WASHINGTON -- President George W. Bush has an unusual -- some would say autocratic -- approach to his job.

In a book published this week, the president is quoted as saying that because he is the "commander" he doesn't have to explain his positions.

In the book "Bush at War," by Bob Woodward, Bush talks about his job as "the strategic thinker" of his administration who makes provocative comments to prod his staff. Woodward then asked if Bush ever explained "what he was doing."

"Of course not," he said. "I'm the commander. See, I don't need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation."

Was he saying in his interview with Woodward, which took place in August, that he does not have to explain his policies to his aides, who are the ones asked to explain them to the public?

Or was he saying he does not have to keep the American people in the loop on where he is coming from and where he is taking them?

Either way, the remark shows an incredible amount of hubris.

The president may have simply had an attack of "irrational exuberance," as Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan would say.

After all, Bush is the leader of the world's only military superpower, and his popularity polls have remained high.

But I believe such a statement can surely be interpreted as a reflection of the arrogance of power.

Mighty as the president may be, he still must constantly explain his policies and actions and be held accountable as the nation's chief executive.

That's the way it is in democracies, where leaders need to bring the people along with their thinking, in contrast to monarchies or dictatorships.

Presidents have the "bully pulpit," as Theodore Roosevelt called it, and they can best rally the nation when they use it to explain where the country is headed, especially in times of crisis.

Franklin D. Roosevelt was a master of that technique, and he used the radio in his unprecedented fireside chats to the American people during the Great Depression and World War II.

President Harry Truman held weekly news conferences to keep everyone abreast of his administration's policies at the end of that conflict and during the early Cold War.

In April 1961 President John F. Kennedy addressed the nation's editors at a convention here and the next day held a news conference at the State Department to explain and take full responsibility for the CIA's failed invasion at Cuba's Bay of Pigs.

The next year Kennedy also addressed the people on television at the start of the Cuban missile crisis. In that appearance, he showed satellite photographs of the Soviet missile sites built on the island. He knew that the people had to be clued in and prepared.

President Lyndon B. Johnson learned the hard way that it was not only important to keep the people informed but to tell them the full truth. He lost the public's support for the Vietnam War after failing to divulge all the facts and to find a valid reason for remaining in that no-win struggle.

His approval ratings plummeted, forcing him to announce he would not run for reelection.

Afterward Johnson told us reporters many times: "The people have to be in on the takeoffs as well as the landings."

While Bush has spoken to the people about the war on terrorism and has made clear his personal desire to wage a separate war on Iraq's Saddam Hussein, he runs one of the most secretive administrations in recent history.

In dealing with the public, Bush should follow the example of his father, George H. W. Bush.

As Stephen Hess, a scholar at the Brookings Institution think tank here noted in his new treatise, "Organizing the Presidency," the elder Bush "scheduled regular news conferences in which he could personally interact with reporters and demonstrate his mastery of the policies of his administration."

I remember when I covered him, I was impressed by his openness. He had detailed knowledge of the news on all fronts, he had served in several top foreign policy government jobs and he was at home with reporters, casually dropping by the White House press room and letting Q-and-A sessions run close to an hour.

The current President Bush does not provide nearly that much access to reporters. While he occasionally answers questions at some public event, he has held only seven formal news conferences in two years.

This is no way to lead in an open society. President George W. Bush must explain early and often where he stands on the big issues of the day and why -- that is, if he wants to retain the high level of public support that is indispensable for any major presidential endeavor.

(Helen Thomas can be reached at the e-mail address helent@hearstdc.com)