Decision points

[The Terminator]

Did you like Decision points by George bush. I haven't read it and was wondering how it was.

[gollu]

Originally Posted by THE TERMINATOR

Did you like Decision points by George bush. I haven't read it and was wondering how it was.

There's a very important option missing:

"I don't intend to read this EVER"

[rhadin]

Unfortunately, Bush originally promised that Decision Points would explain and disclose, but instead it is a dismissal and an apologia. Of all books written by former presidents, this one is the least worth buying and/or reading.

[HarryT]

Who actually wrote it?

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Who actually wrote it?

Supposedly George W. Bush wrote it himself. There has been no leak of a ghostwriter and he is listed as the author. GW announced that he would write this book to explain the basis for various decisions he made as president and how he analyzed the facts.

[boxcorner]

How many Bushisms does it contain?

[doreenjoy]

Originally Posted by rhadin

Unfortunately, Bush originally promised that Decision Points would explain and disclose, but instead it is a dismissal and an apologia. Of all books written by former presidents, this one is the least worth buying and/or reading.

I agree with this. I've read many books by former presidents and Decision Points is the most trite IMO. It's not a question of whether or not I agree with Bush's politics, it's that the book doesn't deliver the drama. There are no truly "quotable" passages, no moments that made me raise my eyebrows in surprise.

I do believe that he wrote it himself, as the sentence structure is somewhat repetitive, which is something you'd expect from a person who doesn't write nonfiction for a living. Not that there is anything wrong with a famous person writing his own books; I'm just saying it does seem as though a non-professional writer did the job.

[KenJackson]

I detect contempt. That's a shame.

This book is toward the top of my reading list. I just haven't gotten to it yet.

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by KenJackson

I detect contempt. That's a shame.

Yes, I have contempt for the book BECAUSE Bush promised one thing -- an hionest explanation of why he made certain decisions -- and gave another -- a glossing over.

When his book was originally announced along with his explanation of what he planned to do in the book, I signed up for the $350 limited edition version of the book along with the $20 version. The former was to go into my library collection and the latter was to be read. I was excitedly looking forward to the book because I wanted to understand his decision-making process.

But when the book was released and it was clear that there was no insight into his decision-making process, I canceled the limited edition version order.

To me the issue was/is not whether I agree with Bush's decisions. Rather, I wanted to gain an insight into how a president thinks and a president's decision-making process. Such an insight could be invaluable. I am a firm believer that every president -- no matter how good or bad history ultimately judges him or his contemporaries view him -- really does think he is making decisions with the good of the country in mind, and not for self-aggrandizement. A peek into how the tough decisions are made would be priceless.

Alas, Bush failed on all points with this book. Consequently, I do have some contempt for the book.

[doreenjoy]

Originally Posted by KenJackson

I detect contempt. That's a shame.

If you're talking about my post, you're mistaken.

The book falls short as an honest analysis, IMO. He holds back on the big drama.

No contempt here, just disappointment in the book.

[KenJackson]

Originally Posted by doreenjoy

If you're talking about my post, you're mistaken.

Hmm! Guilty conscience?

I guessed all the posts between the first one and mine were expressed with some amount of contempt. But I didn't call any out because intent is often difficult to discern when they are so short.

It's quite possible that HarryT heard someone say that someone else wrote it and was just asking. And even Bush's loyal supporters jokingly refer to Bushisms, though that word is often said with a sneer.

So here we are discussing a book that I'm eager to read that has now spent 148 days in the top 100 on Amazon where it has 4.5 stars in 781 customer reviews. But I don't see any overtly positive comments in this thread yet.

That's a shame.

[doreenjoy]

Originally Posted by KenJackson

Hmm! Guilty conscience?

No, but you posted right after my post so I wondered.

I did say my comments were "IMO" and I based them on the content of the book, not the politics of GW. I read a lot of biographies and I've read many books by past presidents, or about them, and ***IMO*** this one fell short ***as a work of non-fiction.***

So here we are discussing a book that I'm eager to read that has now spent 148 days in the top 100 on Amazon where it has 4.5 stars in 781 customer reviews. But I don't see any overtly positive comments in this thread yet.

That's a shame.

Well, maybe you'll be the first to post something positive.

[boxcorner]

Originally Posted by KenJackson

... a book that I'm eager to read that has now spent 148 days in the top 100 on Amazon ...

Why have you not read it yet?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by KenJackson

It's quite possible that HarryT heard someone say that someone else wrote it and was just asking.

The only reason for my question was that the overwhelming majority of "celebrity" autobiographies are ghost written, and I was interested to know if this was the case here.

[boxcorner]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The only reason for my question was that the overwhelming majority of "celebrity" autobiographies are ghost written, and I was interested to know if this was the case here.

Would speculation about a ghost be considered another conspiracy theory?