Rating: 
Summary: Mark Miller is a Patriot - Read This Book!
Review: This extended political essay should be read by every American. The extent of George Bush's ignorance is largely ignored by the mainstream press and we often only hear about it from Jay Leno or Bill Maher. Mark Crispin Miller reveals Bush to us in all his appalling philistinism. He is a man who seems to be actually proud of his ignorance, as if being stupid is it's own reward...of course he is the President of the United States...
Rating:
Summary: A frightening perspective on Bush the younger - and elder
Review: This is not merely a compendium of George W.'s - or George H.W.'s - malapropisms and incoherent ramblings. What Miller does - and what is both unique and fascinating about this book - is look behind the language and consider what we're actually being told. And while plenty of people focus on the what's being said, few talk about what it means.Miller spends some time exploring George the senior's speaking troubles and what might be the cause of his bizarre use of language. And in doing so - and talking about both George's feelings about Nixon - he reveals much about the junior Bush, his temper, his relationship with his father and how far he'd go to win. What's most important about the book, though, is the disection of Bush's language and comments. He presents transcripts on a variety of topics and then parses and analyzes them. For example, his reaction to Gail Sheehy's suggestion that W. is dyslexic was 'I don't know how she knew that...' - pretty much a confirmation that it's true. Much has been made of Bush's intellectualy capacity, but in this well-written, timely book, Miller posits that what might be more worrying is that he's smarter than he acts and that the way he acts is just that - a facade. Put in the context of recent political events - the impeachment and persecutions of the Clintons, the Florida election - Miller presents a portrait that anyone concerned about that state of the nation should take a look at.
Rating: 
Summary: Miller deserves 5 stars--but this book only 3.
Review: Mark Crispin Miller is a brilliant cultural critic. In books like "Boxed In" and in countless other articles, he deconstructs & interprets popular culture w/ incisive wit & profound perspicacity. By contrast, "The Bush Dyslexicon" seems tendentious & too hastily composed. Geo. W. is plenty able to hang himself by his own petard via his incoherent, inarticulate ramblings. I, too, am frustrated, discouraged, & disgusted that he now wields the post that he (fraudulently?!) holds. But I fear that Miller's tendency for hyperbole and heavy-handedness in this particular book belies his prodigious gifts as a scholar & latter-day "public intellectual." Although I count myself amongst the choir to whom Miller is preaching in this work, I am sorry that he makes his case here so stridently. Were his analysis a little more even-handed, I think it might reach a much broader audience more effectively.
Rating:
Summary: Wonderful Book - Just What We Already Knew
Review: Mr. Miller has described President Bush II and his promoters just as they are. The problem is, very few people who should read this book actually will. The best part of the book is the description of the treatment of Bush on TV - totally mindless just like their subject.
Rating: 
Summary: Important analysis of a national crisis
Review: Mark Crispin Miller does an excellent job of demonstrating how George W. Bush became president. One of the greatest strenghs of this work is the author's careful demonstration of the lack of media outrage over the vote mess in Florida. Mr. Miller debunks for good the notion that the "popular" media is somehow a liberal stronghold. This reality, along with a Supreme Court willing to get their man elected at any cost left America with an unelected president. The author's most most interesting analysis involves the strong connection between George H.W. Bush and Richard Nixon. Another very important area of discussion concerns the close ties the Bush family has always maintained with Nazis. Additionally, Mr. Miller demonstrates that neither Bush is interested in the "grind" of intellectualism. As a result, both father and son show a very scarey lack of knowledge about any complex foreign or domestic issue. Both men are slick politicians, and not much else. One aspect of this book is troubling, however. The author reduces himself to name-calling. This casts a lack of credibility on the material. While the "choir" will certainly forgive him for his outpouring of disguest, he is going to have a difficult time convincing the unsure. Because this book is well analyzed, uses quality resources and outlines a likely explanation for the current situation, the name-calling is especially unfortunate. As a reader with a particular concern with source material, endnotes at the end of each chapter would be extremely helpful. Despite the one concern mentioned above, this book is well worth reading.
Rating:
Summary: A subliminable message to the media...
Review: This was an engaging book on many levels. I think many Americans share the author's frustration at the current woeful state of television media. Pertinent information about Mr. Bush and the election was available, but that's thanks to more traditional print media and the Internet. There seems to be a general decline among Americans to read at all. Many Americans can read, yes, but basically choose not to for the most part, a category that our current President neatly falls under. Mr. Miller appears to reaching at some points in his interpretations of what Bush was trying to say, but for the most part he is dead on, and I do believe it is fair game to analyze statements Mr. Bush has made under the capacity as Governor, President or campaigner. There is a link between the television media, our unelected president, and this decline of literacy. This relates to Mr. Miller's book as he makes a damning case against the motivations and quality of television media. Kudos to Dan Rather for having the honesty to tell the American people recently to read their newspaper in depth for extensive information on the stem cell debate; that television wasn't equipped to explain the issue sufficiently in depth. It is heartening to see that the correlation between the trappings of television "news" and the current appointed administration are being discussed and debated as it is in this book. Further, Mr. Miller draws many interesting and ominous analogies to the Bush Administration and the Nixon Administration. Take note Americans, Karl Rove is our next Bob Haldeman. While our current president lacks Nixon's intelligence, there is ample evidence from the Bush machine that Nixon II is upon us, and Mr. Miller's book does an excellent job of illustrating this point. This book should be taken most seriously, for all the comic grammatical errors committed by Mr. Bush. We need more people brave enough to stand up and speak the awful truth.
