Rating: 
Summary: Why bother?
Review: Yet another example of a mainstream political reporter trying to justify the presidency of this pretender to the throne, a fool who didn't even win the election. Corporate progaganda at it's best. Trying to convince our citizens that our leader isn't a dunce. Too bad it doesn't work. Try Micheal Moore's "Stupid White Men" instead! Hits WAY closer to the mark.
Rating:
Summary: A reporter seduced
Review: Bruni's book is noteworthy for its unwitting chronicle of this political reporter's seduction by his subject: George W. Bush. Bruni got considerable "face-time" with Bush the Candidate, and found him to be an amusing "regular guy." Bruni gives Bush considerable credit for this achievement. Was Bruni so cowed by the WASP oligarchy that "they're just people too" was a revelation to him? Did the nerdy and skeptical Bruni doubt his own ability to pass for a "regular guy?"Bill Clinton possessed an impressive ability to befriend and manipulate reporters who covered him. Once these reporters awoke from the spell cast upon them, some were able to write objectively about the Clinton presidency. "Ambling into History" demonstrates that Bruni isn't sufficiently awake yet to assess Bush the Man, let alone Bush the President.
Rating: 
Summary: A fabulous read
Review: Mr. Bruni's prose has the uncanny ability to make a reader feel as though you're sitting comfortably at home having a thoroughly enjoyable conservation with someone who just happens to know a great deal about the way politicians and journalists think and work. This book is filled with telling little gems about President Bush -- the kinds of things you'd just love to share with your colleagues at the water cooler, because they're interesting, funny and they're bound to make you look smart.
Thank you, Mr. Bruni for letting us into the "bubble" of presidential campaigns.
Rating:
Summary: A first-rate portrait
Review: Frank Bruni accomplishes what few journalists have been willing or able to do. He gives readers a true sense of George W. Bush, contradictions and all. During the campaign, most of the media portrayed Bush as a dim, inexperienced fool whose family lineage was his only qualification for the Presidency. But that caricature is debunked by Ambling Into History. Bush is far more complicated than that caricature, and Ambling literally takes the reader on Bush's odyssey from the Texas State House to the White House. From the earliest days on the campaign trial to those intense days after Sept. 11, we have a front-row seat as Bush grows from a reluctant and awkward candidate to a supremely confident, yet still awkward, wartime president. I was especially struck by the chapter about Bush and his father. Bruni brings alive their complicated relationship -- the anger Bush felt at his Dad's loss in 92 to Clinton, as well as the deep pride and protectiveness that the former president felt for his son during the bruising campaign. In particular, Bruni's description of the pride the two men have in each other's accomplishments is as touching as it is poignant. The book is also an illuminating look inside the modern presidential campaign. Better than anything I have read, it shows how and why reporters become tired of writing about issues, choosing instead to devote so much airtime and print to the candidates' personal styles and verbal gaffes. Bruni is a first-rate writer with a keen eye for those small, often humorous details that tell so much about a person or a moment. Like its subject, Ambling Into History cannot be easily shoved into this category or placed in that box. But I am sure you will agree Ambling Into History will explain George W. Bush better than anything you have read. And, here is a bonus: it is almost impossible to put down.
Rating:
Summary: Ambling into history
Review: The author began with a pre-conceived opinion of George W. Bush. The book is supposed to be the results of his clinical, fair, and unbiased judgement of Bush, as he plumbed Bush's character during the campaign. The author managed to find a few good traits and glimpses of the real Mr. Bush, which he reluctantly revealed. The part I found most interesting was Bruni's frank admissions about the manner in which reporters provoked confrontations between the candidates, and used a mob mentality to set up a construct of the campaigns just to have news items. Not a surprise - this type of media reporting has long been obvious to anyone who watches news with any regularity.
