Customer Reviews

Failures of the Presidents: From the Whiskey Rebellion and War of 1812 to the Bay of Pigs and War in Iraq

5 star:		(17)
4 star:		(21)
3 star:		(9)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

This book examines a number of presidential failures, decisions that simply did not pan out well. The book notes that it sometimes takes quite awhile to weigh successes and failures of presidents. Also, each decision is placed in its context and (Page 9) "Our goal has been to 'get inside [the Presidents'] heads,' to review the circumstances they faced, consider their options, and understand their motives for acting as they did."

20 case studies are considered, from George Washington's effort to put down the Whiskey Rebellion to George W. Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq. Here some questions can be raised. Has there been time for history to judge Bush's Iraq policy? Selecting this example seems to go against one of their statements that time has to pass to assess decisions.

Sometimes, the authors appear to exaggerate the negative consequences of decisions. Washington's efforts to quell the Whiskey Rebellion certainly can be questioned. But to suggest that this was a debacle that helped to lead to the decline and fall of the Federalist Party seems to me to go over the top, as does the suggestion that the decline of this Party "hamstrung the national government for sixty years" (Page 23).

Nonetheless, the book does illustrate the making of and consequences of major decisions. Among those examined here (each decision takes up 12-15 pages of text and photos): Adams' The Alien and Sedition Acts, Jefferson's Embargo Acts, Madison's War of 1812, Cleveland and the Pullman Strike, FDR and the internment of Japanese-Americans, Kennedy's Bay of Pigs invasion. Johnson's Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, Nixon's Watergate, and Carter's 'Malaise" speech and energy proposal. There are others as well, but this listing illustrates what the authors focus upon.

Some of these decisions led to genuine debacles, such as the Bay of Pigs fiasco and the Watergate burglary and its aftermath. Other decisions don't seem to me to rise to that same level of policy disaster. Was Carter's energy policy and 'malaise' theme at nearly the same level of disaster as the Bay of Pigs? Was Iran-Contra under Reagan as disastrous as the US getting into the War of 1812? Even those questions, though, indicate one of the features of this book. It gets one to thinking about the import of decisions and what can go wrong.

To conclude, this is a useful volume, reminding us that leaders need to be questioned, that we should never simply say "Our leaders know what's best." As all of us, leaders are fallible, and these poor decisions should remind us of that. While I have reservations about this book, in the end it makes its own useful contribution.

Timely product, as we have been focusing so much lately on elections, presidential politics, and an upcoming inauguration. I expected this to be less "little blurbs" on each president or "failure", and, instead, a more flowing text, but, nevertheless, I thought it was interesting. This book is more like a "Don't Know Much About Presidential History" with a particular slant to criticizing presidents than it is a more serious history book analyzing American history. But, for people who like to learn in smaller chunks, this could be fun and informing. I think it would be a good reference book for teachers to use in classrooms, for lesson plans, or for the students to look at, as long as it wasn't the only information made available about some of these events. Alone, this is incomplete and a little biased, but as an introduction to discussing them further, it's very good.

Failures of the Presidents: From the Whiskey Rebellion and War of 1812 to the Bay of Pigs and War in Iraq

I categorize light history as anything where the writers compile information from secondary sources and organize it into an easy-to-read format with a theme. In this book the author(s) (I'm not quite sure who did what here as there are several co-authors listed in the acknowledgments who aren't listed on the cover) review what they consider to be the greatest failures of certain--not all--of the presidents from Washington to George W. Bush. (Interestingly, Bush the Father doesn't have a chapter but was included in the Iran-Contra chapter). There are no footnotes and no bibliography, only "additional reading" for each chapter, which, I assume, comprised their source material unless these authors knew it all of the top of their heads.

Of course, anything of this sort will be extremely subjective, but, in this case, I was at a loss to determine the authors' method of choice. In the introduction it is noted that the Monica Lewinsky scandal and Clinton's impeachment are not included because the co-authors "...could not agree definitively that the ...scandals...actually inflicted damage on the United States at the time." In fact, there is no chapter on Clinton, implying, I suppose, that he had no major failures. However, (and I'm a Democrat), if Carter's botched attempt at rescuing the Iranian hostages was included, why not the Battle of Mogadishu (Black Hawk Down)?

