Destiny and Power by Jon Meacham (Review)
I have read biographies for almost half of the U.S. presidents, and I had heard nothing but praise regarding Jon Meacham’s, Destiny and Power. As the cacophony of the 2020 election grew more clamorous, I found myself longing for the GOP of old. George H.W. Bush seemed like the old guard and someone who should model for the current GOP what it means to be a voice of reason, so I bumped Meacham’s book to the top of my list.
In the introduction, Meacham described H.W. Bush as “the last gentleman.” After Bush lost the election to Bill Clinton in 1992, Bush wrote in his journal that “honor, duty, and country”—core ideas to his being—seemed passé as the first Baby Boomer became president. This idea of his values being outdated was a struggle for him, but Bush concluded that things would improve. Indeed, Bush lived long enough to see his virtues (the ones perceived as old fashioned if not vices in 1992) once again appreciated. I wrote about this appreciation a few weeks ago, and history has continued casting Bush’s presidency in a kinder light. His willingness and ability to compromise are missed today, and Meacham’s book makes the politics of just a few decades ago seem far more civil than today.
Destiny and Power is complimentary without being hagiographic. It’s a lengthy book, but Bush had a lengthy life with an impressive career of service. There is plenty to consider, and Meacham handles the story with aplomb. I wholly recommend the book, but put it a notch below The Art of Power, Meacham’s biography of Thomas Jefferson. The following are my observations from Destiny and Power:
Samuel Prescott, Bush’s grandfather, followed the example of Andrew Carnegie who wrote in the The Gospel of Wealth, “This, then, is held to be the duty of the man of Wealth: First, to set an example of modest, unostentatious living, shunning display or extravagance; to provide moderately for the legitimate wants of those dependent upon him; and after doing so to consider all surplus revenues which come to him simply as trust funds, which he is called upon to administer, and strictly bound as a matter of duty to administer in the manner which, in his judgment, is best calculated to produce the most beneficial results for the community—the man of wealth thus becoming the mere agent and trustee for his poorer brethren, bringing to their service his superior wisdom, experience and ability to administer, doing for them better than they would or could do for themselves.” This approach to wealth is not one I see widely practiced by the new Carnegies.
George Bush’s tears at FDR’s death are telling. Bushes were Republicans, yet FDR was his president. This degree of respect toward political opponents seems of a bygone era.
Meacham juxtaposed Bush’s speaking and writing style—the latter being far clearer than the former. Bush spoke as his mother instructed: avoid talking about yourself. This approach often added a vague and complicating element by avoiding first-person speech. Bush’s adroit mind also led him to preemptively address objections and provide clarifications even as he was speaking his positions. Yet his writing provided a directness and an organization that was superior to his conversational records. This trait is what I appreciate most about writing. It affords the opportunity to organize and prioritize with reflection. Increasingly, writing seems like a devalued ability.
Senator Prescott Bush testified against Senator Joseph McCarthy. He made the following statement: “McCarthy has caused dangerous divisions among the American people because of his attitude and the attitude he has encouraged among his followers: that there can be no honest differences of opinion with him. Either you must follow Senator McCarthy blindly, not daring to express any doubts or disagreements about any of his actions, or, in his eyes, you must be a Communist, a Communist sympathizer, or a fool who has been duped by the Communist line.” Read that paragraph again and consider it in the context of how President Trump led this country. The similarities are striking. Any person who demands unfettered agreement is foolish. Such a demand of unanimity is not only poor leadership, but—when it comes from the highest positions of leadership—dangerous to a representative form of government. Traits like McCarthy and Trump demonstrated are those of demagogues and bullies, which spreads the acceptability of such words and conduct in the furthest reach of this country and beyond.
In 1963, the GOP elected H.W. Bush to his first office, GOP Chairman of Harris County. Party leaders asked him to run to keep the party from falling into the Birch Society’s hands. After winning, however, he reconciled with the Birchers and commented, “I found out that jugular politics—going for the opposition’s throat—wasn’t my style. It was a lesson carried over from my experience in business. When competition gets cutthroat, everybody loses. Sometimes confrontation is the only way to resolve problems, but only as a last resort, after all other avenues have been explored.” This assessment is the model of wisdom and far too rare in today’s politics.
