Rating: 
Summary: Must read insight into the workings of this Administration
Review: The most enigmatic part of this book is the title. While Mr. O'Neill is treated sympathetically by the author throughout, few would claim loyalty to be his strongest suit. Indeed, it is made amply clear that from the beginning that Paul O'Neill was determined to serve as Secretary of Treasury on his terms and on no other. Indeed, Mr O'Neill seems to have had some difficulty coming to terms with the fact that Secretary of the Treasury is not an elective post. Viewed in this light his subsequent antics including a habit of engaging in idiosyncratic policy dialog far removed from the bounds of his office and only peripherally related to his areas of expertise can be taken to paint a picture of every CEO's nightmare,that is the know-it-all has-been who views age and experience as a sort of corporate get-out-of-jail free card. Reading this book, O'Neill comes across again and again as fundamentally at odds with, even in opposition to, the goals of the Administration he has pledged to support. While Suskind does an excellent job of presenting O'Neill's position on many of the issues he dealt with during his two years in office, little space is given to describing the dichotomy of a man pledged to serve another but finding himself from day one in opposition to many if not most of the core values of the President. Indeed, this books weakest point is its characterization. By the end of the book, we know exactly where O'Neill stands on various issues but we do not really feel that we know the man or his motivation.If the character of Paul O'Neill only comes through in outline, the characters of the other main protaganists in this book are downright ethereal. The President comes across not so much as intellectually limited as uninterested and disengaged whereas, by his own admission, O'Neill was almost entirely in the dark when it came to policy making and the motivation of men he had known for decades. As an essay in character and motivation, this book never even starts to get off of the ground. On the other hand, if the book fails as an essay in character, it succeeds hands down as a factual diary of the workings of the Bush Administration. The picture we are presented with is of an administration which has junked the legacy of 50 years of diplomacy and international engagement in favor of a America-centric diplomacy geared solely to American domestic interests coupled with a wholesale junking of accepted pragmatic economic housekeeping in favor of a new conservative orthodoxy. This administration does not function as an implementer of carefully considered and crafted policy but as a politburo with a mission to fulfil America's conservative destiny. Whether or not you are appalled by or attracted to this situation will presumably be determined by the degree to which you subscribe to the underlying orthodoxies. However, thoughtful persons of all persuasions will presumeably be horified at the lack of substantive thought and planning that has gone into many of the most aggressive actions of the Bush administration including the invasion of Iraq. This adventure was not, O'Neill points out the result of clear-sighted analysis of American interests but a knee-jerk, doctinaire response based on little more that gut feeling. One suspects that the next several years will be spent digging America out of holes of this President's making. For documenting the problem, O'Neill and Suskind deserve the thanks of all.
Rating:
Summary: A Must Read By All Americans
Review: I had the wonderful pleasure of attending a lecture and book signing at the Politics and Prose Bookstore in Washington, DC. C-Span broadcasted the lecture featuring Ron Suskind. I was impressed and moved by his speech and reading this book has given me an insight as to how Mr. Bush runs our government. This book is a must read. Mr. O'Neill's credibility is beyond reproach. He has served past presidents from both sides of the aisle, has a strong working relationship with Alan Greenspan, and has a good mind as to how this country should approach fiscal responsiblity. Unfortunately he worked within an administration that seems to be more concerned with their control of power than what is best for the average American. Some may see this different and that is okay too. But this book gives us an idea of how Bush makes decisions and who really is in charge of our government. A government driven on ideaology instead of by facts. I hope you all enjoy this book as much as I did.
