After reading Emery's book, I must say he has an amazing grasp of the complex. It is rare that one author can provide such a gripping account of an event that is itself full of contradictory accounts. As the participants run for cover and attempt to discount each others testimony, Emery maintains one voice and keeps the reader on track.
This should be read by anyone who's knowledge of Watergate is limited to a viewing of "All the President's Men". Emery has done us a great service by producing such a readable account of THE American scandal.

I lived Watergate. I was a teen in McLean, Virginia when Nixon resigned. One of my classmates was a son of Robert Bork. Yet, after many years, I had to admit I didn't know much of what the fuss was about. This fine, objective book changed all that. Emery has consolidated the facts, identified the sources, and presented the alternate views that, within his sense of reason, deserve consideration. This is journalism as it should always be and, sadly, was not in the early '70s.

As you choose books about Watergate, consider this: When I started to read this one, in the Fall of 2000, I got only a few pages into it when I realized I was doing something important. I got out of my chair, locked my study door, turned off the phone, and sat back down to read. Only Shirer's book about the Third Reich has also induced such a feeling of moment.

Those three traits seem to be the overriding factor in the downfall of our 37th president. The sheer size of corruption exhibited at THE highest level of our executive branch of government is striking and terrifying. At times, I had difficultly believing that so many intelligent people participated in what seems like endless felonies. This book is thoroughly researched, from Nixon's tapes to Halderman's diary, and is HIGHLY recommended by this very satisfied reader. Well worth the price!!

Oliver Stone is known for making intense, controversial movies, based on historical events. I don't know how much of this story of Nixon is true, but what is written is a very dramatic and interesting story of the goings-on in the White House. If you enjoy the film Nixon, check out this book. You will not be disappointed.

I only like this book because it is clear about the kind of thing which everybody thinks is typical, but most people would think that only fools can object to this much truth and get away with it. To be specific, on pages 371-391 is a Transcript of Conversation in which Nixon and Haldeman talked on May 5, 1971, more than a year before the Watergate break-in, but from a "Watergate Special Prosecution Force File Segment." It might be a conversation about Colson and "a guy that nobody, none of us knows except Dwight." (p. 379). "Thug type guy." (p. 379). "This is the kinda guy can get out and tear things up." (p. 379). "Just ask them to dig up those, their eight thugs." (p. 380). "They, they've got guys who'll go in and knock their heads off." (p. 380). "Murderers. Guys that really, you know, that's what they really do." (p. 380). "And, uh, hope they really hurt 'em. You know, I mean go in with some real--and smash some noses." (p. 380). "They'll just get, the country'll just get a belly full of these people." (p. 381). "There's no, there's no, uh, semblance of respectability." (p. 381). "How the hell do you expect the poor God damned policemen--" (p. 382)? Parts of the transcript were sanitized, RESTRICTED-"D", and the way administration records are likely to be withhelf from public view forever after now, people might as well figure that whatever the government is up to must be in the RESTRICTED-"D" category.

"Nixon" was, I think, the best film of 1995 (it was certainly more important and fascinating than "Braveheart")and here is a great book that gives you a good glimpse not only into it's production, but into the documents, the testomonies and brilliant artistry that make the film what it is. It starts off with an interesting interview with the great cinema genius Oliver Stone in which discusses the film's genesis (how interesting that he passed on a film about Noriega for this movie). And then come the fascinating, interesting and great essays by important Nixon-era, Watergate figures like John Dean, E.Howard Hunt and one Cuban CIA operative. The co-writers of the screenplay also contribute great essays that explore Nixon and a history of political assassinations and black ops within the American government and its overseas operations. The screenplay itself is brilliant, mingling intrigue with drama and political issues, not to mention thrilling history. Stone, as in "JFK," makes a fascinating study of politics and power with this movie. He also makes a point about how our government conducts operations which involve assassination, secret underdealings etc. just as much as any South American or Central American country. "Nixon: An Oliver Stone Film" is a must for film buffs, political film analysts and fans of Oliver Stone (me).

Among the growing number of books in this genre of leadership books, this is a good one. It offers some practical advice on negotiation and diplomacy from the Nixon standpoint. One of the many bright spots of this book is that the author really has a lot of great things to say about Nixon and other world leaders (the author obviously is a master historian). One drawback of his intimate dealings with Nixon, though, is that Humes sometimes comes off as defending Nixon. Otherwise, though, this book could be really useful for anyone wanting to know a little bit about diplomacy (I knew nothing before I read this book). Humes presents lots of useful tactics for aspiring leaders. I recommend this book and also Warren Bennis's Leaders: Strategies For Taking Charge.

