Fat Man Fed Up : How American Politics Went Bad

Rating:
Summary: If You Like Germond...
Review: A pretty good book that takes a - mostly anyway - fair and balanced look at the degradation of American politics in the last fifty years. He blames journalism (fairly), the people (fairly) and even the pols. When he is simply in the business of reporting the facts, Germond does very well. And to his credit, he acknowledges being both a liberal and an atheist.

The downside - and the reason I can't give this book four or five stars - is that some of his errors are basic demagoguery. The book also suffers from at least two time errors, one being that the David Duke-Edwin Edwards Louisiana governor's race was in 1991 (the book says 1997). But he trashes Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia as a 'deservedly obscure' Congressman who (Germond claims)questioned the patriotism of then Senator Max Cleland in the 2002 Georgia Senate race. Germond paints a fraudulent portrait of Cleland as war hero who lost three limbs on the battlefield (Germond fails to mention that Cleland himself admits he lost them in a party atmosphere, not during an attack) and Chambliss questioned Cleland's service. Chambliss, for those who may not know, simply pointed out that Cleland was putting his own interests - re-election with the union vote - ahead of the national interest in the wake of post-09/11. At no time did Chambliss allege that Cleland was not a war hero or didn't go to Vietnam, but one gets that idea from Germond's fraudulent picture. Germond also failed to point out that Chambliss would have never been elected in the first place without a third-party candidate siphoning votes from his Republican opponent (Cleland only won 49% of the 1996 Senate race vote).

He also clearly has a major dislike of both Bushes. While I applaud him for his candor, it has come through in his books before such as referring to Bush 41 as 'ever whining' in "Mad as Hell." His bias is best demonstrated by the notion that Bill Clinton's 43% performance in 1992 constituted a 'mandate.'

But despite these obvioius flaws, Germond tells some good stories and lays the blame for a lot of what goes on at the feet of many including his own profession. Although I rarely agree with Germond on anything, I certainly do enjoy him and I miss seeing him on The McLaughlin Group.

Whatever your persuasion, you WILL enjoy the book. I just couldn't give it five stars for the previous mentioned reasons.

Rating:
Summary: BEST POLITICAL BOOK OF THE SEASON
Review: By far, the most entertaining and insightful book of the 2004 political season is the newly-released FAT MAN FED UP. It is a "must read" for serious students of American electoral politics and the four-year cycle of its continual decay. Germond, one of the most experienced political reporters in the country, is at his best, both witty and biting, in his assessment of presidential elections, candidates, and, of course, the electorate itself. Do yourself a favor and read it before voting in November.

Rating:
Summary: BEST POLITICAL BOOK OF THE SEASON
Review: By far, the most entertaining and insightful book of the 2004 political season is the newly-released FAT MAN FED UP. It is a "must read" for serious students of American electoral politics and the four-year cycle of its continual decay. Germond, one of the most experienced political reporters in the country, is at his best, both witty and biting, in his assessment of presidential elections, candidates, and, of course, the electorate itself. Do yourself a favor and read it before voting in November.

Rating:
Summary: Geez
Review: Conservative's are the thinest skin people on earth, but the thick headedness also.The analogy in another review's comments about M. Moore "misrepresenting history" Yet, didn't Mr. Moore offer $10,000.00 if anybody could prove facts wrong or twisted!--9/11, Point is if you don't see issues in the vary same light as they do then your all these wonderful things they attribute to people who see's things differently, your, ignorant,dishonest,biased to a fault,muckrackers,etc,etc,etc.
So the 1 star reviews are some of these very people they are---"People who when faced with the choice of changing one's mind or proving there's no need to do so, usually get busy on the "proof". THerefore their reviews are useless.

Rating:
Summary: Fat Man only thinks he is fed up; 3.5 *s
Review: Germond is concerned that the political process, especially in national elections, has become increasingly dysfunctional over the last forty years with the result that marginal candidates (empty suits) are elected. The book is not really a scathing indictment of the process or of individuals. Through the use of personal experiences as a political reporter, the author gently criticizes the trends and results of the political process.

The author identifies nothing that would be a surprise to anyone with even a minimal interest in politics: mindless and informationless campaigns; the ascendancy of television and visuals; nitpicking and "gothcha" journalism; empty and evasive notions of objectivity and fairness; ill-conceived and distorting polling; etc. What is unique about the book is the author's ability to flesh out these developments with personal anecdotes. He bemoans the fact that journalists and politicians, as a rule, no longer can have close relationships. Without the element of trust, it becomes less likely that a reporter can penetrate campaign propaganda. Voters are hardly given a free pass; ultimately it is they who must make the process work.

