What do you think?
Rate this book
The Tea Party Goes to Washington
If the midterm elections were a declaration of war on the status quo, Rand Paul leads the battle charge. Voters fearful of growing government and debt have found voice in the Tea Party phenomenon and the movement continues to deliver a message that Washington, D.C. has found impossible to ignore.
In THE TEA PARTY GOES TO WASHINGTON, the newly elected senator and self-described "constitutional conservative" explains why his party has to stand by its limited government rhetoric and why the federal government must be stuffed back into its constitutional box. Given the problems our nation faces, these are not mere suggestions, but moral imperatives.
Rand Paul and those who voted for him want to stop borrowing, end the bailouts, and entitlements and the spending. In THE TEA PARTY GOES TO WASHINGTON you'll
Now is the time to get America back on track-- this is the moment of the new revolution that will take us back to our grass roots, to the country of our founding fathers.
It's a new day in Washington-- as the Tea Party graduates from populist outrage to political influence, Rand Paul stands poised to become one of its greatest champions.
In THE TEA PARTY GOES TO WASHINGTON, the newly elected senator and self-described "constitutional conservative" explains why his party has to stand by its limited government rhetoric and why the federal government must be stuffed back into its constitutional box. Given the problems our nation faces, these are not mere suggestions, but moral imperatives.
Rand Paul and those who voted for him want to stop borrowing, end the bailouts, and entitlements and the spending. In THE TEA PARTY GOES TO WASHINGTON you'll
Now is the time to get America back on track-- this is the moment of the new revolution that will take us back to our grass roots, to the country of our founding fathers.
It's a new day in Washington-- as the Tea Party graduates from populist outrage to political influence, Rand Paul stands poised to become one of its greatest champions.
272 pages, Hardcover
First published February 22, 2011
15 people are currently reading
235 people want to read
About the author
Rand Paul
16 books174 followersU.S. Senator Rand Paul lives in Bowling Green, Kentucky with his wife and three children. He has been a practicing ophthalmologist for seventeen years. His run for the US Senate representing Kentucky was his first bid for political office. He is the son of Ron Paul, Texas congressman and 2008 Republican Presidential candidate.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 34 reviews
August 18, 2012
I am loathe to rate a political tract like Paul's book because one never really knows if one is rating the book itself or the political opinions therein. But I will give this one three stars. It does what he sets out to do, which is use his election to the Senate in 2010 as a framework for explaining his Tea Party ideals. The writing is accessible, and he makes the reader like him.
Paul's strongest arguments are about how both parties are to blame for a lot of our problems, particularly in regards to military spending. I deduct points for frequent reliance on Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and Thomas Woods as models and experts. I suppose they do represent the philosophy, but they're so wildly partisan (or laughable, in Palin's case) as to prevent converting any new followers. Plus, Paul places all of the blame for the mortgage crash on The Fed, which I find to be a naive and simplistic view.
In the end, one could do worse than read Rand Paul for an overview of the Tea Party ideals - especially as they related to the 2010 elections. It's readable, informative, not overly inflammatory, and fairly concise. I would like to have had more insights into the actual election, though. The parts of the book telling that story were easily the most interesting.
Paul's strongest arguments are about how both parties are to blame for a lot of our problems, particularly in regards to military spending. I deduct points for frequent reliance on Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and Thomas Woods as models and experts. I suppose they do represent the philosophy, but they're so wildly partisan (or laughable, in Palin's case) as to prevent converting any new followers. Plus, Paul places all of the blame for the mortgage crash on The Fed, which I find to be a naive and simplistic view.
In the end, one could do worse than read Rand Paul for an overview of the Tea Party ideals - especially as they related to the 2010 elections. It's readable, informative, not overly inflammatory, and fairly concise. I would like to have had more insights into the actual election, though. The parts of the book telling that story were easily the most interesting.