This book works on two levels. The first as a great description of Nixon's 10 commandments and why they work. The second is the application or misapplication of these principles by world leaders throughout history and the consequences.

All ten offer much wisdom, but my favorite is: NEVER GIVE UP UNILATERALLY WHAT COULD BE USED AS A BARGAINING CHIP. MAKE YOUR ADVERSARIES GIVE UP SOMETHING FOR EVERYTHING THEY GET. Here Humes explains that giving up something that is meaningless to you, as a token of good will, may come back to weaken your overall bargaining position. He explains how LBJ conceded so many small points to Brezhnev early on, that when the bargaining began, LBJ could only offer up those things that he held dear in order to gain those things that Breznev would have given away cheaply.

Bargaining from a position of strength seems to run through all 10 commandments and no doubt some people will find these tactics heavy-handed, but Humes describes examples such as Jimmy Carter and Neville Chamberlain, who discounted strength in the name of idealism, and ultimately became case-studies in the failure of leadership.

I found the book fascinating on a political scale, but the principles certainly apply to the workplace. Knowing what you have and what they want will better help you get what you want.

This book provides outstanding insight into the principles of negotiation which can be applied to any discipline.

Additionally, the examples provided are both relevant to each "commandment" and interesting from a historical perspective for important events.

I found this a compelling account of Richard Nixon's life from his early days to his defeat in the election for the Governorship of California in 1962. Ambrose charts Nixon's meteoric rise through Congress and the Senate to the Vice Presidency and narrow defeat at the hands of JFK in the Presidential election.

This is a very readable account and the author attempts to be fair to Nixon throughout, despite the fact that Nixon seemed to stimulate extreme reactions in people: either you loved him or hated him. I thought that the best parts of the book were those that dealt with Nixon's years as Eisenhower's Vice President - the difficulties of holding the office for such an ambitious politician, the problems in defining a role for himself and his often difficult relationship with the President are all examined skillfully.

I should have perhaps wanted a fuller account of Nixon's early political development - what was his political credo, and upon what was it based? What was the basis of his success as a Congressman, for example? I felt that after reading this volume, Nixon seemd driven primarily by his own massive ambition. But you could say that of a lot of politicians - for example Robert A Caro's analysis of Lyndon Johnson is based on the importance of ambition over principle.

But I felt that although ambition was obviously very important, there might have been more to Nixon than that, more even than his (self-perceived) role as a major anti-Communist crusader. If the author felt that those indeed were the main things that made Nixon tick, then fine, but I hoped that some such analysis would have been included.

In all, I thought this was a good read - interesting, honest, and shedding light upon one of the most controversial politicians of the last century.

It is always interesting to understand what really
motivates people. Normally it takes a good deal of
psychoanalyzing, historical background, family history etc.
But some people seem to elude even this.
Nixon is obviously one of those people, who is really
difficult to figure out. But when all is said and done he
is also a very interesting character. And after reading
Stephen Ambroses book I think we are a little closer to
the real Nixon: Saint, villain, crook, statesman etc.

His brothers Arthur and Harold died when Nixon was young.
Which made he determined to have success for three sons.
In his book "six crisis" he describes leadership as it was
part of the quaker religious experience: "In a crisis tension
builds. Breathing gets quicker and the stomach turns,
but it is through these hardships of the soul that
true leaders are found." Quake and hear the voice of God?

But besides all of this psychoanalyzing there is of course
the fascinating story of Richard M. Nixons rise and fall.
Starting with his campaign against Jerry Voorhis.
Followed by his "pink" smear campaign against Helen Douglas.
His Checkers TV-speech. The lost campaign against JFK.
His lost campaign against Pat Brown for governor
of California in 1962, which he ended by saying
"that reporters wouldn't have Nixon to kick around anymore".
His "biggest return since Lazarus" to become president
in 1968.
And then finally - Watergate.

Perhaps it was all there in his psyche when he entered
politics in the first campaign against Voorhis, just waiting
for the world to see.

A brilliant book.

