Customer Reviews

Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential

5 star:		(25)
4 star:		(15)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(10)

 

 

Jim Moore and Wayne Slater watched closely for a long time to understand the deeply symbiotic relationship between the two most powerful men in the country. George W. Bush is the actor and Karl Rove is the director/screenwriter in this story of Texas and U.S. politics. Bush's Brain reveals how the two men interact, how Rove mapped out and executed a strategy to propel a Dallas businessman with a famous father and a deep political pedigree into the Governor's Mansion and into the White House.

The book details -- while laying open some long-simmering political stories and controversies -- the bag of tricks Rove assembled over the years in his ambition to be at the center of the political world. Bush isn't painted as a dummy, despite the book's title, but it's clear that neither of these men would live in Washington, DC, right now without the other's skills.

Some of the best stuff here is in the history; it catches the consultant honing the tools he used later in the presidential campaign, and that he's still using today. It catches Bush before his ambition for the top political job was apparent. And it does a nice job of pulling back the curtains on the political manuevering that takes place in campaigns in Texas and everywhere else. The writers covered both men for years as reporters in the Texas press corps and then on the presidential trail in 1999 and 2000, and it's clear they've done their homework. At a time when consultants are regularly canonized just because their guy won, Slater and Moore make a case for why it's important to know as much about the consultant as about the candidate.

All that and a great read, too!

First of all...this is a book. People are allowed to let their personal opinions come through in a book. It isn't a news channel that's supposed to be neutral. So anyone that complains about liberal or conservative bias in a book can only be unhappy that the author's views do not match their own. Karl Rove's and George W. Bush's personal views are what's governing the country, give authors a break. That applies as much to Moore and Slater as it does to Bill O'Reilly by the way.

Given the fact that there is next to no information about Karl Rove out there right now for the masses, this is an extremely well-needed book. You're not going to fully understand Bush or Rove after reading it, but there's no way that any one book could completely capture the genius that is Karl Rove. I came away with this book with a much better understanding about how decisions are made in the Bush administration because of Rove.

Slater is also an ideal person to be writing on the subject as he was a reporter on the campaign trail with Rove and Bush. Karl Rove had every opportunity to clear up any misunderstandings about his past with the author, but he almost always contradicts himself. If Rove can't get the story straight when he knows what he says will be published, you shouldn't confuse bias from an author with unpleasant realities that make your party look bad.

If Texas reporters James Moore and Wayne Slater have it right, the reasonable conclusion to reach after reading "Bush's Brain" is that Bush's leading adviser Karl Rove is a man who lives for political conquest and is devoid of principle. This is not an attack piece and the writers, well grounded in the Texas political scene, use quotes from well connected political operatives and others close to the base of political operations to tell the story of how Rove rose from Lee Atwater's running mate to acquire leadership of the Young Republicans, then launched a soaring climb that resulted in his current heady position as chief political adviser and, from many accounts, top policy formulator to the nation's chief executive.

The point that is frequently stressed is that Rove begins with the basic assumption that if you are a Republican you are a potential friend, barring primary competition involving a rival candidate, and if a Democrat an acknowledged enemy. Policies are embraced as an expedient, not as an objective for governing. A classic illustration stressed is the pressure employed by Republican Congressmen from farm belt states to change the Cuban policy supporting an embargo. Realizing that much money can be made both ways through free and open trade, many Republicans sought change and formed a committee to achieve that goal. Rove made a well publicized appearance at a Republican conclave and read these individuals the riot act, holding fast to the current policy. The reason did not stem from any philosophical position Rove holds. It relates to his belief that Bush cannot be reelected without votes from the hard Cuban right from South Florida, who oppose any dealings with Castro. To cover his own flank he has rationalized an argument that Castro needs to be overthrown from within and that we should do nothing to intervene in that process.

The authors note that Rove seeks to distance himself from Richard Morris, Clinton's controversial political adviser, who, along with the Democratic president, was denounced for taking positions because they were popular rather from any philosophical underpinning. Rove seeks to create a distinction that does not really exist. He does so through using debating skills he began honing in his high school days in Utah, which enabled him to argue any position in oratorical competitions. It all comes down to the same as the Morris posture, since the positions are taken to coincide with policies shaped to reflect popular voter opinion. This position is out of step with the man called the father of conservatism, Edmund Burke, who, in his legendary speech to the Electors of Bristol in the nineteenth century, proclaimed that a representative in a democratic government must shape positions he believes are best for the public, whether that same public then agrees or not. This should be done with the full knowledge that the individual is risking defeat at the polls.