After losing his senate bid in 1964, he wrote to his friend, Gerry Bemiss: “The Birchers are bad news, and I don’t like them a bit. They gave me a fit here in Houston and in other places in Texas. And I think in retrospect I should have cracked down on them more. This mean, humorless philosophy which says everybody should agree on absolutely everything is not good for the Republican Party or our state. When the word moderation becomes a dirty word, we have some soul-searching to do.”
Bush’s greatest takeaway from his time in China was the importance of patience. He better understood that diplomacy is long game. I think his conclusion is also one of my most significant lessons from working with the Kansas Legislature—today’s enemies may be essential allies tomorrow.
Meacham described Bush as valuing consensus over ideology. He saw the work of government as a role of careful stewardship.
Bush had three rules for serving as Reagan’s #2:
(1) Don’t play the political opportunist—the guy who distances himself from the president when an issue becomes unpopular.
(2) Don’t play the Washington news-leaking game.
(3) Conduct all interviews on the record, even with friends (especially if you want to keep them as friends when you read your words in the news).
These are points that any #2 should take to heart.
Bush’s choice of arrival at the White House after John Hinckley shot Reagan was remarkable and selfless. Instead of landing on the south lawn of the White House via helicopter, Bush instead arrived in his normal manner via car; he didn’t want to draw attention to himself. In the grandstanding manner of today’s politics, it’s hard to imagine any modern politician taking such an approach.
At the start of Desert Shield, H.W. Bush summarized his view on global politics: “All countries in the west have to turn to us. But it is my theory that the more they are included in the takeoff, the more we get their opinion, the more we reach out, no matter what is involved in terms of time involved, the better it is. Everyone is proud; everyone has his place in the sun—large country or small—they should be consulted, their opinions considered. And then, when the United States makes a move and I make a decision, we are more apt to have solid support.” Bush enfolded a wide variety of countries that contributed to the cause both militarily and diplomatically. He did so to wide acclaim.
Meacham looked at the seeds of populism sowed by Newt Gingrich during the Bush budget-tax negations of 1990. The far right brought their messaging straight to the citizens to bypass the GOP machine. Their messaging attacked both Democrats and establishment Republicans. It is interesting looking back at those days in comparison to the Trumpian party of today. The stance of Gingrich republicans and Trumpists makes me think of the shortsightedness in what both brands of republicanism do to any efforts toward conservative governance. Relatedly, Bush’s approach to communication seems similar to William Taft—sound reason but little effort to win the populous.
I thought about James Polk’s presidency often as Meacham worked through Bush’s years in the White House. While Polk only intended to serve four years, Bush had no qualms about serving only one term if it meant he was doing the right thing as president. It would be interesting to do a deep-dive comparison of the two administrations.
On his final day as president, George H. W. Bush wrote the following in his journal: “As I told Bill Clinton, I feel the same sense of wonder and majesty about this office today as I did when I first walked in here. I’ve tried to keep it; I’ve tried to serve here with no taint of dishonor, no conflict of interest, nothing to sully this beautiful place and this job I’ve been privileged to hold. Misjudgments maybe on this issue or that, but never misconduct. Never doing anything that would tarnish and hurt the presidency.” I find these words comforting and aspirational. The goal to never tarnish a position seems most pressing for a president, but it should be a goal for anyone in any role.
It was interesting seeing how H.W. Bush critiqued Dick Cheney’s approach to the vice presidency and his hawkish approach after the 9/11 attacks. Bush Sr. thought Cheney had a separate international-relations voice that ran parallel to his son’s cabinet—a voice that was always rattling sabers. Cheney found H.W. Bush’s comments interesting but disagreed with the assessment. Cheney stated that he ran his office as Bush Jr. wanted him to—as one voice among many. Further, Cheney stated that Bush Sr. seemed to minimize how affecting it was for 3,000 Americans to die on U.S. soil.
As indicated in my introduction, I enjoyed Destiny and Power. Meacham’s style is accessible and lends insight into what makes a person tick—not just what they did. His approach with H.W. Bush demonstrates Meacham’s skill as a biographer over and again. H.W. Bush served as a congressman, Ambassador to the U.N., Chair or the Republican National Committee, Ambassador to China, Director of the CIA, Vice President, and finally President. Meacham lends great insight into America from WWII onward by exploring H.W. Bush’s life, and he does so in a most engaging manner.
