Book Description
From the most highly respected analyst of foreign policy writing today, a story of wasted opportunity and squandered prestige: a critique of the last three U.S. presidents' foreign policy.
America's most distinguished commentator on foreign policy, former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, offers a reasoned but unsparing assessment of the last three presidential administrations' foreign policy. Though spanning less than two decades, these administrations cover a vitally important turning point in world history: the period in which the United States, having emerged from the Cold War with unprecedented power and prestige, managed to squander both in a remarkably short time. This is a tale of decline: from the competent but conventional thinking of the first Bush administration, to the well-intentioned self-indulgence of the Clinton administration, to the mortgaging of America's future by the "suicidal statecraft" of the second Bush administration. Brzezinski concludes with a chapter on how America can regain its lost prestige. This scholarly yet highly opinionated book is sure to be both controversial and influential.
Customer Reviews:
The idealism is better than the realism .......2007-08-29
Intelligence is no substitute for integrity. In surveying the world - situation and the role three U.S. Presidents had after the fall of the Soviet Union Brezinski fails to give prominent place to one major development he himself had considerable responsibility for i.e. the rise of Islamic fundamentalism. It was he who as Carter's foreign policy chief - advisor supervised the fall of the Shah in Iran, and did nothing to prevent the rise of the radical Islamic regime there. He also helped put into place the Mujadeen in Afghanistan, and they have been a key element in the rise of Global Islam worldwide.
In this book he focuses on what he considers the missed opportunities of the U.S. after the fall of the Soviet Union. He is especially critical of the current President.
Brezinski does have interesting things to say about current American weaknesses including the balance of payments problem, the problem of a loss of kind of moral discipline.
His idea of the United States leading mankind to a new era of dignity and freedom is a good one. And for his 'idealism' expressed most fully in the final chapter the book is worth reading.
DR. BRZEZINSKI SHOULD BE RUNNING THIS COUNTRY.......2007-07-25
I feel strongly, that this book says what most rational people in the "world!" are thinking. It is pure and clear truth. It could have been a lot less disasterous for our country, if Dr. Brzezinski could have tutored bush/cheney/rice, on how to lead a great nation with "integrity, honor and some backbone." Can we find a way for a man like Dr. Brzezinski,(who was born in Europe/Poland), to run for President?! Fantastic book! I read it in one sitting.
Second Chance: 3 presidents and the Crisis of American Superpower.......2007-07-21
Grim yet fairly non-biased assessment of the administrations since the fall of the wall. There is some hope at the end of the book, but it will take an extraordinary turn of events to keep America from losing its place in global stature.
His critical eye on the current administration is no nonsense and, sadly, accurate.
J'Accuse.......2007-07-08
This is nothing more than a scathing indictment on eight years of GWB misrule.
To distinguish his indictment from other partisan rhetoric, ZB has placed his argument in a much wider and rational perspective. He has reviewed also the missteps of the previous two US Presidents in the foreign policy arena, and the lost chances of securing and cementing a true global leadership position for USA.
What is so different with the current regime is of course not just a matter of lost chances but colossal cost to US interests abroad. Not to mention lack of any significant progress in any key domestic agenda issues to balance it all.
ZB tries to make the argument at the end that all is not lost, and US still has a chance to regain its leadership position following certain steps.
His argument is not very credible though. He ignores the fact that US, as a nation, thinks and feels very differently than the one of 50s and 60s which put US on a moral path to global leadership. Things are indeed different, and second chance seems to be wishful thinking mostly.
Writing is excellent as expected, delivery and reasoning forceful and complete. Interesting reading for those of us contemplating the next chapter.
Brilliant. A must read as we approach the future election they are boring us with ..........2007-06-28
I happen to hear this guy on Charlie Rose the other night and went out and bought his book. The book isnt as interesting as he is in an interview live but its well worth the read.
His analysis of the past three administrations is superb. It is balanced and I think offers great insight into the hits and misses of our leaders. He goes on to explain his views on the world post Russia and our missed opportunites. His close of post 2008 I would love to hear discussed by him and others.
An important book for this country. Get it and read it and act.
Book Description
Olson turns her razor sharp vision on the Clintons' shocking excesses in their final days of office: the outrageous pardons to political cronies and friends, the looting of the White House, the executive orders that were sheer abuses of presidential power, the presidential library that is becoming a massive boondoogle of vanity more appropriate for a Third World dictator, and much more.
Customer Reviews:
What politicians will do to cling onto power.......2006-12-10
Conservative commentator Barbara Olson, who perished when the hijacked Flight 77 dove into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, reminds us with "The Final Days" precisely what sort of leeching parasites politicians can be. This is not a strict "Republican" or "Democrat" kind of thing, nor is it an issue pertaining to just "conservatives" or just "liberals." The book is not biased just because it reports only the Clinton wrongdoings, even though the author is a self-proclaimed conservative. In fact, the flip side to Olson's coin is the recently released "State of Denial" by Bob Woodward, who similarly documents the slime coursing through the current Bush administration and the ongoing war in Iraq. No, "The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House" merely reiterates a well-worn fact of life dominant in today's world: Power corrupts.
Olson's final account about the closing of doors in the Clinton administration should send alarm bells screeching through the minds of the American electorate, especially in a time when a Hillary Clinton run for the presidency seems almost inevitable. Olson reveals with painstaking accuracy the core tenets of Clintonism: Deny the accusations, play the helpless victim, and attack the enemy with relentless savagery. And, of course, it is permissible to lie whenever the chance arrives. When many liberal Democrats pressured him truthfully to explain everything behind the pardon of Marc Rich and his associates, President Clinton acknowledged that those he pardoned, who evaded millions in taxes and maintained connections with the Castro and Gaddafi regimes, simply had been wrongfully persecuted by the Justice Department. It is a classic example of the `victim hood' phenomenon so popularly paraded by the Clintons. Everyone seems to be a poor, pitiable victim, especially if their names end with "Clinton" and the persecutor is that dang "right-wing conspiracy." I'm afraid the term you're looking for, Mr. and Mrs. President, is "vast critical-thinking conspiracy." Or perhaps the "concerned American citizen conspiracy."
Like "State of Denial," "The Final Days" wields sharp facts to counter the myths surrounding popular politicians. Clinton may have presided over the largest economic expansion in U.S. history, but the shameless "For Sale" sign dangling around his neck during the closing days of his administration calls into question his serious character and moral flaws. Similarly, Bush may have stated "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq, but the fact that we are still there waging a failing campaign at the expense of American and Iraqi blood does not make his acts justifiable. I highly recommend both books to spark in your head the idea that maybe we need to rethink seriously the decision of putting these kinds of people in power.
A book about two topics: pardon and donation........2006-05-26
I listened to the audio version of this book. While most of the things said in this book may be true, it appears a bit biased. In addition to facts, the author uses some adjectives which show her personal dislike of the famous couple.
In the end, I had an impression that this book grew out of author's frustration upon Mark Rich pardon. Many chapters are dedicated to that case.
A disproportionately large portion of the book is devoted to two topics: pardon and donations. At one point the audio book spends a large amount of time only listing names of who donated what item. It goes on and on and on with names that make no sense and contribute nothing much to the story. That could have been moved to the appendix to keep the flow going.
I was hoping to find details about mischievious behavior by Clinton staff during the last days. There was no mention of that.
FAILING TO CROSSOVER.......2006-04-15
"The much talked about Marc Rich pardon has become an appropriate symbol of the entire eight years, but Mrs. Olson does a commendable service by clearly detailing the effrontery of his (Rich's) misdeeds, and an even more skillful demonstration of the President's specious and insulting attempt to justify this shocking act. To add fuel to her raging fire, she quotes former President Jimmy Carter who openly stated "I don't think there is any doubt that some of the factors in his pardon were attributable to his large gifts. In my opinion that was disgraceful."