-Simon

Like other controversial American politicians such as Bill Clinton and Franklin D. Roosevelt, there was little middle ground concerning how the public felt about Richard M. Nixon. To some Americans, Nixon was the most sleazy and two-faced man in American politics, and they despised him. As Adlai Stevenson, the two-time Democratic presidential candidate said in the fifties, Nixon was the kind of man who "would cut down a redwood tree, then climb on the stump and make a speech for tree conservation". But to other Americans, Nixon was a gutsy fighter from a poor family who had, through sheer hard work and intelligence, climbed up the ladder of success, only to be reviled by the wealthy "limousine liberals" whose success had come because of their family connections, not because they deserved to succeed, as Nixon had done. Not surprisingly, perhaps, books written about Nixon also tend to fall into one of these two categories - the "hatchet jobs" written by historians who obviously dislike Nixon and print every negative thing they can find about him; and the mostly admiring books written by his former aides and supporters who defend his actions and attack his enemies as "hypocrites" who did the same things as Nixon, but just never got caught (partly because they were protected by a liberal news media). Stephen Ambrose, one of America's most prominent historians and a former Nixon critic, nonetheless provides what is probably still the most balanced and fair-minded account of Nixon's dramatic life and career with this book. Published in 1987, "Nixon: The Education of a Politician" follows Nixon from his bleak and rather sad childhood to his two bitter defeats for political office - first to John Kennedy in the 1960 presidential race (a campaign which was so close that Nixon believed until the day he died that Kennedy had "stolen" the election from him) and his devastating loss to Democrat Pat Brown in the 1962 California governor's race - a defeat which led many experts to write off Nixon as a political "dead duck" and has-been. Unlike many of Nixon's previous biographers, Ambrose manages to keep his feelings about Nixon to himself and instead he concentrates on telling a well-written, well-researched account of Nixon's life. As Ambrose writes, Nixon had good reason to be somewhat bitter about his life - his father was one of life's "losers" who seemed to fail at almost everything he did, despite years of backbreaking work. The Nixons were a hard-luck family - oil was discovered on land the Nixons had once owned but sold just before drilling began; two of Nixon's beloved brothers died from tuberculosis while young, causing his mother to put enormous pressure on Richard to be successful in life and make up for the family's loss. By the time Nixon entered college he was a very bright and energetic, but also cold and aloof, young man who had a hard time making friends and having fun - he was always so "serious" and grim-looking, his mother remembered. At Duke University Law School he graduated third in his class, but made almost no friends and was called "gloomy gus" by his classmates for his overly serious and stuffy manner. Nixon would repeat this pattern into his political career - working longer and harder than everyone else, maintaining an intense, serious, and rather cold personality, but also lashing out at his political opponents, even when he didn't have to, thus making many powerful enemies in the press and Democratic Party. After this excellent biography, Ambrose went on to write two more volumes to conclude his study of Nixon's career. However, in my opinion neither of the two succeeding volumes can match this one for writing style, interest, and drama. If you want to read an engrossing account of one of this century's major political leaders, then "Nixon: The Education of a Politician" is still your best choice nearly fifteen years after it was published.

Garment shines a little light on some of the more puzzling questions of the Nixon administration and on Iran/contra. He writes as he speaks, conversational and wandering. That's the book's salvation, however: finally here's the human side of some of the darker moments in Republican government. We see how the three branches, press and other groups play off each other to achieve their goals. Like any good serial author, he leaves us hungry for the next book, which will "tell all" about Watergate. I can't wait

I was enticed by this book from the moment I read about Garment's lively performance of "Tiptoe through the Tulips" at age 7 in his father's dress making factory. Having read several Watergate books, I felt that this one was different for one specific reason; Garment makes Nixon into a human being, and helps to bring Nixon's several positive qualities to life (such as his wonderful foreign policy) that many Watergate-related authors have falied to acknowledge. I especially loved the ending of the book at his daughter Annie's Bat-Mitzvah; it was a wonderful conclusion to to a nostalgic story. I am left with only one question...when will the movie be out?

If one is interested solely in the political career of Richard Nixon, then this would be the book to get. That which we learn about Nixon's life before politics and after Watergate was only mentioned as it pertained to his days in office. Kurz was remarkably evenhanded as he described a politician who had some tremendous strengths, and some even greater weaknesses. In fact through most of the book, Kurz almost seemed to have some genuine warmth for his subject. It was something of a surprise to see Kurz reveal near the end that he had rooted against Nixon when the President's troubles were mounting.

