Rating: 
Summary: Valuable and fascinating book on Pres Bush following 9/11
Review: Bob Woodward's books have several predictable reactions:
1) Many of the people involved or talked about in the book condemn it in generalities, but never in specifics.
2) People see in the book their own prejudices. For example, Bush haters will either dislike or like the book depending on how much they perceive the book supporting or condemning Bush. Bush supporters exactly the opposite.
3) Over time the book becomes a standard reference.
4) As history unfolds, the observations and events described in the book might be refined but are rarely overturned in anything but details.
5) Woodward comes out with a new book and the process repeats.This is a most interesting book. Bush comes across as more intelligent, involved, active, and passionate than his media persona is portrayed. This isn't to say he is without flaw, but I like Bush MORE after reading this book. Woodward also carefully details the rifts between the Cheney / Rumsfeld camp versus the Powell / Armitrage camp. This is fascinating stuff. It also gives details about Condi Rice's role in working with Bush as well as the CIA involvement in responding to 9/11. I believe that your judgment about this book should be independent of what you think of the administration's positions, policies, or the people involved. The real question to ask is, "Does this book provide us with valuable and reliable information?" I think a strong yes can be given. I think everyone interested in these issues, especially at this time of impending war, should read this book. It isn't very long, is clearly written for an easy read, and is fascinating enough to hold one's attention. Woodward works hard to remain unbiased, but few will be able to read him that way.
Rating: 
Summary: Bob's lost it!
Review: What a disappointment! With "Bush at war", it seems that Woodward lost the golden touch that carved his reputation as one of the greatest investigative journalist of all time. His investigation of the Watergate scandal during the Nixon administration is a case for independent, courageous and serious journalism. However, "Bush at war" holds none of these promises and happens to be a mere compilation of what was available in the press post 09-11. Woodward had access to top government officials but made poor use of the information he gathered. The book dangerously oscillates from factual to fictional, and bears more resemblance with a pro-Bush ...exercise than with a top-of-the-chart and incisive political analysis. Save your bucks!
Rating: 
Summary: It's not about politics, it's about our nation's leaders
Review: I'm currently reading Bush at War, and I'm enjoying it a lot. It's written in a novel form - even down to the "cast of characters" list in the front - and really brings to life the events that took place behind the scenes on September the 11th. It's cool...you should get it. Warning: This book does contain some of the real-life swearing, with nasty words like the F-word, and most of the rest.
Rating:
Summary: Better Than Your Average Woodward
Review: It had to be galling to Bob Woodward to write a fairly flattering book about a President he undoubtedly would have never dreamed of voting for a couple of years ago (and maybe not even now). While the book does little to dispell Bush's reputation for lacking eloquence or reflection, it does reveal his strengths as a leader who knows how to get action out of his staff. Two key passages in the book, just prior to the bombing in Afghanistan and just prior to the collapse of the Taliban, show a remarkable ability of #41 to reassure weary, wavering cabinet members just as they are beginning to lack confidence in themselves. The big question of nearly every Woodward book is how much he was able to extract from credible sources and how much he pulled out of thin air (he was, after all, the last man to talk to CIA director Casey AFTER he died). How much you think he fabricated for this book will probably depend on how much you like or hate George W. As usual, Woodward's writing style is highly readable, a good second draft of history.
Rating:
Summary: The First Hundred Days
Review: Woodward needs no introduction. If you've read one of his books, then you know his style. He relies on inside access not available to most reporters and writes in a misleading way that is difficult for the reader to know who exactly is the source of the information. The latter characteristic makes Woodward an irresponsible journalist; the former trait makes him one you cannot ignore. "Bush at War" falls into this same pattern. It seduces the reader with descriptions of meetings and events one cannot read about anywhere else since no other reporter had the access to know about them; at the same time, the wary reader can't help but wonder whose agenda is being pushed. You either take Woodward at his word or you don't. (Bush and Powell come off well in the book; Rumsfeld less so -- is this because Rumsfeld was not a primary source for the book?) On balance, I found the book fascinating because the subject matter is so compelling: a nation goes to war. It's also revealing to see that so much of the initial policy-making in the White House after the 9-11 attack had a harum-scarum quality to it. In those first days, there was little quality information coming out of Afghanistan that Bush and others in the administration could rely on, so they had to feel their way to success. This is not a knock against Bush -- anyone else in his position would have been forced to do the same thing -- but it is informative to see the way leaders sometimes need to throw together a policy on the run and then respond to events as they happen.
Rating:
Summary: Great read for Inside Information
Review: This book is a great read for an inside look at how the leadership or our country discussed, debated, and responded to 9/11. It is also a great backdrop for understanding how the presidential team is thinking about our escalation to war with Iraq.
