This was a 10-CD unabridged audio edition of the book, read by the author. I was very pleased with the formatting of the CDs in that each CD was identified at the beginning and end as to which one it was, and that the tracking was at three-minute intervals. Both of these features added greatly to the ‘readability’ (so to speak) of the book.

As it is an audio book, I can’t easily go back and reference passages. There is no index, and I couldn’t take notes as I was driving down the highway. I found that the author’s reading of his own text somewhat stiff and vey formal. I would have expected a certain amount of emotional vocal inflection in there, but it may as well have been a machine reading it. He tended to favor the long form of vowels where one would usually hear the softer pronunciations in conversational speech. I thought this to be rather odd, considering his job had involved a lot of public speaking. I also caught the verbal form of a typographical error, a speako, I suppose, on the last CD.

Regarding content, Mr. McClellan was quite thorough in including all pertinent facts, and quoted (as best as I can reckon) directly from well-documented sources. The first several chapters chronicle his own involvement in politics, and meeting then-Governor Bush. He seemed to be a staunch cheerleader of President Bush (43) throughout the book, even when he presented the facts of how he (McClellan) initially became the scapegoat for the Valerie Plame incident. Instead, he blames the policy of the ‘Permanent Campaign’ rather than the individuals involved. I got the feeling the book was written primarily to clear his own reputation, and I believe him when he said that he did not knowingly state a falsehood. It seemed that by the end of the book, Mr. McClellan felt somewhat differently about his boss than when they first met back in Texas. But it’s hard to tell because of the monotony of the speech pattern.

If I can find a copy of the book, I’m going to have a good look at its index and table of contents. If it provides a decent level of citation and reference, I’ll buy it. I have a strong feeling that there will be much more about all of this. ( )

This is the book any ex-employee would love to write to exonerate himself from the sins of the organization. When that person's job is to explain and cover the mistakes of one of the nation's worst presidencies, the book gets everyone's attention. McClellan explains his own background and what led him to work for the president. It's good to get perspective, but the explanation of the 2000 election until he became press secretary could have been shortened as it isn't revealing and that ground was well-covered by other books. What makes the book compelling was that he would be the press secretary that would have to explain the deceptions that led to the Iraq war(this deeply bothered him as he states, "you only go to war unless you have to and we didn't have to") , Hurricane Katrina, and the disclosure of CIA operative to the American public(in which the people involved lied about their involvement to Scott, but made Scott out as the liar to the American public).To get the inside scoop of what happened behind closed doors is appealing to anyone who is into politics. There is really nothing new here. Everyone knows about the deceit leading up to the Iraq War, the outing of a CIA agent in an attempt to discredit the person who is trying to discredit the war. He theorizes all this happened because of the concept of the perpetual campaign. Instead of getting cooperation, initiatives are simply marketed to trick the American public into a sense of urgency. Some things I didn't know was that the president leaked Valerie Plame's name to discredit joe wilson. The fact that the social security reform (stating the system was broken) was a hoax. I remember being frustrated when all these disasters were going on and watching Scott McClellan skirting the issues. It was hard to read this book because of it. However, the true value in this book is that it is a precursor of an analysis on this presidency. It will provide great fodder for presidential historians and leadership gurus. Some quotes:On whether bush took cocaine when he was younger :"'The media won't let go of these ridiculous cocaine rumors,' I heard Bush say, 'You know the truth is I honestly don't remember whether I tried it or not. We had some pretty wild parties back in the day, and I just don't remember." The overheard comment struck me and has stayed with me to this day not for what it revealed or concealed about the young George W. Bush, but for what it said about Bush as an older man and political leader, especially as revealed through my later experiences working for him. I remember thinking to myself, How can that be? How can someone simply not remember whether or not they used an illegal substance like cocaine? It didn't make a lot of sense. P.49Rove instituted regular strategery meetings using a term derived not, as some might have believed from a real Bush remark but from a Saturday Night Live Skit..."So, generally speaking, I not only understood and respected the Bush administration's emphasis of staying on message, but supported it and worked to help shape it and spread it as part of my job. p124 (explains perceptions of Scott as a robot. From reading the book he had more to do with this technique than the president.)The president's dream of a democratic Middle East was shared by several key administration officials...Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfield...were mainly interested in eliminating a global threat to regional and global peace...and a little less enthralled by Bush's vision of a world transformed by freedom...Bush saw his opportunity to create a legacy of greatness...But there was a problem here...a disconnect between the president's most heartfelt objective in going to war and the publicly stated rationale for that war 130-131But his advisers needed to recognize how potentially harmful his instinctual leadership and limited intellectual curiosity can be when it comes to crucial decisions, and in light of today's situation, it has become reasonable to question his judgement.p146A war of choice or a war of necessity...Surely the distinction between a necessary, unavoidable war and a war that the United States could have avoided but chose to wage an obvious one that Bush must have thought about in the months before the invasion...It strikes me today as an indication of his lack of inquisitiveness and his detrimental resistance to reflection something his advisers needed to compensate Better than they did. p203The Dickerson question..."After 9/11, what would your biggest mistake be, would you say, and what lessons have you learned from it?His response was followed by an agonizing long pause.Have you ever experienced seconds that felt like minutes? A hundred thoughts flowed through my brain while that terrible silence hung embarrassingly in the air...The assembled reporters stirred uneasily in their seats as the silence continued. When someone is struggling in public, everyone around feels uncomfortable. No American wants to see our president look awkward or embarrassed on a national platform. Yet that is what we were witnessing now. As President Bush continued to agonize over a response, I blamed myself...Watching Bush struggle with a simple question, I sensed, as many others in the room did, that he was hung up on what he thought to extract from him, an acknowledgment, one year after the fact, that his decision to go into Iraq was a mistake. That's why, unwilling to make any such admission, his response had morphed into yet another justification of the invasion, even though this was exactly the opposite of what Dickerson had asked. p206The president had promised himself that he would accomplish what his father had failed to do by winning a second term in office. And that meant operating continually in campaign mode: never explaining, never apologizing, never retreating. Unfortunately, that strategy also had less justifiable repercussions: never reflecting, never reconsidering, never comprising. Especially not where Iraq was concerned. p210 ( )

