Rating: 
Summary: From a liberal
Review: (Best with books like this to have it on the table where I stand)I've read many of the recent Bush-bashing, liberal-energizing books (Franken's "Lies and the Lying Liars . . .", Moore's "Stupid White Men" and "Dude, Where's My Country"), and I honestly think that this book is the best for someone who wants a good view into what liberals are so worked up about. Franken's book is often more humorous and a somewhat lighter read, so it may be better for you depending on your taste, but Ivins and Dubose here do the best job I've seen of setting out a well-reasoned, well-argued case, with not only the anecdotes but the numbers to back it up (although admittedly I haven't gone through their end-notes and checked up on all their sources). While I love all the recent liberal-lit---preaching to the converted may not help so much, but we do so enjoy the sermon---"Bushwhacked" impressed me most for an argument that's both compelling and rational. If I can find an equivalent on the conservative side (it's hard to slog through the partisan reviews and find out anything useful about many of these books, and I hope my review isn't more of the same), I'd read it for such a good view into the other perspective.
Rating:
Summary: The sequel we were hoping would not be written
Review: After reading Molly Ivins first book about George W. Bush, "Shrub", I was hoping I would never have to read another book by her. Not because I don't like Ivins or her writing, but because I was hoping that the book would make people see what a worthless leader Bush would make and not vote for him. Unfortunately, Bush got enough votes to allow the Supreme Court to get involved, and now another book must be written. The great thing about Molly Ivins is that she is able to relate the Bush Administrations failed policies to the everyday Americans life. She explains: - Why Bushes ties to Harken and Enron matter.
- How stacking the nations courts with right-wing judges is harmful to democracy.
- Why and how the Bush Administration's "No Child Left Behind" has left millions of kids behind.
- How Bush's poor foreign policy prior to Sept. 11th has negatively affected our ability to fight terrorism. A great sequel to "Shrub". Too bad it had to be written. Highly Recommended!!
Rating: 
Summary: Solid material, witty, but few footnotes
Review: I like everything Molly Ivins writes. Like Peggy Noonan, she can write. But she tends to do what some of her right wing counterparts do not: she provides facts, not just platitudes on the warmth--or lack thereof--of those of whom she writes.
In fact, she tends to be a sort of Upton Sinclairesque critic, rather than the romance novelesque style of those counterparts. Thank God.
This book is more, though, of a cheer lead, something I can use in general arguments with people who defend Bush and his policies. However, if I were inclined to write a more "scholarly" document I would not use this. Why? Because there are no footnotes.
All right. Al Franken pointed out in his book "Lying Liars..." that footnotes can be bogus. That's been known for years, and Franken just puts that fact in a more humorous context. Ann Coulter, for example, uses footnotes with no real referral, or taken out of context. Nonetheless people who defend her will refer to the footnotes--as if they're substantial. So they serve a rhetorical purpose anyway.
The information in this book is substantial. If I were going to a party tonight with, say, my in-laws, I'd read all the highlights I've made in "Bushwacked." I'm not likely to change the opinions of my rivals, but at least I might plant a seed by referring to many of the facts that Molly points out.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not discouraging the reading of the book. It's fact-filled, funny, and solid. I mean, if you think Bush really cares in the least about education, well, look at his talk relative to how much money he puts out for it. Look at what he--or rather to what Karl Rove--has done to Texas while Dubya was acting governor. There's even an intersting chapter on Eugene Scalia and his shenanigans. And much, much more.
But this is more of a rally cry for anti-Busheviks than it is something which you may find in, say, Harper's.
Read it, use it to argue. But don't expect it as a reference on a doctoral dissertation.
By the way, I'll now read "Shrub" by Ivins too. That's how much I like her writing.
Rating: 
Summary: I want to like this book but I can't
Review: Let me say the nice thing first: Molly Ivins has dug up the way that various policies affect individual Americans. The examples are shocking and sad for anyone who cares about public policy and real people.
That said, her overall case isn't persuasive.