Rating:
Summary: If you Care about our future this is a MUST READ.
Review: If you care about the future of the United States and the rest of the world now and in the future you must read this book. Mark Crispin Miller pans Democrats, Republicans, the 4th estate and others. He also gives credit where due. The first father-son presidents, the Adams' were quite a pair. They were snooty, arrogant, and seemingly out of tune with what the people wanted. They were typical Hamiltonian/Federalist/Whig/Republicans. Unfortunately the Bush family are worse. At least there was integrity in the Adams family. While they are also Hamiltonian/Federalist/Whig/Republicans (W's kinder,genteler conservative is a crock) I've read much about the Bush's, Clinton, Gore, Reagan at al some quite biased one way or the other. In this case, while W is the primary subject Crispin Miller covers some very interesting things about Richard Nixon and others too. I believe it is well written and as neutral as one can be writing about a one person subject. If you voted for W you should read this you may change your mind in '04. If you did not vote for W this will confirm your wisdom and maybe encourage you to talk to your friends and relatives to convince them to vote in '04 but not for W. Personally I didn't care much for Gore but 'ol shrub is a real dud. Read this and understand why.
Rating:
Summary: Frightening
Review: While an intelligent person has already realized that our president often has trouble turning a phrase, The Bush Dyslexicon goes beyond laughing at W.'s short-comings. The results are frightening. One of the main arguments concurs with a previous suggestions that Bush has dyslexia. The author, while leaving this as a possibility, goes to further to suggest that Bush is an amnesiac. For this reason, Bush mixes up pre-rehersed answers to questions in his mind, only getting small memorized portions correct. Also, Bush has trouble answering any question straight without falling back on some previous touchy-feely jargon. Does he even remember the question asked. We know W. is not the most intelligent man, but he is a product of the system. The book explains the conspiracy that got Bush into the oval office. Yes, it was Daddy's money and his rich friends. Also, explain how Daddy's money influenced the media. Was it an accident that rather focusing on Gore's knowledge of the issues that the media focused on W.'s image as a good ole boy? Why is it that Americans never heard the story of W.'s bro is Florida altering the voter list illegally? And believe me, W.'s record as the governor of Texas is less than sparkling. Truthfully, this book would take further explanation than the 1,000 words I am allowed. But if you are concerned about the state of democracy in America, this book should be on your read list. And the Democrat presidential candidate should be on your voter list in 2004.
Rating:
Summary: Was Anybody Listening?
Review: What startles me is that we've been exposed to two years worth of Bushisms during the presidential campaign and we never said anything about it. And neither did the media, an industry that was oh-so-ready to take Clinton down. With every passing Bush quote, I found myself shaking my head in disbelief that a man could be so inarticulate, so vague, and so thoughtless and still be selected president. Another fine achievement in "failing upwards." The Bush Dyslexicon is a great book written by Mark Miller, an NYU professor who makes it a point that he is writing only FACTS about Bush. And this is very evident. Chapter after chapter we are exposed to Bush's inarticulate "thoughts", his ramblings, his unclarity, and his outstanding achievement of never answering a question. Campaign trails; debates; newspaper interviews: it's all there. And it's an amazing read, one that impresses the reader with Miller's journalistic writing style and commentary....and begs the question: Why were we not listening and WHY was the media so quiet?
Rating:
Summary: Very Uneven and Occasionally Unfair Criticism
Review: This book should serve as a terrific wake-up call to open-minded citizens who do not yet realize the degree to which the press and politicians accommodate one another to the detriment of the citizenry. Another plus is Professor Miller's advice to those who laugh off the president's gaffes: that a man who is no master of semantics, syntax, grammar, or logic can get degrees from Ivy League institutions and can be elected president is not very funny. In this respect, Miller recalls the century-old chapter in Bryce's AMERICAN COMMONWEALTH -- "Why Great Men Are Not Elected President." At least since 1988, every general-election candidate for the presidency has been deeply flawed. Given a choice of Buchanan, Bush, Gore, Nader, or others in 2000, the mystery is why any punchcard had even a dimple! On the negative side, Miller "over-reads" various of Bush's statements. When we read too closely the remarks of ANYONE who is ad-libbing, we risk unfairness. When we read microscopically the ad libs of a man who -- Miller argues -- is utterly inept at English, we are grossly unfair. If President Bush is as inarticulate as Miller claims, then Miller should not read the president's remarks literally or interpret them Talmudically. Dr. Miller errs (purposely or not) when he takes the President at his exact words to set up a devastating response. To be fair to Mr. Bush, Miller should have conceded what the president probably meant to say. In addition, I was put off by some of the leftish cant in this book. Dr. Miller should be aiming to reveal what the election of an illiterate says about our politics and our polity. The more that he presumes verities that strike the middle and the right as untrue, the more that Miller circumscribes the audience for his analyses.
|