Naturally, given her neo-con bent, Ms. Olsen failed to mention the extremely salient point that the attorney representing Marc Rich's pardon application was none other than Scooter Libby, Dick Cheney's aide.
Excellent and bloody right!.......2006-03-18
All of you Clinton lovers should actually learn to not turn the blind eye on many of these things Clinton did during his presidency. The last few minutes before he was impeached.
I can admit George Bush is a bad president himself but I can also admit what Bill clinton stood for. Corruption!
See the pardons such as the nationalistic terrorist group from Puerto Rico plus the tax cheat and a whole list of other losers that Clinton pardoned.
A Catalogue of Iniquities. .......2004-07-28
The last days of the Clintons were an occasion for the country to witness just how corrupt this two for the price of one team actually was. They took furniture and gifts that were not their's for the taking, and appeared to be granting pardons on the basis of what law breakers held the most influence within their circle of friends and family. From arsenic to Mark Rich, the whole squalid tale is recounted by the superlative Barbara Olso, who sadly is no longer with us.
Amazon.com
Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Robert "Buzz" Patterson was a military aide to President Clinton from May 1996 to May 1998 and one of five individuals entrusted with carrying the "nuclear football"—the bag containing the codes for launching nuclear weapons. This responsibility meant that he spent a considerable amount of time next to the president, giving him a unique perspective on the Clinton administration. Though he arrived at the job "filled with professional devotion and commitment to serve," he left believing that Clinton had "sown a whirlwind of destruction upon the integrity of our government, endangered our national security, and done enormous harm to the American military in which I served."
Dereliction of Duty is not a personal attack on President Clinton or a commentary on his various scandals; rather, it is a "frank indictment of his obvious—to an eyewitness—failure to lead our country with responsibility and honor." Lt. Col. Patterson offers a damning list of anecdotes and charges against the President, including how Clinton lost the nuclear codes and shrugged it off; how he stalled and lost the opportunity to launch a direct strike on Osama bin Laden at a confirmed location; how the President and the First Lady, and much of their staff, consistently treated members of the military with disrespect and disdain; and how Clinton groped a female Air Force enlisted member while aboard Air Force One, among other incidents large and small. A considerable portion of this slim book is devoted to the myriad ways in which President Clinton undermined the military, and hence the security, of the nation. He seriously questions Clinton's decisions to send troops to Somalia, Rwanda, Haiti, and Bosnia to accomplish non-military tasks without clear objectives. Having participated in each of these engagements, Lt. Col. Patterson personally "experienced the frustration of needlessly wasted lives, effort, and national prestige" as well as the alarmingly low morale that Clinton inspired.
This is certainly not the first anti-Clinton book, but it is different in that Patterson does not seem to have a political ax to grind. In fact, at times, he appears apologetic about having to write about his ex-commander in chief. Yet, in the end, this retired soldier felt his last act of service should be to share his experience with his country. --Shawn Carkonen
Book Description
Here is the ultimate insider's account from the highest and most sensitive levels of the Clinton administration, revealing how the irresponsible use of power can lead to a terrible price paid by all Americans.
Customer Reviews:
No Lies Here.......2007-09-25
I bought and read the book at the behest of a friend I worked with, who served as a USAF security officer (NCO) aboard AF One. He is the one who told me about Col. Patterson's book, and said he was surprised to find himself portrayed in it. You see, he was the person who broke the news to Maj. Patterson (at the time) that Bill lost ...oops, MISPLACED, the nuclear launch codes. Folks, I know this man to be a man of Honor and Integrety, something that neither of the adult Clintons that occupied the White House ever had, nor ever will have, IMHO. Read the book. It is all true, according to my friend.
Larry
Sour Grapes?.......2007-08-18
Why would any self-respecting Air Force officer give up a flying career to be a liveried factotum for a couple of power elites? Answer: political schmoozing on this level is a virtual guarantee for a fast promotion. That this cocktail party warrior somehow buffooned an easy shot at full Colonel perhaps best explains this unmitigated rant against all things Clinton. Egregious overstatement of this sort gives cause to wonder whether or not the author dropped the `football' a time or two, perhaps on Bill's toe. Although I can fully appreciate why many people have a negative opinion of the Clintons as a matter of prerogative and political persuasion, vicious slander of the sort one finds in this book does not seem to be the product of sober reflection, no matter how biased. To paraphrase a dead-white-guy philosopher, `insincerity protests too much!'
As 'Insider' as It Gets.......2007-06-27
Robert Patterson was Clinton's top military aide. He was at the presidents side whenever he was on duty.
Read this book before you make a decision on Hillary.
Wow Refreshing Read.......2007-06-10
For once a book about Bill Clinton that has some basis in reality. So many books out there are written based purely on politics and ideology but this book seems more based in facts.
If you want to learn more about Bill Clinton but can't stand all the typical Left wing defenses and Right wing attacks this book is for you
Truth Can Hurt and Is A Stubborn Thing.......2007-05-21
Ron Marlar (a retired USAF officer, college professor, school teacher, living currently in Florida)
I checked Robert (Buzz) Patterson's Dereliction of Duty out of our local library and read it shortly after it was published (2004). Then I bought copies - one each for self-admitted liberal and conservative friends. The copy for the liberal friend was a housewarming gift. It certainly warmed his house and more. At his instigation we have hardly spoken since his warming. Conclusion: Liberals take great offense at criticism no matter how well documented and by eyewitnesses of their favored people.
One of the many incidents - this one personal - Buzz Patterson reports may have been a major factor prompting him to write a book with such a telling title and so full of failures and offenses to civility by the Clintons and their staffers. Bill Clinton hit on Patterson's wife according to Patterson. Should anyone be surprised by that, given the other revelations so far about the Clintons, especially Bill, his own confessions and apologies?
Should anyone be surprised by the Clintons demeaning, misusing and harming the military? Unlike George H.W. and George W. Bush who served at least in some capacity in the military the Clintons have not done so. Indeed Bill evaded military service by deceiving the University of Arkansas ROTC commander.
Those who attack the messenger rather than the message often do so because they cannot attack the message. Despite the ad hominem attacks on Patterson his message rings true as consistent with other reports on the attitudes and actions of the Clintons, those whom they gather around themselves, the supporters of the Clintons and other Democrat politicians, both past and present. Together with that consistency in reports, attitudes and behavior patterns the attackers of Patterson lend credibility to him as the messenger.
Be careful when selecting Dereliction of Duty for buy. The main title is the same as another book (by H.R. McMaster, 1998) recounting the dereliction of duty by Lyndon B. Johnson, Robert Strange McNamara and those that they appointed as top military leaders. Did I not say something already about the consistency of attitudes, behavior patterns and misuse of the military by Democrat politicians, both past and present?
Book Description
Richard Lowry explores the real importance of the Clinton years--the Clinton administration appeasing and ignoring the ever-growing threats to American security from hostile regimes and parties, rogue states, and global terrorist networks. Lowry offers the first sweeping-and stunning assessment of what the Clinton era really meant and means for America.
Customer Reviews:
Know the Truth..........2007-03-25
Legacy: Paying the Price for the Clinton Years by Rich Lowry provides the reader with an intense and thorough analysis of the Clinton Era. Legacy is rich with actual quotations from Clinton, his wife and, most importantly, the people from his inner political circle, his aides and advisors. The book immerses deep into Clinton's insidious past and presents a wealth of forgotten truths to the reader, not as conservative propaganda, but, as cold hard facts. Lowry's powerful use of syntax and diction paints a very deep and honest portrait of Clinton. From Clinton's insecurities and capricious behavior to his inability to take action and responsibility, Rich Lowry does NOT hold back from exposing Clinton for what he truly is...a self-absorbed coward. Overall, Lowry does a splendid job of compressing eight years of mistakes, scandals and lies into one book. I applaud him. Being in the military, I experienced much of the aftermath from Clinton's budget cuts and other bogus endeavors and I can attest that we, as Americans, have paid a heavy and painful price for his cowardice and dishonesty. I encourage all Americans to open their eyes, read this book and acknowledge the fact for now is time to know the truth about Clinton.