1. You can't pin them all on Bush. Some of these are Clinton policies, as she occasionally admits but usually sweeps under the rug.
2. The causal links in this book are spotty at best. There's a lot of innuendo and circumstantial evidence, especially in the chapters on Enron or whenever she mentions campaign contributions. The book is short of smoking guns.
3. The book jacket and "official" reviews tell us the book is funny but it isn't. I can't even tell what the jokes are *supposed* to be, though the odd Texasisms are sometimes mildly amusing. Dan Rather and Keith Jackson do those funnier, though (not always on purpose).
4. Policy analysis by anecdote isn't very satisfying. Most policies help some people and hurt other people, and they all cost money, which is unfortunately finite. Telling stories about the people who get hurt is a helpful reminder that policy matters but unfortunately you also need to do some rigorous analysis too.
For example, spending money on meat inspectors might mean spending less money on heating subsidies for the poor. If you ignore cost-effectiveness, you're saying that we should spend 100% of our money on meat inspectors AND 100% of our money on heating subsidies, AND 100% of our money on everything else we can think of, because a little more spending might help Carrie Ann Smith (not her real name), who has problems.
5. She thinks campaign finance reform will help. Let's see, we've been reforming since the 1970s, which also happens to be the period in which income inequality has been getting worse in this country. So campaign finance reform certainly doesn't seem to help the problem much, does it? Maybe even makes it worse. I'd much rather get rid of gerrymandering and bring back competitive elections. (Which Ivins also mentions, much more briefly.)
So, read this book and get pissed off. But you're probably already pissed off. Don't expect this book to convince anyone unless their mind is already made up.
Rating: 
Summary: A book which is more fiction than fact
Review: This book is really a rehash of Ivins' columns that make her a rich liberal living in Austin. Her selective accounts of Texas politics, her ignoring the facts about the Enron scandal happening on Clinton's watch, her changing of history when it comes to Texas environmental issues, education issues, and other topics makes this a work of fiction. This is not a book about "George W. Bush's America" as its title claims. It is about Ms. Ivins distorted view about the record of G. W. Bush. There are far too many factual errors, and outright misrepresentations to list them. But one example is the education issue. Numerous studies have shown that the "No child left behind" act has resulted in dramatic improvement in test scores for underprivileged children where school systems have had to change focus on education instead of the school lobby. Ms Ivins' references to this change refer only to discredited "studies" by special interest organizations whose methodology has been discredited.
This is a very mendacious book. The good part of this book is that it is one of those reinforcement exercises for delusional liberals. They will read this, support Howard Dean, and lose the next election. Molly is a gift that keeps on giving.
Rating:
Summary: Powerful
Review: She brings an enormous amount of research to this critique of the Bush policies in an engaging down-home tone. She lacks the vituperative toxin of Coulter, although like Coulter, I fear she is preaching to the faithful. Will be an informative read.
Rating:
Summary: Be Afraid--Be Very Afraid
Review: I read Molly Ivins' earlier work Shrub (also written with the help of Lou Dubose). Ivins is the consummate reporter of all things Texan. Known for her sardonic wit, she once said in an interview that when she first walked into the Texas Legislature as a cub reporter, "I thought I had died and gone to heaven." And of one legislator she quipped, "If his IQ dropped any lower, we would have to water him twice a day." In Bushwhacked she says of a piece of ill-fated legislation that it "was deader than an armadillo on I-35." I think that one should make it into the language. However, this the one few moments of comic relief in a book that should scare the pants off of you.
No book Stephen King ever wrote is as scarey as Bushwhacked because King's fictional characters cannot leap off the page and really get you, but all that Ivins and Dubose report is frighteningly real, and it has and will continue to affect your daily life from health issues such as toxic waste giving you cancer or whether you will die from eating a sandwich, to economic issues such as whether you get your Unemployment check or your pension. Bushwhacked catalogs the nauseatingly steady stream of sweetheart deals that Bush contributors got that cost you more in a thousand different ways.
