Confessions of a Political Hitman: My Secret Life of Scandal, Corruption, Hypocrisy and Dirty Attacks That Decide Who Gets Elected (and Who Doesn't) (Hardcover)

~ (Author)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Part memoir, part industry exposé, Marks's account relates how he became a Republican Party operative digging up dirt on Democratic candidates. His field goes by the name opposition research. It is mostly legal, according to Marks, but usually secretive and, by his own evolving standards, frequently immoral. Marks drifted into the field during the first half of the 1990s and became a true believer in the GOP cause. The book names names and cites examples, from local races to statewide campaigns (Jeb Bush vs. Lawton Chiles) and includes contests for the U.S. Senate (Jesse Helms vs. Harvey Gantt) and U.S. House of Representatives, as well as presidential elections (Bob Dole vs. Bill Clinton and John Kerry vs. George W. Bush). Marks began writing the book after coming to doubt his vocation's ethics. Despite this turnabout, he is not an admirable whistleblower with a likable personality. Marks's tone and language drip with sleaze heightened by passages about his womanizing. In fact, that and often poor treatment of candidates and staff members might lead readers to conclude that Marks fell lower than his clients. Marks has written an important book that fills a gap in the popular literature about American politics, but it is not a pleasant read. (Jan.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Booklist

The public professes to hate it, advocates of civil dialogue deplore it, yet no political campaign unilaterally dispenses with digging up derogatory dirt on its rivals. Describing how such research is conducted, Marks illustrates the process through his political adventures on behalf of the Republican Party from the 1990s forward. Reading files in county courthouses and newspaper back issues in libraries makes up the basic legwork, Marks explains, and then higher-ups in the campaign strategize if, how, and when to drop the load on the target. To these vocational elements, Marks adds his personal political migration from liberal Brooklynite to Reaganite Republican to independent—disillusioned, he says, by Republican hypocrisy on family values, among other disappointments. Marks’ vantage point within the Republican ascendance from 1994 to 2006, along with his raft of war stories, will entertainingly educate politicos about the underside of battling their adversaries. --Gilbert Taylor

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 416 pages
• Publisher: Sourcebooks, Inc.; 1 edition (January 1, 2008)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1402208545
• ISBN-13: 978-1402208546
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 6.2 x 1.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.6 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (7 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #102,686 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in these categories: (What's this?)

  #24 in	Books > Nonfiction > Social Sciences > Political Science > Elections
  #68 in	Books > Nonfiction > Politics > Political Parties
  #82 in	Books > Nonfiction > Politics > Human Rights

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

14 of 15 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Informative and Easy Reading About a Dirty Subject!, December 30, 2007

By	Loyd E. Eskildson "Pragmatist" (Phoenix, AZ.) - See all my reviews (TOP 100 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

Marks sees political hitmen as the most influential people in a political race. He writes from 12-some years' experience behind the scenes as an opposition researcher - aka political hitman, and assassin of reputations.

Those hiring political hitmen include the committees to elect various candidates, PACs, political committees, 572 groups (new entities created to evade McCain-Feingold restrictions), and even the candidates themselves (identify areas of vulnerability).

Information sources include voting records, bill sponsorship (sometimes the bills candidates proudly claim "sponsorship" of involved 100+ other sponsors; obviously, some other bills appear negative on the surface - eg. reduced penalties for child-molesters; still another fertile ground is looking for flip-flops down through the years). Marks also tells us that state comptroller offices are a good source of dirt - eg. agency audits or other evidence of government waste, a candidate being behind on personal taxes, etc. Camcorders can also sometimes be a good source - eg. George Allen and "macaca."

Negative ads involve a simple three-step process: 1)The hitman digs up dirt. 2)Pollsters determine which dirt is most damaging. 3)Media folks put the best dirt out to the public.

Marks is clearly a conservative Republican supporter - yet, he doesn't hesitate to state that Democrats can't hold a candle to Republicans in hypocrisy regarding "family values." New Gingrich and Bob Livingston (both House Speakers), Mark Foley, Larry Craig, etc. (And then there's Jack Abramhoff, and friends.)

The bulk of "Confessions of a Political Hitman" is taken up with specifics invovling various campaigns Marks had been involved in. My favorite involved a candidate for Arizona's Republican nomination for governor - Bob Goldwater. Turns out Goldwater lacked none of his famous uncle's talents - at best, he was more than a quart low, late on his personal taxes, and incredibly biased against illegal immigrants. Worse yet, Goldwater's campaign tried to stiff Marks for his vulnerability research - to collect, Marks' secretary had to call Goldwater's campaign office and threaten to release the (itemized) information they had dug up on him. (Marks was immediately paid.)

Another interesting story involved Pat Buchanan's campaign for President. Marks has very high regard for Buchanan's ethics and lack of bias (contrary to those believing Pat is anti-Semitic); however, this admiration does not extend to Bay Buchanan - Pat's sister, who ran his campaigns. Marks found her personally obnoxious, and running a campaign that stiffed many creditors (despite heavy contributions) while taking $100,000/year+ for herself - even a year or so after the campaign. Many campaign financial violations were found by federal investigators and Marks himself, but the FEC did nothing.

