Woodward's Portrait Of Bush Nails Down The Man as He Is - WSJ's Murray

[question everything]

Poor Karen Hughes. She gives a decade of her life to President Bush, writes a hagiography about the experience, but still scores only second place on the Bush campaign's "Suggested Reading List." First place is reserved for Bob Woodward's "Plan of Attack."

That is the book radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh called an "anti-Bush, antiwar screed" in The Wall Street Journal. Ivo Daalder of the Brookings Institution calls it a "deeply disturbing indictment of the president and his policy," while MSNBC's Bill Press says it would cause presumed Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry to "win by a landslide" if widely read. It is fast becoming a staple on the Bush-hater's bedside table. According to Amazon.com, those buying "Plan of Attack" also bought John Dean's "Worse than Watergate" and Al Franken's "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them." (Those buying Ms. Hughes book, on the other hand, bought Sean Hannity's Bushophilic "Deliver Us From Evil.")

(snip)

I think there is a simpler explanation: This book gets it right. The president is exactly as Mr. Woodward portrays him: a man who judges his counterparts by their character -- he often uses an earthier term -- rather than their intellect. A man so certain of his positions that he loses no sleep to doubts. A man who talks to God about key decisions, but avoids long discussions with advisers who disagree. Love him or hate him, this is the real George W. Bush. And the presidential election of 2004 is less about defining him -- Mr. Woodward has done that very well -- than it is about defining us, the voters who will either re-elect him, or not.

(snip)

By now, all Americans have taken fair measure of their president. And their sharp disagreements have less to do with who he is and what he has done than with who they are and what values they hold. Mr. Bush has become the ultimate Blue America-Red America litmus test. Your response to him determines which side of the great divide you populate.

(snip)

Write to Alan Murray at [email protected]

URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB108302179226194161,00.html

[KC21304]

1. I believe Woodward's book tells us who Bush was

for the 3 1/2 hours that Woodward talked to him for the book. Bush approached Woodward to do the book and the sole purpose was so Woodward could tell the people that Bush was running things.

It was not hard to prep Bush for this and for Cheney to make himself scarce for 3 1/2 hrs. They knew the question most people were going to ask and like a good soldier Woodward is saying he never saw Cheney once when he was interviewing Bush.

Of course they had to take the chance that he would get a few things they didn't like from other people but the main objective was obtained. Bush didn't ask his father, Rumsfeld, or Powell for advise. He don't need no stinkin' advice.

[kskiska]

2. Right. This is Bush*s book.

He used Woodward to tell the story the way he wanted it told. He was Bush*s stenographer. There's something fishy when everyone who leaves the administration tells a totally different story than Woodward.