Perhaps the scariest part of the book is the Bush Administration's plan for Partiot Act 2. In short, any group the Attorney General deems a terrorist group, could immediately lose their American Citizenship. Look out ACLU-that just may be you!
The book is filled with examples of Bush's hypocrisy, which manifests in two different styles. These two examples should give you a taste of both styles:
The one style of hypocrisy Bushwhacked highlights is that Bush often strenuously opposes something such as AIDS funding, but after losing the fight, publically champions the cause with great fanfare in a photo-op as though he was leading the charge all along.
The other style of Bush hypocrisy the authors expose is Bush's habit of announcing, "We have a plan . . . ". However, the "plan" results in the very opposite of the stated goal. For example, Bush in a 2002 speech said that he had a plan to safeguard 401K and pension plans. The Bush plan encouraged companies with huge tax breaks if they switched from fixed benefit plans to cash balance retirement plans. This would benefit employers saving them millions a year, but older workers could lose up to 50% of what they would have gotten with the traditional fixed asset plans. The Bush plan also shields employers from age discrimination lawsuits.
Bushwhacked also cites numerous examples of Bush's arrogance. The authors point to Bush's interview with Bob Woodward where Bush said that he does not answer to anyone, but that others have to answer to him. This is Bush's "interesting" (his word) view on the presidency, which is clearly out of kilter with the Constitution's system of checks and balances.
The authors chronicle Bush's arrogance and trace it back to his religious beliefs. Even the most casual observer cannot help noticing that W Bush wears his faith on his sleeve. But until I read this book, I was not aware that Bush believes that God chose him as president. This examination of Bush's belief structure explains much. Before reading this book I could not imagine why a guy who slid into the White House on a technicality has acted as though he had an overwhelming mandate. While Bush obviously received no mandate what-so-ever from the American people, Bush's belief that his mandate comes from God explains his colossal arrogance and makes George W. Bush the scariest president that we have had so far.
Thank you, Molly and Lou. Thank you for "splaining" it to me.
Rating:
Summary: Plain Talking Populism
Review: Molly Ivins and Lou Dubose have developed a good old down home ring for their populist message. They put the current economic situation in America in the perspective of the average American and what the Bush policies have meant to such individuals in that category.
The authors refer to their method as the Doug Jones Average, with Doug representing the average Joe. This book is replete with stories about Americans treading water. Some are not even treading, and have lost their jobs while others find themselves working longer hours and taking home less pay.
The Ivins and Dubose formula for action begins at the ballot box. They take a hard look at Bush economic policies and conclude that they are disproportionately weighted to the advantage of the wealthy, particularly in the corporate sector. As Ivins said recently after Bill O'Reilly called her a socialist and eventually apologized, what she favors is a regulated form of capitalism such as was practiced in progressive Democratic presidential administrations under chief executives such as Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson.
If we would return to those successful policies of yesteryear Ivins and Dubose are confident that things would begin looking up on the Doug Jones Index.
Rating:
Summary: Ouch! I've been BushWhacked!
Review: Great Book. I knew Bush was bad, but I had no idea how bad until I read this book.
Rating:
Summary: From a liberal
Review: (Best with books like this to have it on the table where I stand) I've read many of the recent Bush-bashing, liberal-energizing books (Franken's "Lies and the Lying Liars . . .", Moore's "Stupid White Men" and "Dude, Where's My Country"), and I honestly think that this book is the best for someone who wants a good view into what liberals are so worked up about. Franken's book is often more humorous and a somewhat lighter read, so it may be better for you depending on your taste, but Ivins and Dubose here do the best job I've seen of setting out a well-reasoned, well-argued case, with not only the anecdotes but the numbers to back it up (although admittedly I haven't gone through their end-notes and checked up on all their sources). While I love all the recent liberal-lit---preaching to the converted may not help so much, but we do so enjoy the sermon---"Bushwhacked" impressed me most for an argument that's both compelling and rational. If I can find an equivalent on the conservative side (it's hard to slog through the partisan reviews and find out anything useful about many of these books, and I hope my review isn't more of the same), I'd read it for such a good view into the other perspective.
|