Makes you wonder how he got away with it.......2007-01-14
it kind of tells it like it was. He as not the smiling guy he comes off as. Get it at the library for free. I gave it three stars because it does bring out some of the seedy things he did. I really never finished it.
Devastated by passage of time.......2006-11-04
Wow, what a difference five years makes.
For all the flaws Lowry finds in Clinton (and there are several which bear noting), even the most serious pale to what we now find in the Executive Branch. If only we had a president who cared about his legacy enough to correct mistakes in judgement and reverse course when desperately needed. If only we had a president today who cared about polls, and the will of the people. If only we had a leader who acted cautiously, intellectually, and with the aid of evidence rather than "gut feelings".
I remember well the days when I thought Clinton would be the worst president our country would ever see. How quaint those days seem.
Shipment early, packing condition.......2006-07-29
Book arrived on earliest date listed. Packing was simply a tight bubble wrap envelope that (I am sure) resulted in bent corners of book. Otherwise, book in great condition.
Why the Change? .......2006-06-18
This review is somewhat belated. I read the book shortly after its original release. The copy I have has a scarlet letter "A" in the title, which I thought represented perfectly the legacy of this brilliant, but terribly flawed man. It's too bad the title was retooled.
Average customer rating:
- the hobo philopopher
- Here's your crown King Nothing
- Not the best tutorial on how to sneak interns in and out
- Audio CDs are worth it because Bill narrates them himself
- A Gothic Tale of American Success
|
My Life
Bill Clinton
Manufacturer: Vintage
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
 General
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Presidents & Heads of State
| Leaders & Notable People
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
General
| United States
| Historical
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Clinton, Bill
| ( C )
| People, A-Z
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Memoirs
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Similar Items:
-
Living History
-
Madam Secretary: A Memoir
-
Giving: How Each of Us Can Change the World
-
My Life: The Presidential Years Vol. II (Vintage)
-
My Life: The Early Years
ASIN: 140003003X
Release Date: 2005-05-31 |
Amazon.com
An exhaustive, soul-searching memoir, Bill Clinton's My Life is a refreshingly candid look at the former president as a son, brother, teacher, father, husband, and public figure. Clinton painstakingly outlines the history behind his greatest successes and failures, including his dedication to educational and economic reform, his war against a "vast right-wing operation" determined to destroy him, and the "morally indefensible" acts for which he was nearly impeached. My Life is autobiography as therapy--a personal history written by a man trying to face and banish his private demons.
Clinton approaches the story of his youth with gusto, sharing tales of giant watermelons, nine-pound tumors, a charging ram, famous mobsters and jazz musicians, and a BB gun standoff. He offers an equally energetic portrait of American history, pop culture, and the evolving political landscape, covering the historical events that shaped his early years (namely the deaths of Martin Luther King Jr. and JFK) and the events that shaped his presidency (Waco, Bosnia, Somalia). What makes My Life remarkable as a political memoir is how thoroughly it is infused with Clinton's unassuming, charmingly pithy voice:
I learned a lot from the stories my uncle, aunts, and grandparents told me: that no one is perfect but most people are good; that people can't be judged only by their worst or weakest moments; that harsh judgments can make hypocrites of us all; that a lot of life is just showing up and hanging on; that laughter is often the best, and sometimes the only, response to pain.
However, that same voice might tire readers as Clinton applies his penchant for minute details to a distractible laundry list of events, from his youth through the years of his presidency. Not wanting to forget a single detail that might help account for his actions, Clinton overdoes it--do we really need to know the name of his childhood barber? But when Clinton sticks to the meat of his story--recollections about Mother, his abusive stepfather, Hillary, the campaign trail, and Kenneth Starr--the veracity of emotion and Kitchen Confidential-type revelations about "what it is like to be President" make My Life impossible to put down.
To Clinton, "politics is a contact sport," and while he claims that My Life is not intended to make excuses or assign blame, it does portray him as a fighter whose strategy is to "take the first hit, then counterpunch as hard as I could." While My Life is primarily a stroll through Clinton's memories, it is also a scathing rebuke--a retaliation against his detractors, including Kenneth Starr, whose "mindless search for scandal" protected the guilty while "persecuting the innocent" and distracted his Administration from pressing international matters (including strikes on al Qaeda). Counterpunch indeed.
At its core, My Life is a charming and intriguing if flawed book by an equally intriguing and flawed man who had his worst failures and humiliations made public. Ultimately, the man who left office in the shadow of scandal offers an honest and open account of his life, allowing readers to witness his struggle to "drain the most out of every moment" while maintaining the character with which he was raised. It is a remarkably intimate, persuasive look at the boy he was, the President he became, and man he is today. --Daphne Durham
Book Description
President Bill Clinton’s My Life is the strikingly candid portrait of a global leader who decided early in life to devote his intellectual and political gifts, and his extraordinary capacity for hard work, to serving the public.
It shows us the progress of a remarkable American, who, through his own enormous energies and efforts, made the unlikely journey from Hope, Arkansas, to the White House—a journey fueled by an impassioned interest in the political process which manifested itself at every stage of his life: in college, working as an intern for Senator William Fulbright; at Oxford, becoming part of the Vietnam War protest movement; at Yale Law School, campaigning on the grassroots level for Democratic candidates; back in Arkansas, running for Congress, attorney general, and governor.
We see his career shaped by his resolute determination to improve the life of his fellow citizens, an unfaltering commitment to civil rights, and an exceptional understanding of the practicalities of political life.
We come to understand the emotional pressures of his youth—born after his father’s death; caught in the dysfunctional relationship between his feisty, nurturing mother and his abusive stepfather, whom he never ceased to love and whose name he took; drawn to the brilliant, compelling Hillary Rodham, whom he was determined to marry; passionately devoted, from her infancy, to their daughter, Chelsea, and to the entire experience of fatherhood; slowly and painfully beginning to comprehend how his early denial of pain led him at times into damaging patterns of behavior.
President Clinton’s book is also the fullest, most concretely detailed, most nuanced account of a presidency ever written—encompassing not only the high points and crises but the way the presidency actually works: the day-to-day bombardment of problems, personalities, conflicts, setbacks, achievements.
It is a testament to the positive impact on America and on the world of his work and his ideals.
It is the gripping account of a president under concerted and unrelenting assault orchestrated by his enemies on the Far Right, and how he survived and prevailed.
It is a treasury of moments caught alive, among them:
• The ten-year-old boy watching the national political conventions on his family’s new (and first) television set.
• The young candidate looking for votes in the Arkansas hills and the local seer who tells him, “Anybody who would campaign at a beer joint in Joiner at midnight on Saturday night deserves to carry one box. . . . You’ll win here. But it’ll be the only damn place you win in this county.” (He was right on both counts.)
• The roller-coaster ride of the 1992 campaign.
• The extraordinarily frank exchanges with Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole.
• The delicate manipulation needed to convince Rabin and Arafat to shake hands for the camera while keeping Arafat from kissing Rabin.
• The cost, both public and private, of the scandal that threatened the presidency.
Here is the life of a great national and international figure, revealed with all his talents and contradictions, told openly, directly, in his own completely recognizable voice. A unique book by a unique American.
From the Hardcover edition.
Download Description
President Bill Clinton¿s My Life is the strikingly candid portrait of a global leader who decided early in life to devote his intellectual and political gifts, and his extraordinary capacity for hard work, to serving the public. It is the fullest, most concretely detailed, most nuanced account of a presidency ever written, and a testament to the positive impact on America and on the world of his work and his ideals.
