Rating: 
Summary: Inside the White House
Review: Mr. O'Neill offers the following: "The economy grew an average of 3.8 percent a year between 1996 and 2000" and "Productivity had risen nearly 60 percent each year since 1995." People of average intelligence don't need former Treasury Secretary O'Neill's figures to know the Clinton economy has fallen off a cliff under the Bush administration.It's also very credible that the Bush administration is being run by greedy CEOs and a ruthless GOP party, which O'Neill points out: "There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of policy apparatus. What you've got is everything -- and I mean everything -- being run by the political arm. Everything -- and I mean everything -- is being run by the Mayberry Machiavellis."
Rating:
Summary: What We Have Here is a Failure to Communicate
Review: The title quote, courtesy of the late Strother Martin, describes
one of the central themes of the book. The other major theme is the double entendre in the book's title. Altogether they make The Price of Loyalty by Ron Suskind a thoroughly compelling read. The book chronicles Paul O'Neil's two year stint as Secretary of the Treasury in the administration of George W. Bush. The screed has been the subject of much media buzz including a profile of its protagonist, Mr. O'Neil, on Sixty Minutes. The book is not a kind portrait of the president, his policies or his cadre of advisors. To make the book work, the author must make the reader believe Paul O'Neil. While others are mentioned in the text, this is a biography of two years in O'Neil's life. His experience is the prism of all events. And it is here where Suskind, the writer, really succeeds. I liked Paul O'Neil. I admired the literary portrait of a man of conviction, energy, intelligence, and integrity. Often, tell all books are written by folks who are disgruntled. Suskind shows us early that O'Neil was courted by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. The two polls wanted him much more than he wanted them. He was rich. He was ending a highly successful tenure at Alcoa. He had a wife he dearly loved. The two wanted to spend a rich time together that did not include more government service. But when the call came, O'Neil could not refuse. Suskind, thru O'Neil's retelling, beckons the reader to the days of Nixon and Ford when O'Neil worked budget magic at the office of OMB. He gained a reputation as an "honest broker," a term that gains significance as the book unfolds. He remembers the rigor of the "Brandeis Briefs" that President Nixon demanded. These policy papers sharpened his critical skills and helped spawn a flurry of reasoned debate. Under President Ford he learned team building and consensus building. He then begins a career in the business world where he displays probity and commitment to truth. Slowly he begins to see that much of that vitality is absent in the Bush administration. There is little dialogue. Dissent is marginalized. Meetings are scripted and for appearance sake. Behind the scenes, the president is controlled by handlers. Sadly, over time, O'Neil discovers the identity of one of the ideological handlers. It is a longtime friend. Read the book to find out who the person is. Meetings with the president are eventful only for lack of dialogue. The president seldom engages as did Ford or challenges ala Nixon. One feels almost discomfited reading about some of these painful encounters of the silent kind. Is it vacuity or depth? What seems to engage President Bush most is conversation about food. He reprimands Andy Card for some late cheeseburgers, and he extols the virtue of comfort food at Camp David. It seems this is the only subject O'Neil ever hears the president pontificate upon. His views relevant to the economy are seldom shared in vigorous give and take. What then is the price of loyalty? The book is an examination of where loyalty is placed. As I first read the book's title, I thought that it was a Faustian premise being forwarded. Somehow by placing loyalty in the president there was an unsavory deal about to be made-a soul for the comforts and prerogatives of the ruling class. Then I realized there was a wholly different way of interpreting it that is clarified at the end of the book. It evokes the admonition of Polonius to the matriculating Laertes "to thine ownself be true" or of the ancient Chinese philosopher Lao-zste who proffered "seek not after the master, but seek what he sought." Both quotes, from disparate cultures, speak to the commitment to truth that the virtuous seeker must have. One can never really possess truth; that is, by paradox, the one true thing. But to make an honest effort in the sweat of the human experience is all we can hope to accomplish. This honest pursuit is the windmill which our protagonist tilts. And on page 292, the author reveals why the Bush administration acts as it does. It feels that it has the truth. Why debate? Honest brokerage is just for show, a window dressing to keep critics at bay. People who believe they have the truth are absolutists. They are loyal to the persons possessing that truth; further conversation on matters extraneous to that ideology (in this case preemption and supply side tax cuts) is idle and annoying. "Stick to principle" is the mantra; deficits and angry conflicts the result. Unlike many other texts that have attacked other recent presidents, this book is highly documented. The things that O'Neil says can be checked-he was a high muckity-muck, and his words are marked. I trust his retelling, and I do not question his loyalty.
