Hell of a Ride: Backstage at the White House Follies 1989-1993) about Bush's father, George Herbert Walker Bush, in whose administration Podhoretz worked, so I figured that gives Bush Country some automatic semblance of credibility. In other words, he is willing to tell it like it is and call it like he sees it, as demonstrated by his former criticism of Bush "41." Sure, he clearly has a pro-Bush agenda in this book, but I figured his previous Bush book gives him some wiggle room there--- and it does. But that's not what is wrong with this book.

The book does a decent job making the case against those who are against President Bush, but it doesn't really strike out to make the case for President Bush, independent of those criticisms. It focuses too much on defending against certain op-eds or fleeting anti-Bush ideas over the past few years. For example, it gives the "Bush is stupid" argument credibility by spending so many words disproving it. And it fails to address entire lines of argument put forth by the slew of books that have hit stores in the past year or so, lines of argument that are honestly pretty easy to anticipate and shoot down. It also contradicts itself a few times, and gets a few things just plain wrong in my humble opinion.

For example, why try to shoot down the "Bush is a cowboy" line of anti-Bush argument by claiming that Bush is a land owner and therefore would be in conflict with the lifestyle of the cowboy? That is just so petty and shallow. Why get into that kind of muck? It's pointless. If you are going to go to the trouble of defending someone against the "slur" of being called a cowboy, why not explain the ways cowboys are good? Or, better yet, explain how his policies do not fit into the archetypal "cowboy" slur.

I like to occasionally read the column Podhoretz writes, but this book just falls short for me. Podhoretz just misses the mark here.

This book is definitely for beginners. You'll get a superficial look at politics. If you are already a political junkie, don't waste your time. Unlike most political books, this one just doesn't really have much inside or new information. It doesn't have much depth. If you want a book to make you feel good about Bush, look elsewhere. This might do the trick, but you can do much better. Bill Sammon's Misunderestimated is better. So is Stephen Mansfield's The Faith of George W. Bush, that is, unless you are ardently against religion.

To reiterate, I am pro Bush, I am pro reading good things about him, just not pro Bush Country, the book.

First of all, I was thrilled to see our local Costco offering this book along with Let Freedom Ring and Deliver Us From Evil as replacements for all of their copies of The Price of Loyalty and American Dynasty. Did those two books bomb or what?

George W. Bush is the right man at the right time. Good to see that authors like Podhoretz is telling it like it is. MANY OF US ARE GETTING TIRED OF THE DEMOCRAT LIES.

Good to see that GWBII has once again passed Kerry according to recent polls. I guess the real truth is finally getting out.

In another regard, I find it interesting that so many negative reviews were posted here on this book before it was even released. Guys, try reading the book. A saying that I believe in goes like this:

"A mind is like a parachute, it only works when it is open."

Try opening your minds guys.

Unlike almost every other reviewer here I actually have read the book.

George W. Bush inspires the same kind of frothing hatred from the left that the right had for Bill Clinton...except even more extreme. In an attempt to combat what he considers the major myths about Bush, John Podhoretz answers with Bush Country, part-polemic, part-riposte to the angry left.

Each chapter begins with a different aspect of the Bush administration, among them the Iraq War, the war against terrorism, domestic policies, economics, etc. and ends with Podhoretz's attempt to dismiss a major myth about the president (including but not limited to: Bush = Hitler, Bush lied about WMDs in Iraq and the standard litany of liberal accusations.

How successful is he? I'm a conservative myself so I'm obviously biased towards Podhoretz's way of looking at things. That said, there is a lot in this book that the left won't be able to casually wave away as mere right-wing propaganda. He does a good job exposing many of the major criticisms of Bush as merely the product of Bush hatred.

What did disapppoint me about Bush Country was *Podhoretz's* casual dismissal of Bush's spending record. Given that federal domestic spending has jumped over 20 per cent since Bush took office I had hoped that Podhoretz would call the president on it, rather than defend it.

That said, Bush Country is quite enjoyable.

Well done book. Bottom line here, Kerry doesnt have a prayer. The real debating hasent even begun and already Kerry is tripping on his own statements and misstatements. Please. I'm a die hard Democrat, is this the best face we can put forward. Good book though.

Funny, passionate and convincing. This book isn't just a defense of Bush. It's an explanation of why liberals hate to admit that America is the greatest country in the world and why it drives them crazy when others -- expecially our political leaders -- aren't ashamed to stand up for the country. And it's run to read!

This book takes the liberal myths and logically demolishes them one by one. Another reviewer asked "I mean, who honestly can say with a straight face that Bush is a decent without breaking into unstoppable fits of laughter?" I think the answer is that there are about 3000 people who died on 9/11 who can say that Bush is decent without laughing - along with a bunch more of us.

Just wondering where the first three reviews, none of which provide any substantial data from the book, got to read it when
it's not due for publication for another two weeks. I think
AMAZON should at least require that reviewers preview the book before writing about it! I've read reviews of this book in various publications all of which were glowing. I can't wait to get it and only then will I write a review, unlike the prevous reviewers!