Here is the life of a great national and international figure, revealed with all his talents and contradictions. Filled with fascinating moments and insights, it is told openly, directly, in President Clinton¿s own completely recognizable voice.
From the Hardcover edition.
Customer Reviews:
the hobo philopopher.......2007-09-19
This book was very long. I was going into a public building and I saw a woman reading this book with a highlighter. I asked; Is there really something to Highlight in that book? "Oh my gosh," she said. "This is a real history book of modern day politics."
So I bought it. It is enjoyable but one is left no doubt that Bill Clinton's political career is not over. And why should it be, I suppose.
Here's your crown King Nothing.......2007-09-19
Bubba sure does make `em mad.
For a good ol' boy who could eat chitlins with the best of them, Bill Clinton sure does provoke a lot of hostility and nastiness: But was he the beginning of the End for the American republic? Was his presidency, as a hyperbolic Washington friend of mine said long ago, a little like living "in Rome in the time of Caligula"?
Was Clinton a Chinese stooge, the real "Manchurian candidate", a stooge of special interests and warring bureaucracies that throttled Washington with their wretched excess? A communist? A socialist? A sexual predator? Fidel Castro's little clown? A useful idiot? The antichrist? Satan?
Based on the real Clinton record and this book, "My Life", which is the literary equivalent of a cup of clorox, I'd have to say: none of the above.
All told, in the grand scheme of history, even the little footnote that will be American history, clinton will barely be a coda, a footnote, a little inkstain , a creature barely capable of rising to the ankles of such Oval Office notables as Warren G. Harding, Rutherford B. Hayes, & Franklin Pierce. If he is so lucky.
Now: you've probably reached a pretty harsh indictment about me, my motives, checking out my 1-star and my acid little remarks about Bill Clinton. But I'm not a hater, no way: I voted for the man twice---yes, twice! Hey, what was the choice there? Bush I? Dole? Perot? You gotta remember, those were dark days for our beloved Republic.
I like Bill Clinton! Who wouldn't? hell, he's a genial, genuinely charming guy, though very little of that charisma, which propelled him from an existence in (had this been a less mobile society) gravitating from eating BBQ ribs all day to ruminating on the joys of the mechanical bull down at Bumpus's to the highest office of the most powerful nation on earth---though very little of that ocmes through in my life.
He's impossible to dislike. If BJ Clinton were a superhero, that would be his secret power: uber-likeability. Until he gets pissed off and flames out into an anger death spiral, his nostrils flaring, his eyes wild and furious, looking for all the world like actor Jamey Sheridan who played an okra-loving Satan in "The Stand." Or as Bill's own pleasingly plump little Devil in a Blue (stained) Dress Monica Lewinsky once confided to Linda Tripp, "He's a Magic Man, mama---he's got Magic Hands." Too true!
It's his magic thing, that charisma: it makes his impossible to dislike.
But he's also impossible to find interesting, in the same way that air, or borscht, or granola, is uninteresting. It's there. It has its uses. But what great ideas did the man have? What inspiring philosophy did he propound (aside form making the secret service check the silverware every time he and Mrs. C. left the white house. Did ja know that Mrs.C. senate office desks are stuffed, practically overflowing, with gewgags from air force one and the oval office, even now? True story. I sneeked a peek when she wasn't looking. And they say she has eyes in the back of her head, ha!). Anyway, Bill Clinton had the Magic. He said what the voters wanted him to say. He opened up his big Arkansas Hillbilly hands and just 'gave' us our prosperity. Even if he wasn't entirely hip to what Bush I called "the vision thing" when it came to the 1993 WTC attack, Marines hauled like cordwood through the streets of Mogadishu, the tech-fueled 2000 stock market collapse, or the economy dipping into Recession in the waning months of his presidency.
Trifling details.
Oscar Wilde once wrote a charming little story called "The Sphinx without a Secret", being a kind of dilettante's romantic diversion in search of what he believed to be the baffling, confounding mysteries behind his (unrequited) beloved, a society lady of the day with mysterious airs. The response was that she was a Sphinx without a secret: no mystery there, just nothing to say.
Nothing, nada, zed. Sound & fury, and all the rest of it, just bovine stupidity in a rapidly decaying little cakelette of flesh. Same with Clinton, only he wears boxers. Or FDR underoos.
Clinton is overrated, both in the field of Pro, and in the hellpits of Con. He's an avatar of the Age: lip-biting, apologetic, endlessly evasive, talking a great-game but doing very little. He's the New American Man! He's a Prince of the Buffet Table! He's said to be very good on the Links.
But given that Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes warned us ages ago against being a Nation adrift, what is it Bubba really did?
Sorry, forget it. The baby-back ribs are delish.
JSG
Not the best tutorial on how to sneak interns in and out.......2007-08-05
Really odd that the biggest thing that defined his presidency is all but left out of the book. Very disappointing, of course I do not care to hear the details but the fact that my tax dollar for the 8 years he was in there was being spent paying the Secret Service to make sure to "hold all calls" while Monica was in there inspecting the underneath of the desk is really quite maddening. This is just a self centered bragfest of this guy talking about how he somehow came from the depths to become a leader. Well they got that part wrong because it also did not cover any of the time he was governor of the great state of Arkansas, oh my oh my is there some scandal there!
Women aside, or on the side however you want to take it, the book also is lacking any explanation into the Whitewater scandal as well as the death of Vince Foster. I guess everyone gets paid off so now we will never, ever know. Well ya never know friends some papers always end up appearing on a desk somewhere years later. I bet they had the same shredders from Arthur Anderson in there what do you want to bet?
Audio CDs are worth it because Bill narrates them himself.......2007-07-10
Its nice just from a historical perspective to have the audio version because Bill narrates the CDs. Bill Clinton was one of the most qualified people to be president the country ever had. He knew early in his life that he wanted to help better the country and put in the work to achieve his goal. Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar. His education was earned, not given to him. In a public setting it is a pleasure to hear him speak and not butcher the English language.
A Gothic Tale of American Success.......2007-06-25
This is a gothic tale of American success. Bill Clinton became successful the old fashion way: by listening to his parents and teachers, drinking deeply intellectually, picking his fights and then "bobbing-and-weaving," working like hell, and when he made a wrong turn, he picked himself up and tried again.
Fat, un-athletic and so un-cool during most of his childhood in rural and then urban Arkansas, Clinton somehow survived the Elvis and James Dean eras unscathed. Given the antics of his alcoholic father, there is more than just a passing similarity between Clinton's family dysfunction and the subtext of Dean's movie "Rebel without a Cause."
Clinton was successful when most with his background have failed in part because he was a good observer of human nature and because he came from an unusually richly endowed environment where having such a talent mattered a lot. Even as it was populated by a textured mixture of both "real" and "homespun" intellectuals, racists, and other assorted scoundrels, no matter their station in life, these were people full of life and confidence, always on the go -- if not on the make; many of whom showed up later in Clinton's life. And like Bill, they reappeared in the second act as uncommon and unexpected success stories.
The subtext of this 994-page American drama is that with the right ingredients and a bit of luck, anyone in America can make it. And whether one believes this fully or not, Bill Clinton is living proof that it can, and did happen.
Whatever else one may think of Clinton, his presidency, his foibles, his life, his wife, this book proves that he has a heart, and that it is a good one. He became an intellectual heavyweight through sheer force of will and a desire to "do good," and to make a difference. He accomplished both.
What a good story, what a good life.
Five Stars
Amazon.com
Since his 1972 trailblazing opus, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail, Hunter S. Thompson has reported the election story in his truly inimitable, just-short-of-libel style. In
Better Than Sex, Thompson hits the dusty trail again - without leaving home - yet manages to deliver a mind-bending view of the 1992 presidential campaign, in all its horror, sacrifice, lust, and dubious glory. Complete with faxes sent to and received from candidate Clinton's top aides, and 100 percent pure gonzo screeds on Richard Nixon, George Bush, and Oliver North, here is the most true-blue campaign tell-all ever penned by man, beast, or Thompson.