Rating: 
Summary: Insights into the Bush White House
Review: A new Bob Woodward book is something I look forward to but I hesitated in buying this book (as it turns out I received it as a Christmas present). The hype surrounding it, from reviews I read and Woodward's appearances on Larry King, made it seem as though it would serve purely as propaganda for George Bush II. After all, Woodward uses a long interview with the President and transcripts from National Security Council meetings to construct the book, supplemented by his usual interviews. While the book does help the Bush image quite a bit (I'm not a fan but it gave me new respect for him) it's the background that really makes the book live. The jousting between Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld probably is the most surprising revelation. Powell is a top military man, yet comes across as the ideal diplomat. Rumsfeld (who has become a darling among some media and others for a reason I cannot fathom) is much more hawkish than Powell, certainly understandable in a Pentagon chief. The two go at it in many meetings although the disagreements are portrayed as being respectful. Powell is not a hawk on Iraq in the book either which makes today's statements on the subject questionable. Of all the book's "characters" Rice comes out the best. She appears to be a diplomat who can strategize with the best of them. Chaney does not appear as forceful as he seems in public and is much more in the background than he appears as portrayed in the media. Is this an effort on the part of the Bush White House to end the widely held contention that Chaney is not pulling the President's strings? The President's words, thoughts, ideas and character read much better than his public personna. The book Bush is mostly an intelligent, thoughtful individual who holds the reins of government firmly in hands. His public personna (on TV, for example) is much weaker and vague. The book is absorbing, especially for a reader who enjoys behind the scenes political policy making. Still, it's not the best Woodward book. How much of it is pure investigative reporting and how much carefully filtered propaganda? Woodward's independence and judgment can usually be trusted but the book comes out at a time when a reader may wonder if it's being used to support someone's agenda. With events about to unfold in Iraq, the real story of Bush at war may yet to be told.
Rating:
Summary: A plethora of insider tidbits makes for a compelling read
Review: Just as he has never revealed the identity of the infamous Deep Throat, so to has Bob Woodward secured the wherewithal as to how he procured the classified dialogue of National Security Council meetings which he so prominently displays throughout Bush at War. A juicy example - Deputy Secretary of State conveying to Colin Powell, "They're eating cheese on you"(military for you're getting used) when Rumsfeld and Cheney contradict Powell's earlier statements necessitating the U.N. Inspectors in Iraq. Having read Fighting Back by Bill Sammon and enjoying it thoroughly, I likewise found Bush at War to be compelling, albeit with more focus on CIA and its chief George Tenet. At times, I thought I was reading a Tom Clancy novel when the CIA paramilitary operatives Hank and Gary(1st names only for obvious reasons) undertake their clandestine operations with suitcases full of $3M to buy off the suspect Northern Alliance and Taliban commanders. I found it chock-full of interesting, and sometimes shocking insider info from the NSC meetings that made it completely worthwhile and quite a veritable page turner. As Woodward said on Larry King, thank goodness for the 1st Amendment or this stuff would not be available to the American public. Although the administration is most likely not overly pleased with the release of much of this previously classified information, we as the American public are priveleged to have Woodward so expertly pen this telling epic in American history. Woodward has made a concerted effort to mainain a mostly objective and unbiased account of our prodigiously talented Commander in Chief, George W. Bush. That being said, this book does skew towards the Left moreso than I would prefer. All in all, worth a read for all who desire to delve deeper into the innerworkings of the White House.
Rating:
Summary: Political Fiction
Review: This is probably what Joan Didion meant when she described the current state of journalism as Political Fiction. Bob Woodward's book reads like a novel. He has constructed a narrative with various characters cast in stereotypical roles. This book could have been written by Karl Rove. You are not going to learn anything about Bush or his regime reading this book. You will learn a great deal about Woodward and how he operates as a "journalist". He brags about all the access and documents he received from various goverment agencies. He brags about the interviews he got with everybody including Bush. You can't help but wonder why he never asked any meaningful questions. After awhile though you get it. What Woodward is giving us is Access Journalism. In exchange for access to high level officials and all the meaningless trivia they gave him Woodward shamelessly carries water for his sources. There is nothing in this book to tell us why we are going to war with Iraq. Woodward never bothered to probe. He was too grateful for the chit chat he had with Bush and others to ask any inconvenient questions or do any investigating.
Rating: 
Summary: Political reporting 'lite'
Review: This book makes clear that Bob Woodward has become the Barbara Walters of political journalism. Facile and lightweight. Frustrating lack of critical analysis. Devoid of penetrating questions. Puff piece for the administration.
| 