Rating: 
Summary: Provocative read leads to worries about the future
Review: I'll start with my biggest issue with the book - the supposed infallability of Paul O'Neil. It must be hard to be right about everything. Still, this book is a must read if only for the way it reinforces what many people already suspect - Bush and his "trusted" advisors operate on a 50/50 mixture of arrogance and cold calculation. And our country is paying the price for it.
As for concern about the environment, social programs, and yes, our future - it's not there. Suskind is a gifted writer, and does a great job of portraying some true "cold" warriors.
Rating:
Summary: What We Have Here is a Failure to Communicate
Review: The title quote, courtesy of the late Strother Martin, describes
one of the central themes of the book. The other major theme is the double entendre in the book's title. Altogether they make "The Price of Loyalty" by Ron Suskind a thoroughly compelling read. The book chronicles Paul O'Neil's two year stint as Secretary of the Treasury in the administration of George W. Bush. The screed has been the subject of much media buzz including a profile of its protagonist, Mr. O'Neil, on Sixty Minutes. The book is not a kind portrait of the president, his policies or his cadre of advisors. To make the book work, the author must make the reader believe Paul O'Neil. While others are mentioned in the text, this is a biography of two years in O'Neil's life. His experience is the prism of all events. And it is here where Suskind, the writer, really succeeds. I liked Paul O'Neil. I admired the literary portrait of a man of conviction, energy, intelligence, and integrity. Often, tell all books are written by folks who are disgruntled. Suskind shows us early that O'Neil was courted by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. The two polls wanted him much more than he wanted them. He was rich. He was ending a highly successful tenure at Alcoa. He had a wife he dearly loved. The two wanted to spend a rich time together that did not include more government service. But when the call came, O'Neil could not refuse. Suskind, thru O'Neil's retelling, beckons the reader to the days of Nixon and Ford when O'Neil worked budget magic at the office of OMB. He gained a reputation as an "honest broker," a term that gains significance as the book unfolds. He remembers the rigor of the "Brandeis Briefs" that President Nixon demanded. These policy papers sharpened his critical skills and helped spawn a flurry of reasoned debate. Under President Ford he learned team building and consensus building. He then begins a career in the business world where he displays probity and commitment to truth. Slowly he begins to see that much of that vitality is absent in the Bush administration. There is little dialogue. Dissent is marginalized. Meetings are scripted and for appearance sake. Behind the scenes, the president is controlled by handlers. Sadly, over time, O'Neil discovers the identity of one of the ideological handlers. It is a longtime friend. Read the book to find out who the person is. Meetings with the president are eventful only for lack of dialogue. The president seldom engages as did Ford or challenges ala Nixon. One feels almost discomfited reading about some of these painful encounters of the silent kind. Is it vacuity or depth? What seems to engage President Bush most is conversation about food. He reprimands Andy Card for some late cheeseburgers, and he extols the virtue of comfort food at Camp David. It seems this is the only subject O'Neil ever hears the president pontificate upon. His views relevant to the economy are seldom shared in vigorous give and take. What then is the price of loyalty? The book is an examination of where loyalty is placed. As I first read the book's title, I thought that it was a Faustian premise being forwarded. Somehow by placing loyalty in the president there was an unsavory deal about to be made-a soul for the comforts and prerogatives of the ruling class. Then I realized there was a wholly different way of interpreting it that is clarified at the end of the book. It evokes the admonition of Polonius to the matriculating Laertes "to thine ownself be true" or of the ancient Chinese philosopher Lao-zste who proffered "seek not after the master, but seek what he sought." Both quotes, from disparate cultures, speak to the commitment to truth that the virtuous seeker must have. One can never really possess truth; that is, by paradox, the one true thing. But to make an honest effort in the sweat of the human experience is all we can hope to accomplish. This honest pursuit is the windmill our protagonist attempts to tilt. And on page 292, the author reveals why the Bush administration acts as it does. It feels that it has the truth. Why debate? Honest brokerage is just for show, a window dressing to keep critics at bay. People who believe they have the truth are absolutists. They are loyal to the persons possessing that truth; further conversation on matters extraneous to that ideology (in this case preemption and supply side tax cuts) is idle and annoying. "Stick to principle" is the mantra; deficits and angry conflicts the result. Unlike many other texts that have attacked other recent presidents, this book is highly documented. The things that O'Neil says can be checked-he was a high muckity-muck, and his words are marked. I trust his retelling, and I do not question his loyalty.