December 23, 2014
When I realize that I have made a mistake, I am adult enough to admit that mistake. I first obtained this book in the heat of the several persons identified with the Tea Party that I considered "odd-balls" or weirdos. They made the news with their outlandish statements to the media. particularly on Faux news. I just sort of glanced through this book with an attitude that all the Tea Partiers were cut from the same piece of stupid cloth. I was wrong.
After listening to Rand Paul recently, and being impressed with his comments, I decided to again read his book with a more friendly attitude. I found that much of what I read was in line with what I profess to believe. Mr. Paul and I want less federal govertment, less war, and less government wasteful spending. We both want more accountability and less fraud, waste, and abuse. We both want to eliminate earmarks and pork attatchments added to proposed bills in the House and Senate. We both want more states governing and less Federal intrusion into our domestic affairs. We both want the government to reduce the national debt and work diligently to reach a balanced budget.
I am not yet ready to say I intend to vote for Rand Paul for president. but will say that now I am considering it. I believe that some of my goodreads friends probably still think that both Mr. Pauls are just right-wing nut cases, but I challenge each of you to read this book without a pre-conceived attitude because of the title...Michael
After listening to Rand Paul recently, and being impressed with his comments, I decided to again read his book with a more friendly attitude. I found that much of what I read was in line with what I profess to believe. Mr. Paul and I want less federal govertment, less war, and less government wasteful spending. We both want more accountability and less fraud, waste, and abuse. We both want to eliminate earmarks and pork attatchments added to proposed bills in the House and Senate. We both want more states governing and less Federal intrusion into our domestic affairs. We both want the government to reduce the national debt and work diligently to reach a balanced budget.
I am not yet ready to say I intend to vote for Rand Paul for president. but will say that now I am considering it. I believe that some of my goodreads friends probably still think that both Mr. Pauls are just right-wing nut cases, but I challenge each of you to read this book without a pre-conceived attitude because of the title...Michael
March 27, 2011
I found this book to be helpful in understanding the Tea Party movement and Rand Paul’s involvement with them. The book was written well, is easy to follow and is actually a very quick read.
Some noteworthy information given in the book concerns the comparison of the Tea Party with the Ross Perot campaign. It is interesting to note that while the Perot votes took away from the Republican voters, the Tea Party actually has brought more voters to the Republican side (page 20).
Another interesting fact is how much Rand Paul really is his own person. He may say he is Republican but this book shows he is very much an independent thinker.
Over all I enjoyed the read and would recommend it to everyone who has an interest in better understanding one persons’ viewpoint on the Tea Party and its influence in today’s political field.
I won this book in a First Reads contest
Some noteworthy information given in the book concerns the comparison of the Tea Party with the Ross Perot campaign. It is interesting to note that while the Perot votes took away from the Republican voters, the Tea Party actually has brought more voters to the Republican side (page 20).
Another interesting fact is how much Rand Paul really is his own person. He may say he is Republican but this book shows he is very much an independent thinker.
Over all I enjoyed the read and would recommend it to everyone who has an interest in better understanding one persons’ viewpoint on the Tea Party and its influence in today’s political field.
I won this book in a First Reads contest
April 2, 2011
I am going to write a more in depth review of this book soon, but suffice it to say, this is one of the best political books I have ever read. Mr. Paul is a true conservative and leader, and he is someone all conservatives should be behind. He is the only one with the courage to propose real solutions to tough problems that we are facing, it's scary how confused the mainstream really is in this country.
April 12, 2011
Excellent book! Gave many insights into a hard fought election victory and the rough and tumble world of Kentucky politics. Rand Paul explains much of the history of the conservative movement and how the Tea Party is striving to return our great country to these conservative principles. Discusses in detail effective ways to cut spending and regain control of our national debt. Very interesting read.
July 23, 2013
Great read about ideology and principles behind the Tea Party and the reason for its rise in recent years in response to out of control government in both parties. Paul's principled conservatism is a breath of fresh air in today's political environment.
March 4, 2011
Disclaimer: This was a Firstreads copy.
This book is a primer on Tea Party philosophy as told through the campaign of Kentucky's current junior senator. It is short on autobiography and quite philosophical which is refreshing.