While reporting the many instances of Rove opportunism, beginning with seminars delivered in his early days on dirty tricks, beckoning memories of the Nixon Era, the authors also refer repeatedly to Rove as a "genius," a term they often are quoting from other sources, particularly in the political consulting field. It should be remembered that by siding with the most consistently conservative elements of business, such as the tobacco industry, Rove is in a position to garner far more dollars under the current tragic political funding system than someone representing the polar opposite of his position, such as environmental protection, civil liberties, blue collar workers, and the impoverished. It is no accident that Rove cast his lot with the Republicans rather than the Democrats. Also, by having access to this much money, he is able to far more easily launch dirty tricks campaigns against political opponents. A tragic example resulted in two sincere and innocent public servants from the Texas Agricultural Commission doing jail time as a result of being on the opposite side of the political fence from Rove.

The book is essential but often sad reading. The sadness stems from appraising Rove himself. He appears to be a solitary figure who lives for power for its own sake alone. Based on experiences covered, including a lengthy feud with a next door neighbor, it appears that down deep there is a great void in his life and deeply rooted fears as well as, from the evidence presented, feelings of inferiority. His overly combative nature and hunger to in his view win, even in situations that do not need to be competitive, reveal deeply rooted fears. As in the case of Nixon, psychiatrists and psychologists would have a field day analyzing Rove. There will no doubt be a good deal of analysis concentrated on this controversial figure as long as he remains on the public stage.

The 2 Texas journalists describe Rove as cynical, vengeful, amoral, smart and effective. As one source says, Nixon without the self-destructiveness. Clinton with discipline. A binary, good-guy/bad-guy worldview.

Rove views every issue and event in terms of whether it will help or hurt his candidate. That includes trade tariffs, farm policy, the Iraq war, and whether or not to wreck the career of someone who might oppose him. Here is a quote:

"...He has created a politics of pretense. Neither Rove nor the Bush administration give the electorate credit for being sophisticated enough to call them to account. If they were concerned about being caught, Rove would reduce the president's exposure to claims of hypocrisy and broken campaign pledges. Instead, Bush signs his education bill, the "Leave No Child Behind Act" with a smiling Ted Kennedy over his shoulder. This is the TV moment the electorate remembers, a president appearing to create bipartisan coalitions and endeavoring to "change the tone" in Washington while helping our children. When Bushed proposed a federal budget, however, funding for education was cut with the president authorizing only $22 billion of the $28 billion the measure called for. American needed money to increase military strength and pay for the president's tax cut." (p296)

Bush comes across as a cipher. He is shown as shallow but not stupid. Completely unlike Rove, Bush seems to have principles beyond the expansion of his own power. But Bush's high-mindedness doesn't prevent him from having a right-hand man who uses every tool of the politics of meanness. A typical Rove tactic is to target a staffer in the employ of a political opponent, or someone who might be a challenger in future years, and have a surrogate voice accusations or suspicions about the staffer. Do it at the worst possible time, such as the day the opponent announces his candidacy. The authors cite about a dozen examples of this happening to Rove opponents, more often than mere chance would suggest.

The book is well researched and concise, a good read.

I am a political consultant who has worked in Texas for almost a decade, roughly the same period chronicled in this terrific book, and I am surprised on many fronts. One, there's a lot of stuff in this book that I knew that I can't believe they got people to talk about. Two, there's stuff in this book that I never knew. And three, there's some very sad stories about the lives that Karl Rove has ruined in his single-minded rise to the top of the heap. It's like Robert Caro stopped being repetitive and wrote this book.

Reading about Rove's contempt for fair play from the beginning of his career is absolutely chilling. The book is even-handed and meticulous, but presents so many cases where he damaged lives, careers and democracy with his political ruthlessness.

What's frightening is how much influence he has on Bush today, and the fact that he isn't the only Lee Atwater disciple wielding power in the current Republican Party. Read David Brock's Blinded By the Light for a complementary tale of manipulation and dissembling.