Nixon was convinced that there was a vast copnspiracy of liberals aligned against him. On the one hand, this should have been hard to believe given that Nixon's domestic policies were hardly right wing except for where domestic communism was concerned. On the other hand, Nixon really had generated a lot of antipathy because of his heavy-handed tactics in dealing with his rivals.

Kurz was occasionally a little repetitious, but at least part of that was due to the complexities of telling a detailed story that spanned several decades. Overall, this book was informative and hard to put down. It was a fine piece of work.

Ken Kurtz is an excpetional historian! And a wonderful professor!

The haplessness of the House's investigation of the Nixon White House over the Watergate cover-up is revealed being intentional. The author, who was majority counsel to the House Committee on the Judiciary during the Watergate investigation, shows that it was the result of obstruction by the very Democrats supposedly driving the investigation, done to prevent revelation of abuses of power during the Kennedy Administration that subsequently came out in the Church Hearings. Probably the best, and most poignant, aspect of the book is the tone of the diary excerpts, which reveal the author as a lawyer who believes in the Constitution deeply, and is increasingly dissillusioned by the machinations he observes. The book is both a good read and essential source material for serious students of Watergate and the resulting erosion of public confidence in elected government.

Zeifman's inside-the-Judiciary Committeee look at the infamous Watergate scandals provides compelling first-hand knowledge that both Democrats (loyal to the Kennedys) and Republicans "stonewalled" both the investigation and the move towards the impeachment of President Nixon. The author also paints a picture of "the system" which demonstrates that it barely "worked", and dispels the triumphalist version of events presented by the mainstream media. And, for Clinton scandal-mongers (and no, I'm not someone who relies on Rush Limbaugh for information on HRC), Hillary Rodham (not yet Clinton), makes a few cameo appearances as a special sub-committe underling. Her unlawerly actions reveals that if she is not a liar, at least she has no interest in justice. Highly recommended, and should be reissued by the publisher to counter the smug self-congratualtory satisfaction of the post-Watergate era. Current history is rarely what it seems.

Presidential memoirs need to be judged under a different literary standard than other works of non-fiction, laden as they are with a tradition of wordiness, self-aggrandizement and exculpatory statements. This memoir is definitely better than Carter's (unintelligible), Ford's (would you buy it?), Johnson's (defensive), Bush's (which is only an edited letters collection) and Reagan's (totally ghosted).

And there are some passages in here that are vintage, vintage Nixon. E.g. the long panegyric for his sainted mother, the (fully deserved) tribute to the long-suffering wife and - piece de la resistance - the chapter on "Temperance." And RN's bitterest recollection, that when he resigned the press had the temerity to wheel out Alger Hiss to comment on the occasion.

There are also bits that make you wonder. E.g. his protest that Ferdinand Marcos probably did "the right thing" for his country by declaring martial law - even though RN had nothing to do with it.

Nixon buffs - lovers, haters, and the just plain curious - will do well to read this.

"Life is a roller coaster, exhilarating on the way up and breathtaking on the way down." -Richard Nixon, In the Arena

Richard Nixon spent most of his eighty-one years "in the arena," serving his country as Congressman, Senator, Vice President, President, and, finally, elder statesman and foreign policy mandarin. He was one of the most controversial figures in American public life; "Tricky Dick," the man you loved to hate. He started his career as a hero to conservatives, a dedicated anti-Communist, the vanquisher of Helen Gahagan Douglas and Alger Hiss. Later he enraged many those same supporters by imposing wage and price controls and opening China to the West. He was the leader of the Silent Majority, the ender of the Vietnam war. He was also crippled by disgrace; the only President forced to resign his office.

In the Arena is not a conventional memoir. Nixon already covered the essentials in his 1978 volume, "RN." Rather, this is more of an introduction to the man himself; a personal, intimate, conversational book about how he felt and thought, and what he believed. It is a reminiscence about the major points in his life, both high and low-the subtitle of the book is "A Memoir of Victory, Defeat, and Renewal"-and a commentary on some of the events that have occurred since his earlier autobiography. This is by no means the definitive book on Nixon, but it does provide intriguing insights into the mind of a most intriguing man.