I was glad to encounter an even-handedness in Rand Paul's laying of blame for the fiscal crisis around both Democrats and Republicans. He is hard on both sides but especially on those that he considers to be faux conservative Republicans who actually have little interest in the fostering of a limited federal government. Of course I expected no less having been a Kentucky-based witness of this 'historical' election. The explanations that he gives are more detailed than I would have initially thought. This book is on the same level as most of Ron Paul's writing.
One problem that I encountered was the lack of index and full references both of which I consider to be the hallmark of serious nonfiction To me, the absence of a bibliography makes some of the content less credible. Throughout, Dr. Paul says things like "some polls even have the Tea Party ranking equal or above both major parties." I am sure that such polls exist but not citing them leads one to question their validity and the author's use of such a poll to bolster his opinion. However, one does not know what poll. The "Suggestions for Further Reading" is stunted and most likely an afterthought.
However, some parts of this book are overly repetitious and annoying. Paul tends to have messianic ambitions evidence by his near-continuous indications of what a pioneer and outsider anti-hero that he is in today's political climate. The self-aggrandizement goes on. And on. Also, the buttkissing of Sarah Palin was just a bit too *bleah*.
His continual relating that the Tea Party is so endemic to and a part of the American landscape that it seems to grow forth spontaneously almost like amber waves of grain is cloying and an insult to anyone who has ever taken part of any kind of movement politics especially ones that emerge as national phenomenon. There is a lot of infrastructure that goes into it despite however much it may seem to be decentralized. Even the grassroots has to have some system of root maintenance.
The book also suffers from some ahistorical (or perhaps just poorly informed) tendencies. But one example is the assertion that Thomas Jefferson would be abhorred by debt. Yes, he wrote letters vilifying debt but he is also the same man who was the locus of the Louisiana Purchase a few scant years after the American Revolution sapped the nation's financial reserves. He also died with nearly $100,000 of debt in 1826 (a sum that would be several million inflation-adjusted dollars) and considered a lottery to bridge the gap. One can find this information in a variety of sources like the Joseph Ellis biography of Jefferson or from Bill Bryson's most recent book. (I wasn't joking about how non-sourced material irritates me. ;))
Slavish devotion to the Founders and their purported intentions negates the Constitution as a living document because there is almost a 180 degree difference between the politics/economy/culture that existed then and is now present. It is a concern if people who so fervently espouse some of these sentiments wish to return to a slave-based economy, a rigidly class-based political system that allowed only landed men to vote and in which women were, for the most part, chattel in order to appease those who wish limited government. Had one waited for the states to abolish slavery or enfranchise women, well, we would all still be wishing. It may behoove some to who are calling for a "Second American Revolution" that such an event has already occurred: it was call the American Civil War and one can be fairly certain that is not an event that this nation could wish for or withstand.
Overall, this was a fairly easy read that gives some good insight into Kentucky politics as well as the national Tea Party scene. I agree with some of Dr./Senator Paul's points that the nation's political discourse is limited and needs to be widened and that federal funds should be spent much more judiciously. However, the politics that reverts to a strict Constitutional federal government would be extremely detrimental to much of the gains in liberty that have been undertaken since the document was codified. The devotion to the letter of the Constitution rather than the spirit of it needs fervently to be addressed.
This book is a primer on Tea Party philosophy as told through the campaign of Kentucky's current junior senator. It is short on autobiography and quite philosophical which is refreshing.
I was glad to encounter an even-handedness in Rand Paul's laying of blame for the fiscal crisis around both Democrats and Republicans. He is hard on both sides but especially on those that he considers to be faux conservative Republicans who actually have little interest in the fostering of a limited federal government. Of course I expected no less having been a Kentucky-based witness of this 'historical' election. The explanations that he gives are more detailed than I would have initially thought. This book is on the same level as most of Ron Paul's writing.