Rating:
Summary: FUN, enlightening, info-packed -- and a great view of GWB
Review: Ambling Into History has polarized some readers because of the subject --George W. Bush. Author Frank Bruni has been accused of trivializing and belittling Bush, or of pumping up and promoting him. But as someone who truly has no political ax to grind (pro or con) I must say this: I absolutely LOVED this book. And in the end some of things that people may have felt belittled Bush
were to me quite endearing. I FINALLY had read a political book and learned a lot more about how the subject of the book REALLY was as a REAL person. This political saga shows a politician who privately raises an eyebrow at many of the political process' pomposities, rituals and postures and who behaves as an authentic human being, rather than a character sent from Hollywood's Central Casting to fill a stereotypical role. This book is FUN and enlightening. It's all there: info about the campaign, and early evidence that GWB did not actually "grow in office" due to 911 as much as confront an unprecedented crisis with skills he already had -- and had honed. When I had done shows in Texas (I am an entertainer) I had heard stories about Bush's charisma in private but until this book never saw anything that communicated it in print (or on the networks). Most of Ambling is set on the campaign trail. After Bush's searing loss to John McCain GWB made himself more available to the press. In private he suddenly became a fun candidate to cover -- and he was clearly trying to win them over with humor. A reporter might find Bush playfully sticking his index fingers in the reporters ears to keep him from hearing something. Bush once jokingly put his hands around Bruni's throat. Such antics were a part of Bush's good-guy make-up, evident in college when he named a stickball team "the Nads"...so chants would be "GO NADS!" The behind-the-scenes GWB portrayed here is much more likeable and solid than the early, stiffer candidate publicly seen on the campaign trail. Bruni traces Bush's growth during the campaign masterfully. But the book's greatest success is in showing the absurdities, pomposities, and rituals of the press itself on the campaign trail. No book has ever done this better. Many of Bruni's lines are laugh out loud. For instance, after he describes how the press eats and eats and eats he notes: "The seats on the plane seemed to grow smaller and smaller as the campaign dragged on." Does Ambling trivialize GWB? Not at all. Is it p.r. to pump him up? Nope. It shows a steely determination and quick-learner beneath an affable, refreshingly playful surface. As you read about how he overcame his campaign's and his own obstacles, how deeply he holds his values, how firmly he maintains his core beliefs, and how focused he is on achieving his goals, his no-nonsense actions after Sept. 11 come as no shock at all. Indeed, by the time we reach his final chapter about Bush's post 911 performance, we're not surprised to read about his patience, take-charge attitide and openess to new info. Ambling Into History truly traces GWB's journey with all the challenges, fun -- and tragedies -- along the way.
Rating: 
Summary: The Mirror Has Two Faces
Review: It is one of the tropes of biography that you learn as much or more about the author than about his subject. This is the principal reaction I have to Frank Bruni's "Ambling Into History," his campaign biography of George W. Bush. A digression: let me stipulate at the outset that GWB (1) has a painfully maladroit syntax and is prone to Spoonerisms (a charge leveled against-among others-President Eisenhower); (2) lacks interest in the wonkish details of policy and prefers to delegate execution to trusted aides and staff (a criticism also made repeatedly against President Reagan); and (3) likes to take naps in the afternoon (as did Calvin Coolidge-who, despite enduring the abuse of two generations of progressive historians-remains one of the better presidents of the 20th century-and the last to exercise the office in the manner envisioned by the Framers). Bruni's book has been held up by many-especially on the Right-as a vindication of GWB's essentially substantive character by a journalist from the mainstream media. Perhaps so: however, if this is the best there is, we