Some of the more interesting revelations in the book are Nixon's personal dealings with and reactions to the famous men he knew and met in his life. Herbert Hoover, MacArthur, Churchill, de Gaulle, Adenauer, Kennedy, Eisenhower, and many others. He had their respect, if not their friendship, and he was able to deal with them as an equal, both before and after his presidency. He relates engaging impressions and revealing insights of these Titans of history. Gorbachev, he reveals, was better educated and more charismatic than Brezhnev so he came off as being a benign presence, but, in truth, he was no less ruthless. "[B]eneath the velvet glove he always wears, there is a steel fist." Mao told Nixon that he preferred "rightists" like him because "those on the right can do what those on the left can only talk about." Chou En-Lai was a ruthless negotiator with an all-encompassing understanding of international affairs. MacArthur was the most fascinating speaker he ever met, able to deliver, off the cuff, hours of brilliant, hypnotic rhetoric. The only leader Nixon ever met who could equal him was Lee Kwan Yew of Singapore.

Nixon also writes about Watergate, although, predictably, he makes no stunning confessions or apologies. He admits his responsibility for the cover-up, but denies having any role in the crime itself. He also continues to emphasize the political aspects of the scandal. He paraphrases Talleyrand: "Watergate was worse than a crime-it was a blunder." He reveals that even he did not know about all that was going on. He did not give the matter sufficient attention because he was preoccupied with his China initiatives and his efforts to end the war in Vietnam. He admits regret for considering options that were clearly illegal. Ironically, his order to kill the investigation, the famous "smoking gun" which ultimately led to his resignation, was disregarded. He also discusses his agonizing over accepting the pardon offered by President Ford. "Next to the resignation, accepting the pardon was the most painful decision of my political career." Ultimately, though, he concluded that the continuing obsession by the people with Watergate was crippling the nation. That and his own "desperate financial situation" left him with little choice.

Nixon also writes passionately about his role in the Vietnam War. "A day did not pass during my years in the White House that I did not hate the war in Vietnam." Nixon's mother, of course, was a Quaker and his upbringing had to influence the way he felt about such things. He especially loathed the tremendous human suffering caused by war. Still, he felt that the nation's course was a necessary one and that our goals in Indochina were "worthy and honorable." "I would have done anything to achieve them by peaceful means. But no such options were available." He believed that it was "imperative both morally and strategically" to help free the countries of Indochina, but that did not "lessen the burden [he] felt from leading our nation in war." As always, Nixon remained committed to the ideal of "real peace", that is, an end to war. We cannot achieve what he calls "perfect peace"-an end to conflict-because conflict is the natural state of affairs in the world. However, real peace is obtainable, if only we can take the profit out of war. He believes that this is possible because the destructiveness of nuclear weapons has made world war prohibitively expensive, and because increasing world prosperity has drastically reduced the desire of nations to increase their wealth by acquiring more territory and resources.

This is an excellent book. Well written and compact. No wasted words in this story.

It's vintage Nixon and he's at his best. It's full of fascinating stories and hard, tough insights into power politics. His core belief is that your life needs to be dedicated to some cause greater than yourself. It's an idea well worth pondering.

Probably the biggest weakness is the masterful spin on any of his problems. It's almost as if he's running a political campaign. Every controversial issue is turned into a positive reflection on his career. You know he's got to be lying at least a little bit, but you just can't figure out where. Oh well.

This is not an examination of Richard Nixon, it's a book about the author, Monica Crowley. I can't imagine anyone putting any credence in something which consists exclusively of lengthy quotes from Nixon, when Crowley admits she never used a tape recorder and relied on "after the fact notes." Give me a break! No one has such a prodigious memory as to remain monologues that lasted over an hour and then claim to reproduce Nixon's thoughts verbatim. Yet Crowley miraculously pulls this off.

Richard Nixon was notoriously uncomfortable around women. He wasn't around women, he was distant to his own wife and no extra-marital affair has ever been documented. Yet we are supposed to believe that the aging Nixon would place extraordinary trust in a young woman, tell her his innermost secrets and spend vast amounts of time with her talking geo-politics? It's a wonder that fewer people have questioned the credibility of this account. Though the quotes all sound Nixonian in the extreme, a cynic would cry foul with this anemic effort.