Scott tells us how the White House screwed over him for years. Even though he has good words, mainly, to say about the Bush crew, he obviously has written this book to let us know that he was mislead and made to become a "throw-away" scapegoat. I'm glad that he has included an index so that I can use this as one of my reference sources. (nice photos of big shots) ( )

First ,I am a Liberal, just so you know before you read this review. I must agree with others that the writing style was poor to fair at best. The little personal jokes and quips throughout the book felt forced and fake. I was also expecting more from this book. The reaction that people had, or maybe I should say conservatives had, when this book came out I assumed this book was really going to be a guide to what happened.
Several things in this book did bother me. The first was the way Scott talked about Texas politics. I have read several books and articles by Molly Ivins, Jim Hightower and Lou Dubose. They give what I feel is a pretty honest picture of the way politicans act in Texas. The author was either dishonest or looking through rose colored glasses in his assessment of the political climate. The way he states that George Bush was this great governor who simply had to run for president because of the fantastic job he was doing is really pushing the barrier of fact and fiction. This fantasy continues on into Bush's presidency, where McCellan suggests that Bush suddenly began falling victim to the trap of constantly campaigning and that is where things went wrong. The complete failures of the last 8 years are never really detailed in this book. Iraq, Bin Laden, Katrina, the economy and so on are given some attention, but nothing revealing. Most of the time Bush is portrayed as doing a good job but missing a few minor points.
i was also disappointed when Scott discussed the ValeriePlame affair. Why is McClellan shocked, or anyone else for that matter, when it becomes known that Karl Rove lied? His opinion of Karl Rove to me was overly favorable. How someone is viewed as a genius when he is nothing but an underhander, lying weasel is beyond me.
And let's not overlook what the author himself had to do with Bush's administration. Here is a man who stood in front of the american people and lied or misled them. His assertion that he was simply passing along information given to him is a joke. He has an ideology that fit with the administrations and he was wiling to defend when I have no doubt he knew it was wrong. I don't care if his views and opinions are different than mine, but at least be honest about it. Not a great read, maybe get it at library. ( )

It's a shame this book is instantly shoed off by Bush/Republican supporters for being 'anti-Bush' or a 'revenge' tactic by a disgruntled ex-employee. McClellan writes in a surprisingly positive tone regarding the president, and focuses critique more on the continued poor advice from his senior advisors, the deceptive 'Permanent Campaign,' and partisan bullying that plagues Washington. While Bush deservingly gets much of the blame for the consistent mistakes made during his presidency in the book, McClellan provides candid explanations on the major events that will shape his presidency, such as 9/11, The Iraqi War, The Outing of CIA Operative Valerie Plame and Hurricane Katrina.

The opportunity to step inside a presidency during such historic and important times is unparalleled to any of the past - and its far too important to be casually brushed off by Republicans who consistently shield their eyes from the obvious missteps of their this presidency. Put pride in the corner, and learn from your mistakes... because if you fail to recognize them, and you will surely fall, bringing a nation down with you.

It will take a lot of work to fix this broken machine... the first step, is self-awareness; everything after that, is just details. Read this book, and you'll be well on your way. ( )