have lowered our standards considerably. Columnists and reviewers galore on the Right have extolled this book, yet I find it singularly unimpressive, and quite annoying in its treatment of its subject. ... Bruni provides numerous examples of GWB's eclectic and eccentric syntax, including this one: "When I [GWB] was coming up, it was a dangerous world and we knew exactly who the 'they' were. It was us versus them and it was clear who 'them' was. Today, we're not so sure who the 'they' are, but we know they're there." Bruni notes that one of his colleagues "...actually had tears of laughter streaming down his face" at what Bruni characterizes as "...a marvel of free-floating pronouns and absent antecedents." Personally, I had no trouble understanding GWB's statement, notwithstanding its tortured syntax. Perhaps my fifteen years of working in Washington have attuned me to phraseology of this sort, but one might think that the Frank Brunis of this world would also have gotten used to it. Bruni spares no pains to dismiss that with which he disagrees, and in a tone seemingly calculated to offend. At one point he suggests that the Bush family's self-image as public servants of integrity betrays a "dangerous arrogance" and characterizes it as "extremely presumptuous." Coming from a practitioner of modern journalism-a profession marked by both dangerous arrogance and extreme presumptuousness-these comments would be laughable if they were not both deeply offensive, and ignorant of the WASP patrician tradition of noblesse oblige public service traceable from John Adams to John Lindsay and beyond. At another point, Bruni writes off President Vicente Fox of Mexico as "...a foreign leader who had also [like Bush] spent more of his life in the private sector than in public service...who liked to flee the capital for the parched earth of a remote hideaway and who was as fond as Bush was of cowboy boots and casual attire." The notions that Bush genuinely perceived Fox as an important partner in hemispheric politics, or that Fox's significance was precisely that he was the first President of Mexico not to be a product of the corrupt PRI electoral machine seem never to have crossed Bruni's mind. In fact, what Bruni mostly succeeds in showing, is that he is the narrow-minded and parochial liberal journalist so neatly summed up by the famous observation (made by another New York Times journalist) that "I don't understand how Nixon could have won-no one I know voted for him!" He documents both Bushes' (GWB and his father, GHWB) distaste for presidential debates. Yet, rather than engage seriously the issue of whether such "debates" seriously enhance our understanding of candidates' fitness for office, he dismisses their misgivings as "...applying for a job that came with certain prerequisites and wanting to dismiss those prerequisites as immaterial." [emphasis added] (he also calls this "arrogant"). Apparently, since debates have been a part of "the process" since-well-1960 at the very earliest, they are now "prerequisites" for the Presidency, and to even suggest that they do not represent a useful measure of a candidate is "arrogant"! Bruni also has a tin ear for the deep religious conviction (which-typically-he refers to as "spirituality") that imbues GWB's life. Here, at least, he has the humility to concede that reporters in general, and he in particular, tend to dismiss such views as-at best-unenlightened and extreme. He even admits of such an attitude toward people of faith that "...prejudice...is probably the right thing to call it" [emphasis added]! What a grace note on which to conclude, indeed. Notwithstanding some occasional introspections of this sort, Bruni's tone throughout the book shows the sensibility one might expect: unmoved by any sensibilities one might find outside the narrow confines of the Metroliner Corridor, and apparently ignorant of history prior to his own adulthood: in short, a typically narcissistic Baby-Boomer member of the "New Class." Overall Amazon.com rating: two (out of five possible) stars. The second star is awarded only because the book does at times rise above the partisan hatchet jobs that have for the most part adorned bookstore shelves up until this point.
Rating: 
Summary: He may be a nice guy, but can he become a great President?