Book Description
"Hunter S. Thompson is to drug-addled, stream-of-consciousness, psycho-political black humor what Forrest Gump is to idiot savants."
--The Philadelphia Inquirer
Since his 1972 trailblazing opus, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail, Hunter S. Thompson has reported the election story in his truly inimitable, just-short-of-libel style. In Better than Sex, Thompson hits the dusty trail again--without leaving home--yet manages to deliver a mind-bending view of the 1992 presidential campaign--in all of its horror, sacrifice, lust, and dubious glory. Complete with faxes sent to and received by candidate Clinton's top aides, and 100 percent pure gonzo screeds on Richard Nixon, George Bush, and Oliver North, here is the most true-blue campaign tell-all ever penned by man or beast.
"[Thompson] delivers yet another of his trademark cocktail mixes of unbelievable tales and dark observations about the sausage grind that is the U.S. presidential sweepstakes. Packed with egocentric anecdotes, musings and reprints of memos, faxes and scrawled handwritten notes (Memorable."
--Los Angeles Daily News
"What endears Hunter Thompson to anyone who reads him is that he will say what others are afraid to (.[He] is a master at the unlikely but invariably telling line that sums up a political figure (.In a year when all politics is--to much of the public--a tendentious and pompous bore, it is time to read Hunter Thompson."
--Richmond Times-Dispatch
"While Tom Wolfe mastered the technique of being a fly on the wall, Thompson mastered the art of being a fly in the ointment. He made himself a part of every story, made no apologies for it and thus produced far more honest reporting than any crusading member of the Fourth Estate (. Thompson isn't afraid to take the hard medicine, nor is he bashful about dishing it out (.He is still king of beasts, and his apocalyptic prophecies seldom miss their target."
--Tulsa World
"This is a very, very funny book. No one can ever match Thompson in the vitriol department, and virtually nobody escapes his wrath."
--The Flint Journal
Customer Reviews:
FEAR AND LOATHING IN PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN 1992.......2007-04-23
Better than sex
Know this. The late Hunter Thompson, Doctor Gonzo, was something of a muse for me although our politics, in the final analysis, were light years apart. I have read everything of his that I could get my hands on. During many a troubled time when I got down on the seemingly hopeless struggle in the fight for socialism his savage humor aimed at the inanities of bourgeois politics and politicians carried me through. That said, the book under review Better Than Sex about the trials and tribulations of covering the ill-starred 1992 presidential campaign is not one of his better efforts and even with his vast journalistic skills must have been a chore rather than something to really dig into. I will tell you my take on the matter.
Hunter Thompson started making a name for himself as a political journalist in his first efforts at trying to understand presidential political campaigns during the ill-fated Democratic campaign of George McGovern against one Richard M. Nixon in 1972. His Fear and Loathing on Campaign Trail 1972 stands as a classic of `alternative' journalism on the issue. He stated then that a political junkie, and by any definition he was one, could only really stand in the vortex of one such campaign before burning out. Nevertheless he recklessly pressed his luck. Unfortunately, Thompson found himself in the place where Teddy White found himself after his seminal `straight' reporting on the 1960 Kennedy-Nixon campaign, The Making of President. White too, went on to write more such books and not to his benefit. In short, pigeon-holed. Take that lesson for what it is worth.
The problem with Better Than Sex is that Thompson had written it all before, and to better effect. The writing seems frantic and tired, very tired. It did not help that his cast of main characters- one President George H. W. Bush, one William Jefferson Clinton and one genuine dingo bat Ross Perot- would make even a political junkie get him or herself to the nearest rehabilitation center. The book reflects that in many ways not the least of which is the extraordinary amount of filler (literally with `draft' notes, letters, drawings etc.) that clutters the book. If that does not convince you then a three star rating on a genuine five star journalistic hero of mine tells the tale. Still, there is more than enough savagely funny analysis and humor for a real Thompson junkie to get by on during a few lonely political nights. Enough said.
Not what I expected but still good.......2006-01-27
Lots of politic stuff.Kind of boring theme but Hunters words makes it fun and intersting.It is a good book if you are a Hunter fan.If you are not dont start go with this one.Pick up "Fear and Lothing in Las Vagas" or "Hells Angels".After you read those book this book will be lot better.
Political Junkies, Rejoice..........2005-06-03
I find that, no matter what book I read by the good Dr. Thompson, I can never write an appropriate review or make any sort of intelligent, logical comment on the subject. To date, I've read Hell's Angels, The Rum Diary, and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas twice, along with a few of the articles in Hey Rube. Picking up Better Than Sex, I hoped to finish the book and be able to, finally, write some sort of response to the book, putting to rest this impotence of critique that seems to hang like a strange, twisted shadow over his writing.
Like most people faced with the inability to perform a task, mine is psychological, rooted in a sort of awe factor, that phosphorous phantom known as envy that usually takes the form of imitation or fear and inability. I mean, essentially, you read Thompson and when you put the book down, you say "I want to write like that." Then, you open up Word or, if you're a bit old-fashioned, you pull out a pen and paper, and sit there, staring at the blankness, the perfect emptiness that you know you're only going to muck up because no human being can write like that.
No living human being, anyway.
What Thompson did - not only in writing but in life - was to infuse everything he touched with a sort of rough humanity. Whatever the subject, from the loss of idealism in the sixties hippy culture to why Bill Clinton was a weird one, but the only thing we had going in 1992, he could explain and expound upon it with the word of a poet and the common sense of your best childhood friend. The man knew how to craft a sentence and a story, something that was both informational and interesting, and by the time you reach the end of the story, you realize you're walking away not only entertained but educated. He had the power to do that.
Better Than Sex is a bit different from his earlier work, mostly in that it relies heavily on deviant, manic faxes sent to everyone from Clinton's campaign manager to Jan Wenner at Rolling Stone while Thompson was covering the campaign trail in 1992. While you're shuttled from one strange jaunt to the next, entertained at Hunter's various bizarre suggestions, you're also learning, picking up things you never realized were going on in that oh-so-important election year. He's pointing out mistakes that Bush Sr. made in 92, mistakes that were remembered not only by Hunter, but as becomes apparent as the book comes to a close, by the Bush II campaign. It's like a hard, fast look at the 2004 election trail, seeing the same plays from the same teams, except this time the away team learned from their mistakes twelve years ago, and they're not about to lose this championship again.
Reading it, however, isn't just an entertaining story or a guide to how to win a Presidential election. It's also a window into the mind of a man who was fed up with the Republicans twelve years ago, ready to take drastic action if Bush Sr. was re-elected. Reading it now, in light of Thompson's suicide in February, one can almost begin to comprehend the incomprehensible, as in his weirdest, most outrageous moments, Hunter revealed more of himself than he did when straight-laced and serious. In his coverage of the 92 campaign is the story of a man who could not live under the fascist iron fist of the more moderate Bush Republicans of the past, who reviled everything they stood for, and who threatened to flee the country should they take control for another four years. He shows himself as a man who is reinvigorated by the victory of sensibility over the zealous, Big Brother of a Republican party that was half the strength and only a forth as fanatical as the one that recently enthroned itself for another four years. He is revived by the masses throwing out the trash and choosing to change the ways of the country by making a choice for improvement and change. Twelve years later his rallying cry in Rolling Stone went unanswered, America chose fascism over freedom, and freak power as a force to be reckoned with is dead in the United States-how could he survive in that world?
This is not to say that a single presidential election could determine the life or death of one man; when it comes to politics, mortality rates are usually in the thousands. What Better Than Sex does say, however, is that like it or not, Thompson was a political junkie, that while his reputation was built on drugs, his perfect drug is a good political match, and that as a catalyst, it held major sway with a man whom drugs alone could not touch.