Rating:
Summary: Genuinely Raises the Question: "Who's In Charge Here?"
Review: Paul O'Neill thought he was getting Robert Rubin's old job when he was appointed Treasury Secretary, but in fact he was only assuming the title. Mr. Rubin's job, at least as described by Mr.Rubin, was to sift though economic data, study the intricacies of world economics, and to shape domestic and global economic policy accordingly. That is the job Mr. O'Neill believed he was getting. Instead he found himself in what he appears to consider a figure-head position. Paul O'Neill, who had been a budget adviser to both the Nixon, Ford, and the George H.W. Bush administrations, and had been a successful chief executive at Alcoa, was able to sift through economic data to his little heart's desire with his friend, Alan Greenspan. But he soon discovered that was pretty much the limit of what was expected of him. That and signing his name to newly minted money flowing out of the Treasury. Along the way, O'Neill made more than few public statements that were contrary to the Administration's position, eventually leading to his being asked to resign. Mr. O'Neill slowly came to the conclusion that he was serving in an administration that would not let facts get in the way of policies set by a "praetorian guard" of ideologues surrounding the president. O'Neill found himself to in a subservient position to such insiders as Karl Rove, the man credited with putting Bush in the White House. Noting many of the policy making decision problems, O'Neill recounts a conversation with Dick Chaney in which he said to Chaney, an old friend, "We need to be better about keeping politics out of the policy process." But he was ignored. O'Neill states that he continually asked the Vice President to foster a more open policy-making process in the White House, but to no avail. O'Neill's actions apparently led others in the inner circle to doubt his loyalty to the President. As we learn, O'Neill finally realizes that Mr. Chaney is the leader of the inner circle, which apparently keeps facts, be they about the deficit, steel tariffs or Iraq, from getting in the way of policy. At the center of this book is a recurring, unasked question: Who's in charge here? The portrait of Bush painted by O'Neill is not particularly flattering. Bush nicknamed O'Neill "Pablo," a nickname that irritated O'Neill, and their meetings appear to nearly always have been ineffectual. In the first of near-weekly one-on-one meetings between the two, O'Neill arrives prepared to spend an hour talking about the economy, tax cuts, and Social Security. And he does, pressing on with a monologue because the expressionless President barely says a word in response. This lead O'Neill to question exactly what the President was up to. O'Neill states "I wondered, from the first, if the President didn't know the questions to ask. Or did his strategy somehow involve never showing what he thought?" O'Neill appears to have come to the conclusion that is the former, rather than the latter, that led to the President's stoicism. O'Neill did have enough influence to stave off a tax cut on dividends, for a while anyway. But when the issue came up after the midterm elections, O'Neill told the administration that the country could not afford it, only to rebuffed by Chaney. Chaney is said to have stated: "Reagan proved deficits don't matter. We won the midterms. This is our due." He does note that at that meeting the President, who is depicted as having a hard time following the discussion, wonders whether he hasn't already given wealthy people enough of a break. But, when the question came up, it was immediately nipped in the bud by Rove. O'Neill eventually came to believe that he, Christie Whitman and Colin Powell were essentially hired for cover by a president who had pledged to govern from the center, but really had no intention of doing so. O'Neill, a man who admired how President Bush's father, when faced with a dire fiscal outlook, had reneged on his "no new taxes" pledge, was and is clearly troubled at the lack of fiscal responsibility in the administration. Particularly given the fact it is a Republican administration. O'Neill notes that both he and Mr. Greenspan were concerned that the bulk of the first round of tax cuts in 2001 could prove unaffordable if projected $5.6 trillion surpluses over the next decade turned out to be an illusion (as they did). He states that he tried to get the President to agree to condition the phasing in of these cuts on the availability of surpluses to no avail. He further notes that Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan was concerned that the first Bush tax cut did not include "triggers" that would have shut down the transfer of $1.35 trillion back to taxpayers if the budget surplus was evaporating. Greenspan is quoted as saying, "Without the triggers, that tax cut is irresponsible fiscal policy." O'Neill can and has been criticized for some of his revelations, such as the Greenspan quote. No doubt some of those quoted in the book never imagined that statements they may have made would come back to haunt them in this fashion. But, conversely, O'Neill never imagined himself in this position and he now finds himself defending his reputation after his ouster by none other than his friend, Dick Chaney. But I also do not believe he has revealed anything that the American people do not have a right to be aware of in this book. The White House is naturally upset that a departed cabinet member has provided such an intimate and devastating portrait of presidential decision-making, particularly in an election year. But O'Neill also feels betrayed by a White House that discouraged any serious fiscal policy discussions and had no problem sending him packing when he continually failed to tow the administration's line. Of course, administration defenders are painting O'Neill as a man with an agenda (and, despite his denials, I think he does have a bit of an agenda), but there is evidence to indicate that much of what O'Neill claims is true. Suskind reportedly sifted through some 19,000 documents and hours of interviews to present this eye-opening window into the Bush White House. He substantiates much of what is said throughout. But it does beg the question, how unfiltered is what is said? Both Suskind and O'Neill have denied having an agenda, but they do seem determined to paint the President as an empty suit. What's troubling is, even if only half of what is recounted is true, they may be right.