A quick, easy read, Miss Crowley's book gives us a portrait of a fading, but occasionally wise, ex-president. Nixon is exposed, his warts and his decencies. The petty, self-important Nixon is here, an old man given to bitternesses, especially towards George Bush. Bush was Nixon's protege and semi-creation (if not for Nixon's sponsorship, Bush would have ended his career as a failed Texas pol or minor cabinet secretary) yet Bush rarely asked Nixon for the elder's advise- and Nixon pouted over the affront. Nixon arrogantly considered himself one of America's greatest presidents, a minority view amongst conservatives as well as liberals. Nixon enjoyed the flattery Bill Clinton sent his way. Nixon's strong points come out in this book, too. He remained intellectual sharp until the end and intellectually curious. He was a quick study of personalities and situations. He understood what the icy Hillary Rodham Clinton was all about after one short meeting. He knew Ronald Reagan was having mental problems two years before Reagan's public announcement of his Alzheimer's affliction. My only problem with Monica Crowley's book is that she uses quote marks for most conversations though she admits that she didn't use a tape recorder. She claims she wrote notes after conversations- but who can have that perfect a memory even if her notes were scribbled five minutes after a given conversation took place. Still, Miss Crowley's book is fun and valuable.

This is a very interesting, fun-to-read book. You will learn a lot about the way Nixon thinks, and his longing to be known as one of the greatest presidents of the 20th century.

Although you feel somewhat uncomfortable reading the text, knowing that Crowley betrayed Nixon's trust in her by writing this book, the quotes are too delicious to ignore.
The book is divided into three sections; "Head, Heart, and Guts," which explores Nixon's views on politics and the various presidents, "The 1992 Presidential Election," and "Nixon's Third Term," which pretty much deals with Nixon's interactions with the new President Clinton until Nixon's death.

Even though I am a Democrat, I found that several of Nixon's views were parallel to mine. He is very thoughtful about every political issue, and not afraid to stray from his party (privately, at least.) His thoughts about the former presidents, and all the different ways in which they angered him, will delight every reader.

Open up a number of major newspapers and every once in awhile you'll find a column penned by Richard Reeves. Given the limited space available in a newspaper op/ed section, Reeves is rarely given a chance to provide a detailed analysis on any topic. Instead, he writes intersting opinion pieces on national affairs that are usually worth reading even if you don't agree with him.

In his new book regarding President Nixon, Reeves employs a similar style in recounting Nixon's five plus years in the White House. In many ways, this book is a compilation of anecdotes and brief historical passages that gives readers a glimpse of the Nixon White House and of Nixon himself.

The key thing to remember is that it will be little more than a glimpse. If you are looking for a detailed study of the Nixon presidency, you might want to look elsewhere.

The positive thing about this subject is that there are so many books regarding the Nixon years. If you lived through the era and have read many of the other books such as Haldeman's diary, Nxion's own autobiograhpies or even Anthony Summers hatchet job, you'll enjoy this book too.

My only complaint about the book is actually a central part of its premise. The book centers solely on Nixon without examining his relationship with others. For example, I would be surprised if there are more than 10 mentions in the entire book about Pat Nixon. There is also very little about his relationship with political supporters other than brief mentions about Watergate-related scandal. Part of Reeve's thesis, is that Nixon was very isolated in the White House and had little human interaction. The recent theatrical movie also portrayed a very narcisistic human being too. However, Nixon wasn't a hermit. He did have friendships with Bebe Rebozo and others and had a enough people skills to set the record for being on the cover of Time Magazine more than any other person. I wish this book would have delved into that greater.

In short, this is not the definitive book on the Nixon Administration. Yet, it is an enjoyable read that will certainly bring this era in history back to life. Regardless of your political leanings, Nixon' presidency is worth learning more about and understanding.

"President Nixon: Alone in the White House" is one of those rare biographies that manages to capture the very essence of its subject. Mr. Reeves, who had access not only to President Nixon himself but to most of Nixon's key advisors and confidantes, has written a book that reveals Richard Nixon's motivations and thus goes a long way toward explaining some of the strange things Nixon did as President. What we see in the book is a man who assumes that all men approach life the way he does--and his approach is quintessentially Machiavellian. Nixon truly believes that all men cheat, lie and are out to get him. All is fair in politics. By assuming the worst in others, Nixon guarantees the worst in himself.