Accurate Title.......2004-05-22
This book is better than sex. His best since Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. He's not your average acid casualty. This book is an amazing blend of outrageous, mind bending accusations, libelous paranoid ranting, and just good old fashion fun. Hunter is a national treasure and this book is a great read.
A great representation of sarcasm.......2004-05-05
Better Than Sex is a book for those who like to read sarcastic, humorous, and often-cynical writing. Thompson creates a world of politics that is not the "norm" in the United States. It is something ugly, COMPETETIVE (even capitalizing it makes it understated), and downright dirty. He compares getting into politics like an addiction, a very serious addiction. It can mold people into a horrible beast that would run over their own mother as long as they got elected.
This is a book about politics. Yet, there are stories contained with James Carville, the ragin' cajun, stealing Hunter's money and jacket. Also, Thompson describes the, both good and bad, possibilities of a fax-machine, press pass, and telephone. Thompson basically shows his interest in politics in a very uninterested way. He almost makes it seem like he doesn't, in actuality, care about politics through his blatant sarcasm and, at times, downright rudeness. However, while reading, that does not deter from that he is obviously obsessed with politics. I think he's simply trying to state his opinion in a broad, un-censored way. All in all a very good and fun read, for those of you who are cynical and critical of the world around you.
Amazon.com
While no one came out of the Monica Lewinsky scandal looking good, David Schippers, the chief investigative counsel for the Clinton impeachment, wants to be sure Americans know just who contributed to the debacle and how. A trial attorney and a Democrat, Schippers was hired by Republican congressman Henry Hyde to lead an oversight investigation of the Justice Department, then was redirected to handle the impeachment. The quintessential honest man, Schippers was shocked, not so much by Clinton's actions (which he calls a far-reaching conspiracy to obstruct justice with perjury, lies, and witness tampering), but by Republican and Democratic politicians who sold out the impeachment process.
If you ever want to vote again, you might not want to know what went on behind the scenes in the Capitol Hill meat grinder leading up to and during the impeachment proceedings against William Jefferson Clinton.... Lies, cowardice, hypocrisy, cynicism, amorality, butt-covering--these were the squalid political body parts that, squeezed through the political processor, combined to make a mockery of the impeachment process.
Of course, Schippers does want you to know what happened, and he also wants you to vote--against those who made the mess. And so he names names--of Republican senators who refused to allow evidence on the floor, of the five Democratic congressmen who never examined the evidence, of the GOP senator who said, "You're not going to dump this garbage on us," and also of the politicians who did an honest job, or at least asked reasonable questions (such as Joseph Lieberman). Schippers also reveals the evidence he was building against the Clinton administration regarding illegal INS actions and Chinagate, but that he was forced to drop. He reviews the successful struggle to get a full hearing in the House and the "flat-out rigged ball game" in the Senate. He discusses the president's pattern of abuse and intimidation of women, including some highly disturbing information regarding Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broaddrick, and Dolly Kyle Browning.
Most of the documents related to the impeachment are still sealed, so Schippers's story is more diatribe than new information. Perhaps what this book confirms most (besides the ugly, self-serving side of politics) is the chasm between those trying Clinton, who firmly believed that his lying was destroying the structure of government, and those who felt that lying about sex was nobody's business. Schippers is clearly in the first camp: "I do not care what you are lying about. If you're the President of the United States and you lie under oath, you should be removed from office." --Lesley Reed
Book Description
David Schippers names names on both sides of the aisle, so that the voters can hold accountable their elected representatives who put partisanship or political deal making above the law.
Customer Reviews:
A man of unquestionable integrity.......2007-07-15
Note that this review is long after the publication of this book but Mr. Schippers' book is a timeless monument to his integrity and a searing indictment of our Congress and especially Bill Clinton and friends.
An even greater travesty is that this book apparently was given a "pass" by the mainstream intelligentsia and dismissed by the mainstream media.
If you really care about this country and its poloitical future, please read this book. I implore you to do so with an open mind. I acknowledge that I am a Republican but this book should worry readers on both sides of the aisle.
Mr. Schippers is a great American and my nominee for a Medal of Freedom. The Constitution really means something to him in its most literal language.
Recent history revised.......2006-01-28
This is quick revisionism from a hired gun. Perhaps the events of the Clinton presidency are too soon for anyone, liberal or conservative, to be objective, but it will never happen if people keep buying books like this.
Knowledge is Power?.......2004-03-01
The fragments of stories that arise from the Clinton impeachment period grow further and wider with each retelling of the story from the perspective of many who claim to know what everyone else doesn't. The analysis of each of these books reminds us that like today in the case of the Iraq War and the Bush first term, the American people actually know very little of the behind the scenes events, or their accuracy. What is clear, however, is that the White House environment has for some time now become one of the most hostile territories of America's political structure. It certainly seemed to be from the earliest time that Clinton took office until the time he left. Who knows how much is true, or false, and how it may, or may not, have been handled, and by whom? Though we may get some inkling of how the White House is designed to work from the West Wing series, it may well be the ideal, and not the reality. If everything that has been told about Clinton was true, the American people would have seen the greatest Jeckyll and Hyde act of all time, it seems, and that would be doubtful and improbable. If it is true, it would be unusual that Hillary would want to run for President, and the people of America may need to give far more scrutiny to the Presidents it chooses than they have in the past. Either way, the impact has been felt in all quarters of the nation, and will not likely be easily forgotten. Questioning how much knowledge the people have, and how much power over the office people have are critical issues at this time in America because of the accumulated knowledge we have of all past Presidents, that grows with each new review of what America thought she knew, but found later she didn't.
Part of the story.......2004-01-26
David Schippers has written a very passionate and readable account of the impeachment of Bill Clinton. He argues persuasively that Clinton was guilty of perjury, suborning witnesses, and other crimes. But for the cowardice of his political leaders, he argues, Clinton would have been convicted of high crimes and misdemeanors and evicted from office.
Schippers expresses great frustration that American public opinion seemed to overlook or excuse Clinton's excesses, despite the overwhelming evidence proving his guilt.
What Schippers fails to mention is the chain of events leading up to the impeachment, starting with Whitewater, a small-time land deal that was seized upon and exaggerated by Clinton's enemies to discredit him and his wife. Although one independent counsel (Fiske) found no wrongdoing, Right-wing ideologues, led by Jesse Helms and Lauch Faircloth apparently influenced the appointment of a second special prosecutor, Ken Starr, who had the appropriate ideological qualifications.
What then transpired was a seven-year investigation, in essence a standing inquisistion, that morphed from an investigation of Whitewater, to an investigation of any charges the Rabid Right could promote, from Filegate to Troopergate to Paula Jones. At its highest point, the OIC employed more than 60 FBI agents and dozens of lawyers, all dedicated to finding "something" on Clinton.
No one's personal life could withstand such scrutiny, not even the Pope's. In Clinton's case, he had already established during the 1992 campaign that he was probably a philanderer and a liar.
The Rabid Right, determined to use Clinton's raging hormones to descredit him, devised an intricate conspiracy, financed by Richard Mellon Scaife's millions and aided by several Arkansas low-lifes who enthusiastically fabricated evidence to get the Clintons. As part of the conspiracy, the American Spectator ran a secret Arkansas Project, spreading money around to finance an "investigation" of the Clintons that resembled a witch hunt than an investitation.
They eventually hit upon using Paula Jones' lawsuit to entrap Clinton into perjuring himself, aided by the secret tapes Linda Tripp had made of Monica Lewinski's narration of her sexual encounters with the President.
As part of the context Schippers urges us to consider, it's important to remember that Newt Gingrich and his minions had adopted a front channel strategy to discredit the Clintons, as well. This involved among other things, using the Republicans' control of Congress to institute endless hearings and investigations of the Administration. At one point, ten different committees were investigating the Clintons, along with several different special prosecutors.