This book was obviously completed before the Republican ads that defeated Senator Max Cleland by calling him unpatriotic, even though Cleland had lost two legs and an arm in Vietnam--but that approach only buttresses the core points I take from this powerful book: The bullying tactics of people like Rove need to themselves become a political issue, because they represent a direct attack on our democracy.

Paul Loeb
Author Soul of a Citizen

I do not know if the authors set out to make Karl Rove out to be such a dark, evil man with the book or that is just where the research took them, but I doubt too many readers will come away thinking that Karl Rove is anything but. I think the first thing that struck me is that the authors portray Rove as more then just your run of the mill political consultant. They want you to leave with the impression that Rove is the man behind the curtain pulling all the strings of the Bush presidency. They detail how Rove's influence goes beyond just the political front to be an all-encompassing review of anything Bush does. I think we have all heard how President Clinton seemed to take the pulse of the country via polls and then choose his direction based on the polls. Well the authors want you to think that Bush basically has substituted the polls and maybe even an individual thought process with whatever King Karl wants to do.

The book provides some background on Karl, how he started in politics and his life before GW. I found the section detailing the work he did for the first President Bush too limited and the detail about Rove's non-Bush work too detailed. The authors get into the weeds to prove a point that Rove is a rather mean player in the world of politics and I think they could have edited some of it out. This background and the detail on his work with Bush all point to some interesting things that do seem to be playing out today. They state that Rove is the kind of man that has to win and by winning it means really making the opponent lose and lose big. They also point out that Karl is a very good player at the down and dirty art of nasty politics. He would make the Nixon team take a step back.

The one area you always have to be on the look out for in books like this is down right bias based on a dislike for the President. To be fair I think the authors steered clear of this for the most part. I felt there were plenty of opportunities for the authors to take more shots at President Bush and they did not. That is not to say that President Bush gets away scott free. They do lay a few jabs at him for seaming to let Karl play the game so nasty and for enabling this winner take all approach Rove has taken. They state clearly that Karl is a great political operator, but if he is your only close confidant there could be extreme pressures to let him and his slash and burn style take over for your own. Overall I found the book very entertaining. It offers and insight into a man we do not get a lot of information about and a process that does not see the light of day much. If you are interested in politics or the Bush Presidency you will be interested in this book.

This is an OK book written to the standards of newspaper reporters moving outside their demonstrated depth. The research tends toward interviews and newspaper reports and in some cases lacks the formality and conclusiveness that would clearly substantiate the cases the authors attempt to prove. In their defense, some of the issues they explore are recent and underdocumented and others such as Karl Rove's dirty tricks and behind-the-scenes maneuvers were secretive operations never meant to see the light of day.

What emerges is a slightly underdefined portrait of a man who insists that you are either with him or against him, who never lets go of a grudge, and who is determined not merely to defeat an opponent but to destroy him - and whose lifelong ambition has been to rise to the top in politics. While the authors make these claims in the introduction and later in concluding summaries, they assemble only enough evidence to make their assertions plausible but not incontrovertible. Some pieces of evidence are there, but the point is not clearly driven home. Still, enough evidence is revealed to raise fundamental questions about Karl Rove's predatory political practices, George W. Bush's competence to be president and his motives in holding the office, and the threat that these two men and the forces they represent pose to the ability of this country to function as a democratic republic.

What is demonstrated more completely is a very sympathetic case for Mike Moeller and Pete McRae, two former Texas Agriculture Department deputies who were charged and convicted in Rove's attack on then Texas Agriculture Commissioner Jim Hightower. What becomes clear in the particular case of Rove's attack on these two is his determination not simply to defeat an opponent but to ruin him. This theme is reiterated in Rove's later attacks on other political foes such as former client and Republican senatorial candidate from Pennsylvania, Dick Thornburgh, who stiffed Rove on his consulting fees after he lost the campaign and was sued relentlessly by Rove to recover every penny.