And yet one catches glimpses of Nixon the man where one feels a certain amount of compassion. Nixon was a melancholy and lonely individual, distrustful of those around him. He was a politician who had an aversion to people. He feels awkward in any social situation, to the point where his interactions are meticulously scripted beforehand on one of his handy yellow legal pads. In one hilarious sequence, Nixon is up all night writing and memorizing a script for an "off the cuff" speech he is planning to give the next day. What is amazing is that he does not see how ridiculous it is to be scripting an unscripted speech. Nixon also spends hours writing memos to himself about how he wants to be perceived. Each one of the memos drips with irony, for he sees in himself all the things that he is not. One cannot help but feel compassion for a man so out of touch with who he is.

Reeves argues that Nixon is at his best when looking at the bigger picture, in "connecting the dots" of major policy decisions and their historical precedents as well as the possible outcomes. This is the Nixon who takes the bold steps to open up Communist China and to bring a much-needed thaw to the festering Cold War with Russia. Reeves also shows a Nixon who realizes the disaster of Vietnam but doesn't know how to remove the U.S. and preserve the honor and dignity of the nation. One must admire Nixon for his foreign policy successes and for his broad thinking in this area. The book also paints an interesting portrait of Henry Kissinger, showing him to be brilliant but incredibly vain and condescending. Kissinger spends a great deal of time making sure Secretary of State Rogers is out of the loop on every major foreign policy decision.

Domestically, however, we see in this book a Nixon who is all politician and zero statesman. He waffles on integration, does little to help Blacks because they vote 90% Democrat, and panders in the worst way to groups he believes he must win over in order to win reelection in 1972. Nixon tells his dynamic duo, Haldeman and Erlichman, not to bog him down with policy details, then buries himself in such details as replacement shower heads for the White House or the clownish design for the White House security force. We also see Nixon the bigot, saving his cruelest cuts for the Jews. In these glimpses we see just how shallow and ignorant Nixon could be, despite his moments of greatness. The last section of the book deals with Watergate and the events that brought Richard Nixon to disgrace. It is not a pretty sight, and just goes to show how thoroughly Nixon was involved in the cover-up and how much he enjoyed the dirty tricks attributed to his campaign. At one point, after George Wallace is shot, Nixon laments the fact that Nixon's men didn't think to go into the would-be assasin's apartment and plant McGovern literature to discredit his opponent.

Upon finishing this book, I immediately wondered if Reeves began working on a sequel, following Nixon from his resignation through his period of exile and disgrace to the era of his partial rehabilitation near the end of his life. I certainly hope Reeves follows up, for the story of Nixon the private citizen in the years after his fall from power would be fascinating and remains largely untold.

This is a good book, and I believe that both fans and detractors of our former President would enjoy it. Reeves has not written it to discredit the man, but to try to explain him. After finishing the book, I felt I knew the real Richard Nixon somewhat better, and that had Richard Nixon had a different take on the motivations of his fellow man, he may have gone down as one of our better Presidents.

I first met Richard Reeves 28 years ago when he had a crush on a cute blonde from Lima Ohio who worked in my office. I was in awe of him then, as he had already written the wonderful novel Convention; and I was an impressionable teenager at the time. His writing skills, moving from fiction to non-fiction, are undiminished though I guess you can't go far wrong with a subject who is a)endlessly fascinating; and 2)who recorded every word he spoke during his Presidency. There is so much of topical relevance to be gleaned from this book. RNs fascination was foreign affairs and since his departure, we seem to have had Presidents who have emphasized domestic politics. One can make an argument that our current woeful status in the international affairs arena is a direct result of our subsequent neglect. Here is a Nixon juggling the Middle East, the Russians, the Chinese, Allende, war between India and Pakistan seemingly all at the same moment; while at the same time his lieutenants, Rogers, Laird and Kissinger are all at war inside the White House with spies and counterspies on each other and palace intrigues which seemed to delight our supreme leader no end. One cant help but be struck by how much autotomy and power we give a president, as nixon and kissinger almost singlehandedly reshaped the world with as little imput as possible from annoying members of congress or anybody else, and especially not from pariah Secretary of State Rogers. One final point, before you rush to relive the 1970s, in the Huston plan for domestic intelligence which in part led to the Watrergate excesses, you may note a similarity to the anti terrorism bill just passed by Congress. Great period; important lessons for today, and well reported, mostly from the tapes.