This is the background that Schippers is surely aware of but considers irrelevant to his straight-forward consideration of crimes committed by Bill Clinton.
But the American electorate, even before the Right-wing conspiracy was brought to light, saw the basic unfairness of the seven-year inquisition conducted by Ken Starr. Moreover, despite Schippers' contention that Starr was an honorable man, the public saw incessant leeks that could only have come from the OIC. Starr's office also lost credibility when it took over the Paula Jones lawsuit, becoming enmeshed in an investigation of the President's sex life for transparently political purposes. At least two books contend that Starr had earlier provided quiet legal advice to Jones's legal team, a flagrant conflict of interest for an officer of the court.
Moreover, subsequent books about the investigation -- actually, a campaign is more accurate -- reveal that Starr, the Federalist "elves" and their right-wing allies used tactics and methods that ranged from merely unethical to downright illegal.
If sixty FBI agents and a couple dozen lawyers were assigned to investigate the "investigators" I suspect every one of them would be found guilty of some crime or other. Others, like our current Solictor General, Ted Olson, would likely have been indicted for perjury. Ken Starr would probably have been disbarred in every state in the union where he is a member, and co-conspirators like Ann Coulter could well have been indicted for aiding and abetting Linda Tripp's illegal (in Maryland) unilateral wiretapping of Monica Lewinski. Coulter allegedly even made copies of the illegal tapes. At least two of the Troopers, who were reportedly paid off with Right-wing money, probably perjured themselves, as well.
So Schippers has told us a tale of the crimes of Bill Clinton, but nothing of the crimes and immoral, unethical, and illegal activities of the hunters.
The second part of the story is why the American public never really supported the impeachment, to Schippers' apparent surprise.
It's possible, by reading other sources, to conclude that Schippers himself was prepared to believe only the worst about Clinton -- that he became a zealot in pursuit of Clinton.
While Schippers buys the 17-year rape charge against Clinton, David Brock believes that the woman in question probably brought the rape charge to persuade her then-boyfriend (now husband) that her relationship with Clinton had not been consensual.
Schippers also protests that Clinton was trying to abuse power by preventing Paula Jones from having her day in court. This looks like another case of consensual sex that the Clinton-haters managed to massage into a sexual harassment case, with the express purpose of investigating Clinton's Achilles' heel -- his philandering. Jones's case apparently had major shortcomings. Under cross examination, she couldn't remember if the encounter took place in the morning or the afternoon. Moreover, Clinton apparently does not have the "distinguishing characteristics" that Jones alleges. Hers was a strange story that was summarily dismissed in court.
Even Gennifer Flowers, whom I had initially believed, now looks like an adventurer trying to boost her career with a story about a 12-year affair with Clinton. Under cross-examination, she couldn't seem to come up with dates and places of their alleged assignations -- except a Little Rock hotel that hadn't even been built until five years after the claimed date of their meeting. It sounds like Gennifer was a one-night stand who subesequently invented an on-going relationship.
So was this impeachment the partriotic undertaking Schippers contends. Well, maybe...but it was hopelessly compromised by the actions of Newt Gingrich, the Rabid Right, and the Arkansas sleeze merchants, before it ever got off the ground.
Yes, Trent Lott and company could have pushed the impeachment. Had Clinton been removed from office, however, Al Gore would have taken over which would have constituted a major leg up in the subsequent elections, and the Supreme Court would never have had the opportunity to elect our new President.
A Perfect Title.......2004-01-23
It would have been difficult to give this book a more appropriate name. David Schippers shows that there was truly a sellout in the so called senate trial on the impeachment of President Clinton. One can see the frustration of the author after participating in the collection of a vast amount of information and the House Managers not being allowed to present the bulk of this information to the senate along with appropriate witnesses.
It is his contention that the sellout was made by the senate leadership. There was no interest in even looking at the gathered evidence, and it was obvious that senatorial minds were made up even before they were sworn in before the Chief Justice for the trial. This can be compared to a jury in a criminal case having their minds made up prior to being sworn in and hearing the evidence.
The reason for the senators not wanting the President convicted in the senate was largely due to the polls showing support of the American people for the President. It can be argued that this support held fast because the Administration was able to keep all Democratic senators loyal and thus maintain the argument of this being just a partisan Republican effort to overthrow the results of the previous presidential election.
Again this can be compared to jurors in a criminal trial voting not to convict the defendant because the majority of people did not want the person convicted.
Book Description
Stephen Skowronek's wholly innovative study demonstrates that presidents are persistent agents of change, continually disrupting and transforming the political landscape. In an afterword to this new edition, the author examines "third way" leadership as it has been practiced by Bill Clinton and others. These leaders are neither great repudiators nor orthodox innovators. They challenge received political categories, mix seemingly antithetical doctrines, and often take their opponents' issues as their own. As the 1996 election confirmed, third way leadership has great electoral appeal. The question is whether Clinton in his second term will escape the convulsive end so often associated with the type.
Customer Reviews:
The individual president in the politics of his time........2007-08-26
Stephen Skowronek wants to change how we judge the success of our Presidents. His major contribution to that understanding is to turn our attention away from the individual holding the office. Instead he wants us to focus on a combination of political, social and institutional factors. Perhaps the best way to introduce his theory is to start off with his observation that in general, "power has been less of a problem for presidents than authority" (p.17). In other words, it is easier to get things done then to sustain the justification of the action taken. In fact, Skowronek (hereafter called S.) feels that it in the ability of a president to "control the political definition of their actions" that will determine "the terms in which their places in history are understood" (ibid.)
Furthermore, S. sees that the power and authority have changed over the span of American history according to different arcs of development. S. sees the power of the presidency as being in the resources available to the office at any one moment and distinguishes that history of change (toward more resources and toward more independent use of those resources) as occuring in secular time. Authority refers to the way a president is expected by his contemporaries to use the resources of his office. The historical arc of change of authority structures, S. sees as taking place in political time (p.30).
The final key to understanding S.'s theory is his insistance on the inherently disruptive and creative nature of the office of the presidency. This is something that he insists on time and time again throughout the book (the first instance is on p.xii). Every president imposes themselves on the office in such a way as to change (disrupt) the current political order. How they frame doing so greatly determines the extent to which their authority to do so is challenged.
Here is where it gets interesting. Some presidents have been elected with a clear warrant for radical change in the political order. Some are elected to continue down an established path. S. imposes order on all this with a simple two by two box on p. 36. A president arrives in office either affliated with or opposed to the current regime. That regime is either vulnerable or resiliant. A president who arrives opposed to a current regime that is vulnerable has a chance to practice what S. calls the politics of reconstruction. S. examines as examples the presidencies of Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, F.D.R., and Reagan. This is the politics of greatness. If they arrive opposed to a current regime that is resiliant, the president is mired in the politics of preemption. S. sees as examples of this situation to be the presidencies of John Tyler, Andrew Johnson, (maybe) Grover Cleveland, (maybe) Woodrow Wilson, Richard Nixon and (somewhat) Bill Clinton. If a president arrives affiliated with a resiliant regime, he is an examplar of the politics of articulation. S discusses as examples of this James Monroe, James Polk, Teddy Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson. Finally, if the president is affiliated with a vulnerable regime, he will be an example of the politics of disjunction. S.'s examples are John Quincy Adams, Franklin Pierce, Herbert Hoover and Jimmy Carter (pp.17-57).
A couple of points need to be made about this scheme. The different types of politics unfold in a cycle in political time. There is a reconstructive president who usually arrives as the leader of a party realignment and with a mandate to change the corrupt and inept politics of the current regime. Utilizing this warrant for change they are able to make full use of the current powers of the president to change the regime (usually increasing both those powers and the independence of their use). One of their typical rhetorical tropes will be making the claim that they are returning our politics back to its first principles.