There are also some inclusions I question. For example, what has become known as "The Trail of Tears," the relocation of the Cherokee under Andrew Jackson. A qualifier here. I am a huge advocate for American Indian rights and know more about America's treatment of the Indians than most professional historians. However, I can't say I see how it falls under the rubric noted above re: the absence of the Lewinsky scandal. While it was certainly a moral shame, I don't see how it could be seen as "inflicting damage on the US at the time." More significant would be the taking of the Black Hills in the 1870s leading to a rallying of Plains Indian Tribes and Custer's defeat at The Little Bighorn.

I would also question the inclusion of the Energy Crisis under Jimmy Carter as a presidential failure. Too bad if it caused some economic woes at the time. In retrospect we'd have done better to stick with gas rationing and lowering our thermostats.

I did appreciate the inclusion of Iran-Contra, the now all but forgotten illegal dealings of the Reagan administration which are far too complicated to outline here. At a time when both Republicans and Democrats feel the need to pay lip service to the late president, it's good to remember what that administration got away with and how it began the line of thinking that the president is above the law and all things are allowable as commander-in-chief. However, I would have liked to see other inclusions under Reagan, like the firing of the Air Traffic Controllers and the banking deregulation that led to the Keating scandal (of which John McCain was a part).

Then again, you can't include everything or it would be a tome. All-in-all a good read, especially for those who avoid history because they think it is too boring. This is an easy read, covers a lot of important history, and, at its best, may entice people to read more about these events.

This is a book you can sit down and read for mild, non-fiction entertainment. I was kind expecting a book with obscure stories that I had not heard about, but what it ended up being was a kind of overview of fairly well known historical "failures." I'm not complaining it was still entertaining and somewhat educational but there wasn't anything shocking. The writing is not academic and is mostly general overviews backed up with a good supply of quotes and some fantastic photos and illustrations. The author does some analysis but does not go too in-depth.

One thing I hate is getting a book like this is finding out that it was written by a political pundit who blames the worlds ills on Clinton/Bush, GOP/Dems or liberals/neocons. When I saw that they skipped from Reagan's Iran Contra Gate to Bush 43's Iraq war, I immediately worried that this is just another book of punditry. But I am glad he left out Clinton/Lewinsky/Paula Jones. They were sad political events, but as the author explains, these were personal failures that actually only impacted a small group of people. (compared to Bay of Pigs or Japanese internment camps.) However, I'm surprised that he would include a chapter on Bush. There is still a lot of history to be written. The Iraq War may not even end up being his biggest failure. I think I would have given that one another decade to reflect.

I read this book backwards, because I could better judge the author's coverage of the events I knew best. I was impressed, I spent the first day having thoughts like "Oh yeah, I remember that plane going down in Nicaragua." It was kind of a nice look back now that the pieces have fallen into place. Between me and my wife, who is a history teacher, we could only find one thing we did not agree with, and that may have been a typo. The author claims the Spanish American war had the most casualties of any war between the Civil War and World War II, which we both had problems with since it seems that World War 1 should have beaten it pretty soundly.

The book itself is a very high quality book. The pages are thick paper and the chapters are richly illustrated. Physically, I have seen very few books that stand up to it for quality of production. For content, it is very good although it stays to the surface of the events pretty much. There are things that will make some people with certain political leanings a little irate, but it seems fair the parties involved, which is refreshing.

I recommend it to anyone looking for a pop history book that might fall under the category of bathroom reading.

Any president's historical significance is formed more by the times and events in which he is in office, more so than what a specific president's political philosophy may be. We are seeing that now with president-elect Obama. Very few presidents have faced so many huge problems before taking office as Obama.

This book's essays deal with what the author's deem as presidential failures. But the criteria for deciding that any presidential action is a failure or not can be many. And it's for sure that no president ever took any kind of action believing it would be a failure. So it is historical perspective that really determines what is a failure and what is not.

The essays of this book give a thumbnail sketch of the issue in question. Some of these 'failures' can hardly be discussed as fully as needed by 12-15 pages, while others can be described in far less.

So this book remains somewhat of a mixed bag. For those who like history in short doses and are looking for introductory essays about specific historical events, this book does the job. For those wanting to delve deeper into historical presidential decision making, it won't do the job.

Still, I gave it 4 stars. It is well-written and serves as a good introduction to the events it portrays.