With the exception of a concern, briefly mentioned, of the importance of money in political campaigns, the author has little to say about the growing dominance of corporate and financial interests in the country as a whole and in the political process. One would have expected, especially since the author is a liberal, some comment on the rise of such issues as free trade, outsourcing, privatization, deregulation, the massive decline of labor, tax cut mania, etc and their minimal and inept questioning by the media and lack of salience in elections. He does decry the rise of the religious right and its role in the installation of a patently unqualified individual in the White House.

The Fat Man is fed up, it seems, mostly because of the loss of collegiality and standards of conduct among political operatives of all kinds. However, there are millions of people in this country way more fed up than the author with the rightward, fundamentalist, pro-business turn in economic and political affairs that threaten to undermine the American way of life that has been carefully fought for and constructed over many decades. The author is not optimistic that a remedy is at hand, as it likewise undoubtedly seems to the many others disgusted with the path that the country is following.


Rating:
Summary: Charting the downward spiral of American politics.
Review: Jack Germond has been a reporter for fifty years, and in that time, he has seen it all. "Fat Man Fed Up" is a scathing indictment of the process that has made the American electoral system a shallow and hypocritical exercise. Germond points his finger at an indifferent electorate, the media, and at politicians themselves, who, in his opinion, all share some of the blame for the decline of American politics.

Germond quotes a publisher named Gray who flatly states that "we get about what we deserve" in terms of our elected officials at all levels of government. Many voters are poorly informed about issues, and they are impatient with politicians who discuss the economy or foreign policy in detail. Such voters look for attractive and likeable candidates, and they often reject more qualified individuals who are less charismatic. Almost half of all Americans do not bother to vote at all. How then can we complain when so many mediocre individuals are elected to represent us?

Germond skewers the print and broadcast media, who pounce on every peccadillo and scandal in a politician's background, but who fail to balance things by giving thoughtful coverage to the important issues of the day. Small wonder that so many voters throw up their hands in despair when they consider their options. After all, they think, aren't all politicians lying crooks? If we believe what we read in the papers and see on television, we might think that there are no honest elected officials working hard day after day to make our country a better place.

In addition, Germond decries the state of campaigning in this country. We live in an age when sound bites and the political attack ad rule the airwaves, and candidates' handlers heavily guard them lest they make a political gaffe that will end their chances. The result is that the voters have little or no opportunity to get to know the candidates, and many voters end up casting their ballots for an image rather than for a person. Germond also reserves plenty of invective for meaningless political conventions, right-wing talk shows, misleading polls, and politicians who misrepresent themselves and spend tremendous amounts of money to buy an electoral victory.

Some readers will be turned off by Germond's brutal honesty and salty language. He makes no effort to sugarcoat his criticism of politicians who have failed to distinguish themselves as candidates or as elected officials. Nor does he hold back in his harsh appraisal of the media and the public. However, whether you agree with him or not, Germond's comments are timely, literate, and informative.

Germond fails to wrap things up with a chapter listing facile solutions that will get American politics back on track quickly. In fact, he doubts that any easy solutions exist. However, the first step to addressing a problem is to admit that it exists. If enough people read Germond's book, it is possible that we will start to think about ways to bring American politics back to life.


Rating:
Summary: Warning--truth ahead
Review: Jack Germond has been a writer on the political beat since roughly the Lincoln administration (just kidding, Jack). And he's reached a point in his life where he's free to speak his mind, even more directly and forcefully than he has throughout his career, which is saying a lot. This book will likely make some people on both ends of the political spectrum uneasy, but I consider it to be a very, VERY welcome addition to the public dialog.

Rating:
Summary: An Insightful, Witty & Pertinent Take On American Politics
Review: Jack Germond has been one of my favorite political reporters for years. Germond is the "fat man" of the title. And he IS fed up with American electoral politics. As a newspaperman he covered national politics since the 1960 presidential election. He spent 20 years covering the political arena for the Gannett Newspapers, the Washington Star and the Baltimore Sun. I used to listen to his commentary regularly on the Today Show, The McLaughlin Group, and Inside Washington and, now that he has retired, I miss his punditry. I picked up a copy of his recent book "Fat Man Fed Up: How American Politics Went Bad," because I too am fed up and believe that today's politics are as bad as I have experienced - and I clearly remember some rotten political abuses in the 1960s and 70s. Germond addresses the decline of substance, civility and integrity in politics today. And he certainly doesn't disappoint readers with this scathing, witty, insightful assessment.