The presidents who follow are usually affiliates whose warrant is to continue along the new path. They do so initially as articulators but increasingly as disjunctivists (my own term and an ugly one, I acknowledge). This is due to the disruptive and individual nature of the office. In imposing their own style, ideas and appointees upon reaching office, the affiliates inevitably expose schisms in the party structure and ideology. This type of president will try to run a full-service presidency that pleases all factions of the party but the competition for the resources to do so will begin the unraveling of the coalitions created by the reconstructivists.
Even solid policy success will create problems for the affiliates who are claiming the mantle of the favorite son. Their own implementation of policy to solidify the success of their predecessor begins a debate on the history and the future of that's predecessor's reconstruction.(p.327).
Finally, in the politics of disjunction, the president will tend to resort to the reification of technique. This occurs when the president begins to lose control over the framing of the divisive issues of the day. They then attempt to use a standard of behavior as a justification for their actions. These standards of political behavior were usually introduced by the reconstructive president and have since become "politically vacuous" by the development of events. J. Q. Adams attempted to shore up his appointments by claiming that they were chosen solely on the basis of ability (the standard of patrician politics championed by Jefferson). But the politics of the moment demanded a balancing of political interests that were pressing upon him due above all to the circumstances of his election. Playing the patrician only made him seem duplicitious (see chapter 4, part 3).
Occassionally non-political events (e.g., the assisination of Lincoln) throws into office someone who is opposed to a resiliant regime and we experience the politics of preemption.
There is nothing regular or predetermined about these cycles. My qualifications about what type of president Cleveland and Wilson were shows that S. is sensitive to the difficulties with typing many of the individuals who have held the office. I think his chosen and discussed examples are probably best seen as Weberian ideal types. But I also think that S. feels that his typology can be usefully and clearly imposed on the great majority of our presidents.
Another qualifier on the theory is that the presidency is not the only governmental branch that has developed in secular time. Both Congress and the judiciary became increasingly independent from the presidency and developed increasing resources for expressing that independence.
Just as important, the last century has seen the rise of other institutions that are independent of the three branches (the Federal Reserve Bank) or outside of government all together (large unions, religious organizations, PACs, etc.) These factors along with others make it increasingly difficult to successfully pull off a reconstructive presidency.
S.s organizes his case studies in chronological order. They are in sections that are led off by study of the reconstructive presidents, followed by studies of affiliates and disjunctive presidents. They are very impressive essays that could easily stand alone. Part of what impressed me about them is the amount of archival research that S. has done. I would have expected him to rely on secondary studies and for the most part he has. But he has also read deeply in the writings of the individual presidents. For example, he makes good use of the letters of Franklin Pierce. There is an extraordinary amount of research that went into this book.
There is also a certain amount of hyperbole. I feel that S. sometimes makes his argument through his rhetoric. S. wants to emphasize the powerful nature of the office. So S. tells us that Polk's attempts to manage Jacksonian orthodoxy unleashed "schisms so destabilizing that it would take a civil war to resolve them."(p.162). I am going to suggest that those schisms were unleashed long before Polk did much of anything on the political scene. Polk's actions made things worse at most by accelerating a process already well developed.
Finally, S. feels that the political reality exposed in his theory is breaking down in various ways in the post-modern plebescitary presidency (his terms- don't look at me). I have gone on far too long to even begin to go into why he feels that is. What I hope I have done is to make you want to read the book. This is as important and insightful a scholarly work as I have read in a long time. It has several flaws but scholarly timidity is not one of them. If you are an American politics or history reader, you simply must read this book.
And then write a comment to me explaining how S.'s theory applies to Bush. I am still working on that one.
Good but boring.......2006-12-15
I had to read this for a class in undergrad, it was ok. I only read like 2 chapters because i was out drinking too often. His thesis is unique and kind of makes you think about the way presidents act within the overall American political landscape.
Most important book on the presidency in decades.......2004-06-08
Skowronek has written a magesterial study of the American presidency, fundamentally reinterpreting it through a novel historical framework. His writing style is very dense, and often unclear - but the hard work necessary to understand him is well worth the effort.
I first read this as an undergraduate, then twice again in graduate school. Each reading brought out new insights I missed the previous time.
No student of the presidency can afford not to read this. Quibble with him on some details, perhaps, but overall no one can doubt its lasting importance. An instant classic.
BRILLIANT, but a tad dense.......2002-02-22
This is definitely a difficult book, and understanding certain critical passages may require several readings. In short, this is NOT a good book for an introduction to presidential politics and leadership. For a more readable and still highly regarded account, Neustadt's seminal work is a good choice. However, none of this is to say that Skowronek's book is not brilliant--it is, and reading it carefully is a very profitable experience and will enhance anyone's understanding of the presidency, agree with Professor Skowronek or not. Through all the technical references, Skowronek proposes a paradigm for assessing presidential leadership: Reconstruction, Disjunction, Articulation, and Pre-emption, all of which are based on the nature of the government and its commitments (vulnerable or resilient) and on the president's relationship to that regime (opposed or affiliated). Reconstruction results when presidents are opposed to a vulnerable regime--here are the "great" presidents: Lincoln, FDR, and Reagan, for example. Affiliation with a vulnerable regime produces Disjunction. Articulation results from affiliation with a resilient regime. And Pre-emption is the product of opposition to a resilient regime. Of course, this merely scratches the surface of Skowronek's argument, for which he argues quite well and which he approaches from a fairly historical perspective. I highly recommend this for anyone wishing to gain a deeper, fuller understanding of presidential leadership, especially in considering how much a president's skills affect what type of leader he is and how much circumstances shape his presidency.
Decent.......2000-08-31
I read this as part of a course (taught by the author himself) in my sophomore year of college. Skowronek is I think to be applauded for his historical approach to presidential politics, and for his style of writing: it seems more as if youre reading a story than a political science book. Time and time again, Skowronek comes back to his thesis and main themes (legitimacy and presidents ability to correctly understand and manipulate their historical moment. The book never loses focus as Skrownek discusses different presidents or as he tells stories about a particular president. And hes done his research really really well. In particular his use of presidential quotes is very very impressive. Numerous times he gives examples of Presidents who attempt to build political legitimacy using words that fit very well into Skowronek's conceptual framework ("preserving foundations", recovering old sacred truths, continuing work that has already begun). The problem with Skowronek's book is that I think, given the sort of analysis hes doing here, its not very naunced. Im sure for example, articulation presidents often distanced themselves from their predecesors in some form or another. Some may not have a problem with this: after all S. is trying to prove his point and prove it well. However I thought at times that the book could have been more nauanced. Just my thoughts....OHH BUY THE BOOK!
Amazon.com
A Rhodes scholar with a healthy ego, the young idealist George Stephanopoulos thought he was ready for the obscure governor of Arkansas. But soon after he signed on as his presidential-campaign manager, the odds of Clinton's triumph soared, and so did the chance for calamity via Gennifer Flowers and other scandals. Stephanopoulos scrambled behind the scenes, squelching rumors, spinning major news organizations, artfully knifing Clinton rivals, and second-guessing public opinion--lessons that would serve him well when Clinton won.
For the next four years, Stephanopoulos was a few feet from the president, advising him on everything from Iraq and Waco to gays in the military and Paula Jones. More than any book yet--including Monica Lewinsky's--Stephanopoulos's memoir reveals what went on in the scary, occasionally hilarious world backstage at the White House. He casts stark light on characters from Yeltsin, "like a boiled potato slathered in sour cream," to the author's nemesis Dick Morris, whom he depicts bellowing
At the Center of the Storm: My Years at the CIA
The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives
Nixon and Kissinger: Partners in Power
Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq's Green Zone (Vintage)
Power, Faith, and Fantasy: America in the Middle East: 1776 to the Present
