I almost hate to post anything on this subject, but the fact that former Bush 43 speechwriter Matt Latimer’s book is coming out tomorrow (September 22) compelled to post a couple thoughts.
I’m not going to mention the name of the book, because I hope this incredible act of money-grubbing disloyalty fails misreably and the book publisher fails to recoup its investment. Unfortunately, given the desire of the mainstream media to hype the story of any “Bush Insider” (no matter how low-level) who chooses to criticize the very person who gave them the career shot of a lifetime will probably ensure this piece of…work…will make a few bucks.
Should the President of the United States be forced to perform and “act presidential” in front of his/her staff at all times due to the fear that some employee will use some snippet of what is said and distort it for profit in a maligning book sometime down the road? As James Carville said in this CNN interview, the President should be entitled to some privacy when working in the Oval Office. I don’t agree with what James says very often, but he said it just right in this clip.
It should also be noted that Bill McGurn, former head of speechwriting for President Bush and the person who hired Matt Latimer, has written a piece in the Wall Street Journal providing context to Latimer’s time at the White House. It is a necessary setting straight of the record.
When the sun rises over our capital city this morning, its denizens will awake to a truly novel tale: The aggrieved ex-staffer—wait for it!—disillusioned by Washington. The tome out today is by former Bush speechwriter Matt Latimer, who describes the White House as “less like Aaron Sorkin’s The West Wing and more like The Office.” In Mr. Latimer’s hands, it reads more like “The Princess Diaries,” full of hurt feelings and high-schoolish drama.
Like all kiss and tells, “Speechless: Tales of a White House Survivor” is thick with atmospherics intended to suggest the author’s importance: a West Wing office, meetings in the Oval, rides on Air Force One, etc. Like most kiss and tells too, it’s divided between heroes (Mr. Latimer and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld) and idiots (pretty much everyone else). And like so many kiss and tells, the tale of failure, foolishness and vanity it reveals is not necessarily the one the author intends.
Read the whole article here.
I’ve been skeptical of every book penned by former Bush administration officials and their ghost writers regardless of how many times the authors appeared on 60 Minutes or had their courage and virtues extolled on MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Mathews.
I agree with Bill McGurn’s assessment in the WSJ, as well the comments you left after the column. Your blog succeeded in convincing me not to read the book. There is only one thing from the book that bothers me – the “CPAC speech” quote he attributed to the President:
“Let me tell you something, I whupped Gary Bauer’s ass in 2000. So take out all this movement stuff. There is no movement”
I respect the President for keeping our nation safe and leading our nation through some of its toughest days, but I believe he said it. Maybe I’m giving it undue credibility because it was in a Byron York column, maybe I choose to believe it because it would explain so much about what went wrong with Republicans in Washington, but in my gut, I believe it’s true.
What is your sense? Am I wrong?
Hi Steve,
Thanks for stopping by my blog. I appreciate your comment.
As for the comment about the the CPAC speech, I wasn’t there so I couldn’t tell you the context. However, given what I’ve seen from the reported excerpts of the book, I think Latimer has tried to extrapolate great meaning from one off comments he claims to have heard the President make. And, he does so in a way in which he casts himself as the conservative hero — thereby engaging in more book-selling self-aggrandisement.
I’d chalk up most of these encounters about content of the speech to the President wanting to emphasize different things or simply not being happy with the language drafted by Latimer. As Bill said in his WSJ piece, the President didn’t warm to Latimer. That may be a product of many things, but the most likely reason is he wasn’t terribly fond of some of his work.
One note on the GOP and what went wrong. In ’06, Republicans took a beating based on many things. Spending could’ve been kept in check, but would it have been smart for the President to repeatedly veto bills sent to him by a Republican Congress? Probably not. A great portion of the increased spending was for security matters – war and increased homeland security. Non-security discretionary was slowed to below the rate of inflation. And, a large reason for our ’06 losses and tarnished reputation was because of ethical scandals by GOP members (Duke Cunningham, Mark Foley, Bob Ney and about 9 or 10 others). That should not be forgotten.
I worked for President Bush in various capacities from 1999 to 2009. I know he’s a conservative and I know he doesn’t deserve the disrespect he’s received from a sad former staffer like Latimer.
[...] view represents the worst of Washington. Here is a refresher on my views of his approach – The One Whose Name Cannot Be Spoken. Share this [...]