Review: He refuses to travel anywhere without his cherished feather pillow. He has a habit of addressing individuals around him by affectionate pet names-even those he has only known for a short time. He enjoys drinking non-alcoholic beer, having given up the real thing over fifteen years ago. Once, he almost lost his temper at a reporter for accidentally eating his peanut-butter and jelly sandwich. Observations and anecdotes such as these are the focus of New York Times reporter Frank Bruni's "Ambling into History: The Unlikely Odyssey of George W. Bush". Bruni was among a select group of journalists who had been permitted to accompany Bush on the 2000 presidential campaign trail. Wherever Bush traveled, whatever rallies and events he attended, Bruni and his colleagues were there, notepads and tape recorders at the ready. They rode with him on the campaign bus, flew with him on his chartered plane, and slept in hotel rooms close to his. Being in such close proximity to "Dubbya" over such an extended period of time gave Bruni a rare opportunity to study the man up-close, providing him with insight to the finer details of Bush's character that few outside of his family and campaign staff ever got to see. Thus, rather than offer an examination of Bush's campaign strategy or revisit the election scandal that will forever remain an unpleasant footnote in our nation's history, Bruni instead chose to make his work an exploration of "the personality behind the policies and the often offbeat character that flickered through the frippery and pomp." "Ambling into History" is certainly less interested in the politics than in the politician. Bruni is particularly fascinated by the little quirks exhibited in Bush's behavior throughout the campaign, character traits that in Bruni's view simply beg interpretation. Hence, Bush's frequent bouts of homesickness while on the road equate to a longing for traditional and familiar values. His recovery from alcoholism and fondness for daily exercise makes him a model of personal discipline and self-improvement. His penchant for mid-afternoon naps and insistence on a certain amount of "personal time" each workday indicates an inherent understanding of the need to properly pace oneself to get through the long haul. Not that Bruni's observations are always flattering. Indeed, the overall portrait Bruni paints of Bush resembles something of a cross between a frat boy prankster, an overly sensitive man-child and an uncultured yahoo. That is not to say that Bruni dislikes Bush. In fact, when compared to Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore-who Bruni portrays as "someone so intent on success that he would shift shapes and betray his principles to achieve it"-Bush comes out looking downright wholesome. It is quite apparent that Bruni has developed a certain affection and respect for Bush after spending over a year in his constant presence. He describes Bush as "fetchingly down-to-earth", someone who can often seem childishly playful but also serious and focused when the situation (such as Sept. 11) demands it. He describes a man with commendable family values, a solid display of integrity, and yes, even a strong sense of compassion. And if he isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, well, at least he gets points for trying. Perhaps the most surprising revelation in the book, however, is Bruni's observation that Bush may not have been as zealous in his quest for the presidency as one might imagine. Bruni contrasts Al Gore's near-obsessive drive to win the election with Bush's at times almost "half-hearted" attitude about becoming president. Bruni furtively suggests that Bush's decision to run was not so much driven by political ambition but rather by a desire to gain approval from his parents (who, it is hinted at, had always thought of brother Jeb as the brainier, more motivated one out of the two) and restore a sense of pride to the family name-specifically referring to the elder Bush's defeat to Bill Clinton in the 1992 presidential election. But the most important question of all is whether Bush has the makings of a great president, for as we currently enter into a protracted war against a new kind of adversary and our homeland security is under constant threat, we cannot accept anything less than greatness from our Executive-in-Chief. Bruni's answer is indecisive at best. He demonstrates that at times Bush can be a lot smarter than he appears but, more often than not, when the media suggests that he is doing a good job, it is merely a euphemistic way of saying he hasn't screwed up, that he has exceeded the expectations of his detractors. He may be competent, but is George W. Bush capable of leading our country in these uncertain times? Bruni is content to let history decide that. Meanwhile, the fate of our nation sits in the hands of a man who is decidedly decent and respectable but, ultimately, is still untested in his potential for true leadership.
Rating:
Summary: Memorable; touching
Review: My husband is supposed to be reading Ambling ... for an on-line book group, but I borrowed it 2 days ago, and wouldn't give it back to him until I finished. This book does a remarkable job of portraying a man who struggled with family expectations, addictions, and ambivalence about his race to the presidency. I think that what makes Bruni's criticisms of Bush seem fair even to this Republican is that Bruni frequently touches on his uncertainties regarding the man. Bruni shows a healthy scepticism toward journalists and his own prejudices, telling Bush's story with a remarkable even-handedness. He's sympathetic to Bush's good qualities, yet fair when dealing with the man's faults. This is a book I am strongly recommending to both my Republican and Democrat friends.
Rating:
Summary: Bravo!
Review: What a fantastic read. Bruni is a masterful writer and, fortunately for us, injects his personal charm into this portrait of George W. Bush without taking sides. Bruni portrays Bush as a novelist would, describing his hilariously human moments -- not to humiliate Bush, but to present him as a three-dimensional figure. It's a terrific book, probably the best so far about this president.
| 