The disturbingly close and symbiotic relationship between Rove and George W. Bush is made clear through a series of anecdotes about Rove's mentoring to turn Bush into presidential material and some of their squabbles when Rove pushes too far. The emerging portrait is of two halves that make a whole: Bush, the politician from the patrician background with an easy personal manner and a self-proclaimed distaste for governmental policy, and Rove, the driven, manipulative, amoral combatant who molded Bush's thinking and now controls the flow of information the president uses to make decisions. The authors' reference to Rove as "co-president" tips their position, but their warnings about an unelected, permanent campaign consultant who has daily access to the president and who is expert at couching policy issues as political issues is an alarm that should cut across partisan lines.

Although this book was written before the invasion of Iraq, the authors offer a chillingly prescient preview of what has transpired in that country since the U.S. invasion.

While I thought this book was a very good analysis of the problems currently existing in the political climate, I felt that it left out some things that were very crucial. While giving a complete analysis of Karl Rove, it managed to let George W. Bush off the hook very handily, presenting him as a sweet, down-home fellow who got caught up in Rove's ambitions. I found it quite interesting that the authors managed to leave all of Bush's bad side out of the book, and made it appear that he was mostly a pawn in Rove's plans. While I find Rove quite frightening, I feel that leaving out certain key facts, such as where Bush "found" the money for his tax cuts in the Texas budget, and simply noting that he "sold" his Harken stock to buy the Texas Rangers without noting the insider trading that was part of the deal led to a major component of the story being missed - this Rove/Bush relationship is not just about one man manipulating another - it is about a partnership that has gone frighteningly awry. I would strongly recommend this book, but with the above reservations.

Interesting. Most people find George Bush a little too lame-brained to be a president. It turns out he is!

This book starts with an introduction that copiously thanks Mr. Rove for all the time he gave the authors. Then they spend the rest of the book at least challenging his scruples. They contend, in effect, that Dubya doesn't run the country but Karl Rove does. (And neither one was elected!)

Rove started before college as a Young Republican where he rapidly worked up the ranks to become a leader. Once he slid into the world of the real campaign, apparently his ambition was to win at all costs. The authors document a series of actions for which Rove is clearly responsible. "Unscrupulous" is far too weak a word for the actions. It's like Rove read some of those books popular in the 80s that said to make it do whatever it takes. If it's at the expense--or hide--of someone else, so be it. So a series of people spent time in federal prisons on Rove's account, while others' lives were changed forever (some even became Democrats because of Karl's ruthlessness!)

The text then covers in considerable detail Dubya's rise to power in Texas (and how that state converted from a "Southern Democrat" state to a Republican state, largely with the aid of Rove. Then when Rove decided that Dubya was presidential material, he dropped hints as to McCain's mental suitability for office (because of McCain's time in a POW camp, which Dubya avoided with daddy Bush's help!) Some of the actions the authors document they admit that they have no black and white evidence that Rove was responsible for them. But they all but have his fingerprints on them, i.e., they're so similar to things for which he was obviously responsible before that they reek of Rove. It's much like a criminal record brought up in court.

Oh, and if your suspicious as to Dubya's motives for invading Iraq, one of the last chapters fairly well summarizes what some of us have suspected all along: with the economy in ghastly shape, and a mid-term election coming up, what better to get the "masses" riled up than--rah, rah--a war! (There are several volumes in Amazon.com more directly addressing that issue, but this volume summarizes those reasons quite well.)

While it may have sidetracked the subject of Rove, I only wish the authors had gone into more detail of the election of 2000 in which Dubya was not elected. Much has been written of that and to me much of it also has Rove's fingerprints all over it.

The book is particularly important because we, the electorate, need to know more about Rove and his kind. Again, he wasn't elected; he is far more manipulative of policy than Dubya is capable of being. And, again, Rove's lack of integrity is legendary. (I talked with a State Dept. official who's experienced Rove's fabrications too. He pretty well confirmed what the authors are saying.)

I don't want to discuss the "objectivity" of the authors, though they had lots of experience with Rove. And their work is certainly well-researched unlike the ranting of many a right wing demagogue from whom we frequently hear these days. But if you want to find a lot more about how the country runs these days, and who runs it, this is a book I'd recommend. I only wish I could be as eloquent as the authors in reviewing the book. But there's so much there, and it's disconcerting. It's hard to be too eloquent while fighting some of the rage Rove stimulates.