This book is written in a very clear, easy-to-read style. There are 20 chapters, each one a 15 to 20 page article about a Presidential Mistake. These are bad executive decisions that ruined or endangered large numbers of people, destroyed economies, shamed the United States in the international community, and changed the political landscape significantly in their aftermath. Of course, with only 20, not every president got a chapter. Nixon and Carter each got two. Surprisingly (to some) there is not a chapter on the Clinton sex scandal; the authors decided that, although the story generated a lot of media noise at the time, it was not a policy-making error and turned out to have had little or no actual effect on the long-term fate of the nation & the world. Equally surprising, after explaining in the introduction that presidents can really only be judged in retrospect, with 20 to 40 years of historical hindsight, they included a chapter on George W. Bush, written while he is still in office. Admittedly, the Iraq war is seen as a disaster by most, but "only time will tell" how it finally plays out. I also felt that the authors failed to prove the ultimate error of McKinley's "splendid little war" with Spain for possession of the Philippines. According to the authors' summation, although the war itself was a humanitarian disaster, the long term results seem to have worked out in everyone's favor. Perhaps some nuance was lost in the effort to condense a complex historical episode down to a 14-page article (with pictures.)

I would consider this a "coffee table" book because it is a large, squarish size, printed on heavy paper, lavishly illustrated with full-color pictures (each with a two- or three-sentence caption). It is graphically designed (somewhat inconsistently) with paragraph headings in a larger font, and quotes from the text pulled out and reiterated in large blocks in the middle of the page ... like a magazine article. All of this is nice from a Typographical Design standpoint, but the picture captions distracted from the main body of the text. I've never been a big fan of the coffee-table format because it is not conducive to serious reading.

Though, for what it is, I found this book interesting and informative. It gave quick overviews of things like the Tonkin Gulf, the Bay of Pigs, Watergate, and the Iran hostage crisis, which my parents talked about but I was too young to understand. Reading this book lets you say "Oh, so that's what it was about" without having to read longer, more detailed, and possibly more boring historical works on the subject.

If you do want to read more, the authors have provided an extensive bibliography of further reading for each chapter. Very helpful. Good job!

This books takes a few of the Presidents of the United States and delves into a mistake they have made. It discusses what led up to the decisions that were made, the consequences and long term impacts. This was written in chronological order.

This is not a fun-light-poke-fun at history book. It is also not a text book type of a book. Rather it is a book written for a person who has an interest in U.S. history, knows some of the basics and would like to know more.

Some of the events really did not seem like a big deal looking back on them now. For example, the Whiskey Rebellion. Some of the events are a bit too recent to look back on and say with any certainty this is a mistake or this was a good decision. The author himself in his opening speaks of how history and time can tell and allows us to look back on an event with some objectivity and allows us to see the long term consequences. While everyone might have an opinion about it, the War in Iran, is one of those decisions that need more time to pass before including it in a book such as this. It is still going on and the long term, much less all of the short term consequences are still unknown.

There are other times in U.S. history this author could have included; such as, the teapot dome scandal. However, it seems that this author was limited in space and furthermore tried to cover things that might not normally be included in a normal history text book.

The illustrations and photos only add to the text.

This was an interesting book.
Enjoy.

The idea of Presidential failure is much on the modern mind. Having endured one of the most disastrous presidencies in US history, it makes you realize how important that man in the White House is, and how much you must consider your vote.

"Failures of the Presidents" is thus a very timely book, not only presenting the messes of presidential villains like George W. Bush, Richard Nixon and Franklin Pierce, but also the poor decisions and deadly consequences of American legends and heroes like George Washington, F.D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy. The perspective is balanced, and author Thomas Craughwell is sure not to play along party lines.

Craughwell's introduction sets the stage for the book. He says straight out why Bill Clinton is not included; nobody died on account of his indiscretion. Compare that with the thousands made homeless by Jefferson's Embargo Act or Andrew Jackson's forced marching of the Cherokee nation along the Trail of Tears, and it all seems insignificant. These are the really big blunders, the kind that lead our country into unnecessary wars and the death and displacement of thousands.

Some, like FDR's Japanese concentration camps, are well-documented and in the public consciousness. Some, like John Adam's Alien and Sedition Acts, should have been better remembered. They are a scary foreshadowing of the McCarthy Era and Homeland Security. A couple of the "failures" are simply the inability to lead, such as Herbert Hoover being blatantly ignored by General McArthur when marching on the Bonus Army, made up of hungry and weak veterans who just wanted their promised war bonuses early so they could eat. Jimmy Carter also takes hits not for mistakes that he made, but his inability to get anyone to listen to and respect what he was trying to say, even when he was in the right.