Rating:
Summary: An important read for 2004
Review: Whether you are Republican or Democrat, this is a must-read for the upcoming election. Very few surprises are contained within this book -- the biggest "revelation" seemingly being the fact that Bush and his pals were planning an overthrow of Hussein from Day 1. This truly couldn't surprise many readers. But what is of relevance is the description of how decisions are made and crucial topics are discussed, or, more to the point, not discussed, at least not in a broad and engaged forum, such as a Cabinet meeting. And even though former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill is the prime source for this book, his portrayal by Suskind is not unblemished either. It would seem that Bush and O'Neill brought out the worst in each other, with O'Neill trying to engage his boss in any way possible, including odd actions and statements. O'Neill comes across, both in the book and in interviews post-publication, as being somewhat naive about the way Washington works. This is truly surprising given his experience within the Nixon and Ford administrations. The reading of Suskind's book is important for all engaged US citizens. Rarely do we get a glimpse such as this within a current administration. This, typically, is the type of information that comes out 5 - 10 years after a presidency. Given the information O'Neill has shared with us, it is important that we evaluate carefully what type of administration we want occupying the White House.
Rating:
Summary: Very thought provoking
Review: O'Neill and Suskind's outstanding careers lend credence to the information revealed in the book. I'm reminded of all the bizarre policy shifts (Kyoto, missile defense, Iraq) that the Bush administration has made over the past 3 years. Suskind's analysis (with O'Neill and Whitman's inside information) sound like the most plausible explanation for Bush and co's actions. It's amazing to me O'Neill lasted as long as he did. I would have QUIT long before he was asked to leave!
Rating:
Summary: Don't miss reading this one!
Review: My thanks to Paul O'Neill for what seems to me to be an honest, straightforward, informative, (and disturbing) account of the inner workings of the Bush Administration. This is a story that needed to be told. Too bad Mr. O'Neill did not have the chance to apply his genius to some of this country's major problems.
Rating:
Summary: Politics and Business in the 21st century
Review: Prior to serving as Treasurer for George W. Bush, Paul O'Neil lived a life of public service and financial management in the corporate world. He was a conservative republican with close ideological bonds to Alan Greenspan and long-term working and friendly relationships with most of the figures of the Bush White House. So why didn't it work? The book outlines the shift in Clinton democratic thinking toward the Republican middle and a shift in Republican thinking toward Neoconservatism. Whatever these shifts may mean in the real world, O'Neill also outlines one other change -- one that pertains to all politicians of the 21st century -- the ability and willingness to challenge oneself with ideas distinctly different than those of personal preference. He calls it pragmatism -- considering the pros and cons of every argument and then choosing the one that is right. Only then can you be held to the impenetrable scrutiny of public criticism and be found true. As this book is confined to republican issues and characters one may be inclined to suspect the author of "axe-grinding". Little of that occurs here. Rather, O'Neill leads the reader to understand the necessity of clear, wide-ranging thinking, unfettered by ideology or preconception. This is a lesson for every manager, voter, or politician. It is so non-republican that his is a lesson that every democrat candidate must consider openly if he expects to survive in the 21st century political world. It would be no difficult exercise to exclude politics from the book and view its discussion rather in the financial world -- exclusively challenging business managers who play so loosely with their corporations and the futures of their employees and stockholders. Under no condition, allow a closed mind to prohibit you from learning the lessons necessary for survival in the real 21st century. Examine your own thinking and the price you would pay for loyalty.
Rating: 
Summary: Opportunism
Review: It is disappointing to read this book. Suskind takes advantage of a remarkably naive and suprisingly over idealistic O'Neill and is rewarded by scandal seeking readers turn book purchasers. Suskind gets is monetary reward, O'Neill subsequently recants much of what is stated in the book. There is no furry like a former Secretary of the Treasury scorned.
| 