Rating:
Summary: Ideas were tossed out without the weight of consequences
Review: The author explains his exceptional opportunity to peruse O'Neill's papers. He required the assistance of his very able researcher, alan Wirzbicki. Paul O'Neill is amazingly loyal. O'Neill's portfolio was wider than he could have possibly imagined. The book has a 'hear it now' quality. Paul O'Neill, formerly CEO of Alcoa, was, as Secretary of the Treasury, no longer the top man. Secretary of the Treasury was a hard spot for a maverick to inhabit. What evolved was that the pragmatism of O'Neill, Whitman, and other centrists in the executive and legislative branches was crushed. Meetings cabinet secretaries had with the President were often scripted. O'Neill was troubled by how disengaged the President seemed. O'Neill felt that in committee work good process had to be embraced to insure a good outcome. In the 1970's Powell had worked for O'Neill as a White House fellow. Bush's cabinet members addressed each other formally. In the Nixon administration O'Neill and others had been forced to produce Brandeis briefs. O'Neill pressed everywhere he could for an authentic discussion. This is a sort of Mr. Smith goes to Washington story. The irony of the situation is that this Mr. Smith thought he knew the context in which he would be compelled to work since he was a sort of insider based upon his previous government experience. The book shows that Alan Greenspan saw that in the area of CEO behavior managements were too often inadequate. Greenspan and O'Neill felt that CEOs had to be motivated by fear of the abyss. Perhaps the CEO had to be kept honest by imposing a reasonable investor, a negligence standard. This was a higher standard than GAAP, Generally Accepted Accounting Practices. It was all coming due--Enron, Global Crossing, Tyco. There was a crisis of transparency, of auditor ethics, of disclosure. Having CEOs certify financial statements was put on the table. O'Neill's nickname by POTUS changed from Pablo to the Big O. After the midterm election O'Neill ran into the ideology of the administration, a sort of absolutism. The President had praetorian guards, so to speak. In the administration ideas were tossed out without the weight of consequence. O'Neill was told the President wanted a new team. To help with the transition, O'Neill stayed until December 31, 2002.
Rating:
Summary: Well written
Review: If the information contained within this book is true and has not been tainted by any political axes that the author may have, then George W. Bush has lost control of his cabinet by not listening to more than one side in any controversial issue. That is something he promised not to do in his campaign for the Presidency. I do not doubt the words of Paul O'Neill, who has served honorably in enough administrations that it can not be doubted where he stands. I do question where Ron Suskind's loyalties lie.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Information, But Decide For Yourself
Review: Having read this book, I can understand why the Bush administration is working so hard to convince people that Mr. Clarke has a personal agenda, not the best interests of the country at heart. I believe their hope is that you won't read this book. Their hope is that you'll take what the media and the pundits say at face value and discard Mr. Clarke's perspective out of hand. Mr. Clarke does seem a bit soft on the Clinton administration. Yes, from what Mr. Clarke says, they did see terrorism as a high priority. However, most of their actions seem to have had little effect. So if you judge the Clinton administration on effectiveness rather than intent, I can't hold them in the same high regard Mr. Clarke seems to. I also feel there's too little self-examination in this book. I didn't hear enough about how Mr. Clarke feels he failed. And yet, he admits that he did. I'd like to know more about what he could have done better. However, there's not a lot of that in this book. If you follow the news and read other books, you'll see much of what Mr. Clarke says about the Bush administration corroborated. In Bob Woodward's book on the Bush administration, even the President says that he didn't see terrorism as a high priority issue. There are also parallels between what Mr. Clarke says and what's in the book on Paul O'Neill. So I believe that Mr. Clarke has a great deal of credibility. Don't let others convince you not to read this book. This issue is too important. Deciding that Mr. Clarke is full of hot air might be the right conclusion. I don't think so, but I'm just one person. However, read this book and make that decision based on facts you have, not on what others, who often haven't read the book themselves, tell you.
Rating:
Summary: It lets you be a fly on the wall
Review: I thought this was a great book, very easy to read and it lets one get the feeling of the workings of this White House. I can kind of understand the feeling that Bush might have felt that ONeill was disloyal because ONeill did take charge and try to make his own way despite knowing that Bush (Cheney?) wasn't in agreement. That said, I agree with his opinion that the deficit and the debt are the biggest drags on the economy and a grave danger to the future of this country. I already knew that the Iraq thing was a big smokescreen and have been angry about that for a long time. But very well written.
Rating: 
Summary: The book O'Neill disavowed
Review: Not long after this volume was published, Paul O'Neill stated in an interview that (1) it wasn't the book he thought he had written with ghost writer Suskind, (2) that he still supported Bush and (3) he intended to vote for him again. And yet that remarkable revelation has been little reported on in the media, or discussed here. The reasons are not hard to discern. Books like this serve as a sort of touchstone for those who have preconceptions they'd like to see justified, and because painting your political opponant as evil is much simpler than actually dealing with specific issues. Ah, they must have done these terrible things- after all, they're evil men. Well, how do you know they're evil men? It's obvious- they did evil things, QED. You needn't be a Bush supporter to accept that this is not terribly good, or terribly accurate history. Suskind has built, from a sample of personal stories, a much larger narrative that O'Neill himself says does not portray the administration he remembers working in. Read it with a very large grain of salt.