For a historical book, "Failures of the Presidents" is surprisingly packed with photos and illustrations. Political cartoons from the era, photographs and paintings of the failures in questions, all of them combine to bring the issues to life in a way that words alone can't.

The only thing I didn't like about "Failures of the Presidents" is that the writing can be a little choppy, and the editing could have been tighter. Many of the picture captions are just things repeated in the main text, and don't add anything to the book. But these are small complaints in an over-all good packaged. Definitely worth reading.

Failures of the Presidents is simply a beautiful book. The paper is a very high quality gloss and they have included wonderful pictures of events and prior to widespread camera use some great art of the time. Fair Winds press has done a terrific job with this book.
There are twenty sections covering most of U.S. history with two presidents Carter and Nixon having two sections apiece. It is written in an easy to go through style that keeps pages turning, and with each section being roughly ten to twenty pages, it's very easy to tell yourself O.K. just one more section before I go to bed.
Some of the other reviewers have complained about another book about the negative aspects of U.S. history. I would like to point out to any potential buyers, this is not a Howard Zinn book, yes it covers some mistakes made but it does so with a reasonable attitude, the book is not trying to portray America as evil, only that on a few occasions a few men did either stupid or malicious things, which consequentially is the truth. It's more of a book demonstrating the law of unintended consequences than it is a book where the authors have an axe to grind with their past.
The authors break no new ground but it is a wonderful collection of vignettes, and as an additional positive they do not assume you know anything about the subject matter which is handy in case you've forgotten some of it. The book can also be read out of order in chapter four I believe they have in paranthesees for more information about this see chapter 2. This is handy if you are already familiar with a subject or just don't care about a particular event.
It is a good book for starting discussions and for giving you good trivia questions for your friends, such as which first lady saved the Declaration of Independence? I would recommend the book for the quality and art alone. A great popular level history book and a good christmas gift for the History Channel watcher.

Part of the excitement about reading history is watching the great minds of the past grappling with horrifically complex problems, and sometimes, quite humanly, failing. "Failures of the Presidents" offers a chronicle of presidential failures from George Washington to George W. Bush. Indeed some of the "failures", even when known to the public, are usually presented as successes. Take the War of 1812, with its usual focus on impressment on US sailors, the Star Spangled Banner, burning of the White House and Andrew Jackson's victory at he Battle of New Orleans. Authors Craughwell and Phelps take a step back from these stirring events to discuss President Madison's goal of hobbling Britain's global reach by capturing its Canadian territories. This war goal was a wild overreach, and Americans never drove the British out of North America. The result of the miscalculation was a stalemate -- Britain called off its attacks, but at the cost of severely damaging US prestige. So, fine. The War of 1812 was a failure in terns of its own aims.

Some of Craughwell and Phelps's exposition is spellbinding. Their depiction of a wild and wooly post-independence America under George Washington, struggling with the limits of federalism and also trying to balance the books, was new to me, The Whiskey rebellion, born of desperate attempts by Pennsylvania farmers to keep the heads above water financially, was fascinating and instructive. The ability of our government to enforce its edicts has been an issue right from the start.

By the middle of the book, however, the usually smooth-flowing narrative fell apart. Partly this was due not to the *lack* of data but to an overabundance of it. When the Tonkin Gulf resolution comes in for critical study, Craughwell and Phelps rely on transcripts of discussions between LBJ and Secretary of State Robert McNamara. The transcripts don't provide clear statements by either man, but are examples of the kind of indirect speech that communicates by suggestions rather than directly through its content. Worse, C&P's explanation of the context of the calls was neither clear nor convincing. Also, while the Tonkin Gulf resolution might be termed misleading, it was hardly a failure. It did what it was intended to do -- which was to provide a pretext getting the US into a fight in Vietnam. While the war could be termed a mistake, it is not the resolution that made it so.

As a good Massachusetts liberal and patriot, I am not afraid of narratives that show US leaders or founders in a negative or limited light. But "Failures of the Presidents" goes overboard to demonize unpopular presidents (Nixon gets two dings) and to give their a narrative strongly pro-labor stance. For opening up little-known areas of history, FoP gets 3 stars. For its too frequent anti-establishment bias and occasional unreadability, it fails to get the other two.