"Fat Man Fed Up" tackles problems that other journalists seem reluctant to address. Indeed he believes that one of the reasons politics has gone bad is because journalists have allowed it to. He laments that most newspapers seem to have lost interest in politics, while talk radio and cable TV news have increased divisiveness and partisanship in the country. Mr. Germond responds to complaints of liberal bias in the media and points out that these complaints "miss the real point." He questions if the bias actually exists, and if so, whether it colors the way editors and reporters work. Germond takes today's press to task for its failure to accurately portray prominent political figures - from Barbara Bush to Al Sharpton. Politicians and the media are criticized for their use and abuse of political polls to mislead uninformed and gullible voters.

Germond also holds forth on the extraordinary influence of TV on the electorate, and campaign coverage driven by sound bites. He reminds the reader that the TV networks control dialogue and all but the most simplistic, shallow political coverage is provided. Given that many Americans are not particularly knowledgeable or politically savvy, candidates and their managers know how to manipulate them. Meanwhile, Germond writes, the media focuses on all the wrong things - meaningless polls and meaningless scandals. I recently heard him cite the coverage given to whether John Kerry threw away his Vietnam War medals or his ribbons during a demonstration that occurred over 30 years ago. "Who cares?" he asks. Politics today, he claims, is built on television, money, and celebrity. Germond also blasts "the big lie" school of campaigning - where empty slogans and noise sell the candidates.

What I most enjoy about this book, however, are not the problems Germond discusses, but the wonderful anecdotes - the juicy tidbits - he supplies to illustrate his points. Most of these are drawn from his own experiences.

This is much more than the usual election year publication. "Fat Man Fed Up" is a memoir of sorts, of and by a reporter who has seen it all and offers you his memories, close up and personal, of past presidential candidates, elections and our political process. Mr. Germond's prose is a wonderful example of the plain style in American journalism. He conveys both facts and opinions in a crisp, concise manner, unadorned with spin or hype. He has a wonderful way with words and his prose is a pleasure to read. Pertinent, highly readable and, at times, outrageous, this book is difficult to put down. Highly recommended!
JANA

Rating:
Summary: Sad indictment of the state of American politics
Review: Jack Germond has over 40 years experience in covering politics, from the city level right through Presidential campaigns. He's seen it all: the boozers, the philanderers, the corrupt, the ignorant, the ideologue, and the idealist. He uses that experience to demonstrate how our political system has gotten to the point where people care more about hairstyles and superficial symbols over real substance and constructive debate. Sometimes, the stories are pretty funny, but generally, this is a depressing and unforgiving look at both print and (especially) television "journalism" and how they are used by the two major parties to keep out any potential competitors, and to keep the complicated issues we face simplified beyond resolution into sound bites. I sincerely doubt that the anonymous reviewer(s) from D.C. actually read the book, as no specific examples of their complaint are offered for examination. Germond has almost always acted as the force of moderation, with a degree of what used to be called "horse sense" sorely lacking in so many of today's columnists and anchors. His stories span the once-wider stretches of our political spectrum and the now-forgotten civility between the parties, and I can't blame him for decrying how spin, never-ending campaigns, and millions upon millions of campaign dollars have either discouraged the average voter or created voting blocks incapable of independant thought. I can't imagine a better way to spend an evening or two reading this and imagining sitting with Jack over a steak and a couple of martinis, wistfully reminiscing over what promise our country held, and wondering desperately how we can get back on track. A great read, highly recommended.

Rating:
Summary: Talk show presence does not translate into book sales
Review: Mr. Germond believes that is now his time to 'cash in' on book sales. Being a pseudo talk show/journalist celebrity does not qualify him as being a successful book writer. Whereas his jaundiced opinions expressed on TV and newspaper are free to the listeners, books must be sold and the readers must be convinced that there is value in the book and must be attracted to Germond's typical diatribe against family values and patriotism. Unfortunately, this lop-sided liberal anti-American stance is only shared by a minority of Americans--those who also found some entertainment in Michael Moore's tasteless, misrepresentation of history. The content of this book is more drivel that Germond expressed for years in newspaper articles and on TV. Mot for me and and not for the majority of readers. When will the author learn to be objective rather than having a goal and writing to support principles that are unsupportable.