Rating:
Summary: Important History Wrapped in a Compelling Story
Review: Suskind's great accomplishment in this book is the creation of a great story. I love political books, but I understand that for many people they can be dense and boring. That is not an issue here. The narrative develops like it would in any great novel, with the underdog hero trying to fight for the "right thing" while the powers that be attempt to hold him back. Now, the fact that this isn't just "Erin Brockavich 2" is important. This is, after all, the story of the President of the United States during one of the most important times in our nation's history. The final verdict on George W. Bush is that his administration (largely run by an all-star team of conservatives from former administrations) is run by politics, not principal. O'Neill himself makes the important distinction between philosophy and idealogy. All the President's men made their decisions about which direction the country should be pushed towards, and they won't let debate, changing circumstances or facts avert their ideas from that goal. Aldous Huxley wrote, "Facts don't cease to exist because they are ignored." Suskind and O'Neill try to point out what facts have been ignored over the past three years. They fight on the side of loyalty: not to a man or a party, but to the promise of our nation.
Rating: 
Summary: Shame on you buying this book
Review: = Do not buy this book!!!!!!!!!!
Reviewer: A reader from Brea, CA United States
Shame on all of you for even buying or condsidering this book.
How dare you take what this man said as the truth. Turning your back on our President is allowing the terrorists to win. SUPPORT THE MAN THAT BROUGHT THIS COUNTRY TOGETHER FOR THE FIRST TIME IN MANY MANY YEARS AFTER SEPTEMBER 11TH
It is so sad how soon we forget
UNITED WE STAND!!!!!!!!!!!!
O'Neill is nothing but an angry backstabber!!!
Rating:
Summary: Normal Republicans start here...
Review: First a few caveats, I was a liberal teenager turned mid life moderate. I've only voted Republican once, for Rudy Giuliani, the first time around. I stand by that choice, he was the right mayor for New York at that time. I mention that because those that "always" vote republican need that attitude this November. If you are curious about all the accusations flying around the guy you voted for in 2000 and want to become a better informed voter, The Price of Loyalty is the place to start. This is so because Paul O'Neill is an old school conservative republican / Alcoa CEO who's integrity is, for all intents and purposes, unquestioned. Similarly, Ron Suskind, is a well respected, Pulitzer Prize winning author from The Wall Street Journal. This is not liberal mud slinging. This is the voice of a concerned citizen who has seen things at the very top that all Americans should be aware of. For those who get most of their information from television and even newspapers, the accounts here might seem unbelievable. But that is the very point, there is more going on in politics (and always has been) than can be reduced to simple black and white platforms that are subsequently further reduced to sound bites or tidy USA Today type news clippings. Though many of the major issues of the last few years are discussed, such as the administrations obsession with Iraq and tax cuts at any cost, (and ever so subtly, eviscerated) what concerns O'Neill is something deeper. What concerns him is the utter politicization of the policy making process. He is stupefied not by the ideology alone, but by the absence of the very things that White House administrations have used throughout history to arrive at sound decisions. The most basic of which is the time honored practice of bringing contrary opinions from the best minds available together in order to arrive at an informed - and correct - decision. A particularly pointed example is provided when illustrating the administrations willful disregard of scientific analysis with regards to the environment and the subsequent scuttling of the Kyoto protocol. This complete reversal from Bush's stated campaign posture came within 100 days of taking office and certainly did much to establish a new "tone" in Washington, though not the one he had promised. The book is well measured in its criticisms and befitting a man of O'Neill's stature, but it is never dull either, thanks to Suskind. Perhaps he pats himself on the back a little too much when detailing his thoughts on the environment and water programs for Africa, but you do get the impression that Paul O'Neill means every last thing he says. Indeed, months after the release of this important book, his honesty and credibility remains intact. They never laid a glove on him.
| 