The biggest issue is whether negative ads are effective. Marks has no doubt, though he does cite several instances where they backfired. To make his case that negative advertising have played key roles in recent elections, Marks reviews each presidential election from 1980 on. 2004 - the Swift boat ads sank Kerry while directly attacking his strength, especially when he delayed responding. 2000 - Gore's support for the Brady Bill was highlighted by NRA ads in key "Blue" states (eg. W. Virginia) and Marks believed they cost Gore the election. 1996 - Clinton aired negative local ads about the Republican Congress long before the election. Republicans failed to respond (thought the ads were too early to have an impact), and lost. 1992 - rerunning Bush I's "read my lips" was all it took. 1988 - Willie Horton, Boston Harbor (filthy), and Gov. Dukakis' opposition to Ma. children reciting the Pledge of Allegiance were all it took for Bush I to win. 1984 - Reagan won in a landslide, due to his popularity, and helped by Mondale's pledge to raise taxes. This was the one year Marks believes negative campaigning did not play a key role. Finally, 1980 - Reagan's "Are you better or worse off than you were four years ago?" put Carter out of office in a close race.

Ending "Confessions of a Political Hitman," Marks reviews each of the current leading candidates and cites what he believes are their vulnerabilities to negative ads, and includes his misgivings about working as a political hitman.

8 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars I would give -0- stars, if possible, May 9, 2008

By	Jo Perry "JFP" (Dayton, OH) - See all my reviews

I had very high expectations for this book, having seen Mr. Marks on "Hardball". He came across as funny, articulate and a true "insider". It is evident, from this memoir, that despite his almost 20 years in "the game", that his retirement was brought on not only because of his personal, growing distaste of the job, but he seemed to have worked on as many, if not more, failed campaigns as successful ones. I wonder that perhaps work was harder to come by given his resume.

Additionally, I cannot remember EVER reading a book that was so poorly proofread. I marked no fewer than 25 mispellings, punctuation errors (parentheticals were never closed), and one or two places where it was evident entire sentences were omitted! This made me wonder, if a book gets published with so many glaring mistakes, how trustworthy was the text itself?

Do not spend your hard earned money on this book--get a library copy, and then decide whether you even want to spend your time. Terrible waste of mine.

2.0 out of 5 stars If Only the Author Could Get Out of the Way, March 29, 2009

By	Warlock One (Portland OR) - See all my reviews

There is a void ready for a book with this title to occupy. Though there are plenty of books on politics available- for nearly every viewpoint, era, and geographic location- there aren't a great number on the behind-the-scenes business of public images and negative campaigning.
And there are moments where this book skirts the edges of being the book that should occupy that void. When talking about what an "Oppo Man", or Opposition Researcher, actually does to gain the information that goes into a negative television, radio, or newspaper spot, the author offers up some interesting information. Likewise some- but sadly, only some- of the anecdotes of campaigns worked for; the stories of being thrown out of a courthouse by officials loyal to the party to be researched or "conning" a worker at a club into giving access to a damaging photograph make for a more cohesive picture of what an Opposition Researcher might go through in the pursuit of the target's weak spot.
And then we get the author's own, personal voice. Alas.
Beyond anything else, Marks comes off like a guy sitting on the stool next to you in a bar who took a returned "hello" as an invitation to start talking to you at length. And like that guy, he has a few interesting things to say and an awful lot of things to say that might cause you to smile and nod in order to be pleasant while looking for a way to extricate yourself.
For a guy in a bar, that's okay- you might even tell a friend about that interesting anecdote you heard the other night. From a pundit, an informed source, we can, do, and should expect a little more perspective, distance, and objectivity than is on offer in this book.
For example, we get to hear more than once (from Marks) how Mr. Marks' has terrific political instincts. And then we hear how many of the campaigns he worked for lost. How his sure-fire, can't-miss research zinger was never used. How surprised he was and is that the electorate bit the other way. In particular, while Marks claims his exposure to the seedy side of his party had moderated his own political stance, there are some issues on which he visibly cannot understand why voters would not share his view. It's understandable how a young man who grew up in New York when it was becoming a major haven for crime and saw it reformed significantly under Giuliani could fiercely favor tough penalties for criminals. But not many people find acting as a defense attorney for defendants later found guilty as morally reprehensible as actually committing the crimes. Some people, astonishingly, actually support the need for everyone to have a competent defense.
We read a lot about Stephen Marks' sex life during his time as an OR, vaguely under the umbrella of his woeful laments about sinking into sex addiction and distancing himself from genuine intimacy with someone he could have cared about. Once, this is relevant- in regard to an ex-girlfriend who begins to stalk him and interfere with his work. A second time, we can let it go- the title has "Confessions" in it; we're reading a slice of the author's life, and hey, sex sells, right?... But eventually, even if one were in a bar, you would be inclined to ask, "Excuse me, are you *bragging*?"
It is perhaps inevitable that, as a former Opposition Researcher, Marks may significantly misconstrue both the value of opposition research, the importance of "Oppo Men" to a political campaign, the role of negative campaigning in politics, and the value or harm done by that campaigning both to the campaign and to society as a whole. Naturally, Marks finds researchers like himself crucial and their work both critical to campaign success and beneficial to the public. Again, one glances back in the very same book at the list of losing campaigns, the issues that were non-starters, the good people brought low by pandering to the basest prejudices and self-interest... And smiles and nods at that guy at the bar, trying to think how to extricate oneself.
Marks believes that his work changed how he looked at things; perhaps it did. But it didn't do enough to give him the objectivity that would give this work lasting value. And he still defends negative campaigning without so much as a sideways glance at the question of whether its practice consistently refines the candidates or simply demeans them. He cites Vanderbilt Professor John Geer, who asks if one would buy a car without knowing about its problems. But he fails to consider that people, unlike cars, can learn from their past errors and improve.
One finds oneself wishing for a ghost writer to temper the author's experience with some much-needed perspective. But in fairness, a competent writer might have pruned what has been offered to an unsellable length. As for myself, I'll still hope someone might one day write that good book about working in opposition research.