One problem that I encountered was the lack of index and full references both of which I consider to be the hallmark of serious nonfiction To me, the absence of a bibliography makes some of the content less credible. Throughout, Dr. Paul says things like "some polls even have the Tea Party ranking equal or above both major parties." I am sure that such polls exist but not citing them leads one to question their validity and the author's use of such a poll to bolster his opinion. However, one does not know what poll. The "Suggestions for Further Reading" is stunted and most likely an afterthought.
However, some parts of this book are overly repetitious and annoying. Paul tends to have messianic ambitions evidence by his near-continuous indications of what a pioneer and outsider anti-hero that he is in today's political climate. The self-aggrandizement goes on. And on. Also, the buttkissing of Sarah Palin was just a bit too *bleah*.
His continual relating that the Tea Party is so endemic to and a part of the American landscape that it seems to grow forth spontaneously almost like amber waves of grain is cloying and an insult to anyone who has ever taken part of any kind of movement politics especially ones that emerge as national phenomenon. There is a lot of infrastructure that goes into it despite however much it may seem to be decentralized. Even the grassroots has to have some system of root maintenance.
The book also suffers from some ahistorical (or perhaps just poorly informed) tendencies. But one example is the assertion that Thomas Jefferson would be abhorred by debt. Yes, he wrote letters vilifying debt but he is also the same man who was the locus of the Louisiana Purchase a few scant years after the American Revolution sapped the nation's financial reserves. He also died with nearly $100,000 of debt in 1826 (a sum that would be several million inflation-adjusted dollars) and considered a lottery to bridge the gap. One can find this information in a variety of sources like the Joseph Ellis biography of Jefferson or from Bill Bryson's most recent book. (I wasn't joking about how non-sourced material irritates me. ;))
Slavish devotion to the Founders and their purported intentions negates the Constitution as a living document because there is almost a 180 degree difference between the politics/economy/culture that existed then and is now present. It is a concern if people who so fervently espouse some of these sentiments wish to return to a slave-based economy, a rigidly class-based political system that allowed only landed men to vote and in which women were, for the most part, chattel in order to appease those who wish limited government. Had one waited for the states to abolish slavery or enfranchise women, well, we would all still be wishing. It may behoove some to who are calling for a "Second American Revolution" that such an event has already occurred: it was call the American Civil War and one can be fairly certain that is not an event that this nation could wish for or withstand.
Overall, this was a fairly easy read that gives some good insight into Kentucky politics as well as the national Tea Party scene. I agree with some of Dr./Senator Paul's points that the nation's political discourse is limited and needs to be widened and that federal funds should be spent much more judiciously. However, the politics that reverts to a strict Constitutional federal government would be extremely detrimental to much of the gains in liberty that have been undertaken since the document was codified. The devotion to the letter of the Constitution rather than the spirit of it needs fervently to be addressed.
December 1, 2015
I'm biased. Rand Paul could scratch out the words "I'm Running for Preezy" in crayon on a sheet of notebook paper, and I would buy it and rate it 4-5 stars on Goodreads.
With that qualifier, this was a great book!
Seriously though, this is a great book to get to know Rand Paul. I wish the title were different because it probably seriously limits the range of readers who might pick it up. Part of the book is dedicated to that challenge: the branding of the Tea Party. The Tea Party was arguably born out of Ron Paul's 2008 campaign and began as a conservative and libertarian movement. Like any insurgent movement, it faced fierce opposition from both established parties. The Tea Party was co-opted by any number of angry disenfranchisees, which made the movement an easy target for ridicule and scorn from across the spectrum.
Rand Paul has the same sense and realism as his father, but he is attempting to tailor the ideas for mainstream consumption. This is an enormous challenge and results in pragmatic variances from libertarian principles. The result is that the right thinks Rand Paul is "soft on defense", the left thinks he is a "crazy right winger" and so-called "true libertarians" think he is watered down and too willing to make sacrifices.
This book is part biography and part Tea Party manifesto, from the perspective of the man who knows what it was really meant to be about. Sadly, as a result of strife within the republican party and successful establishment (both republican and democrat) attacks, the Tea Party brand has been associated with racism and pitchforks. Nothing could be further from the original idea. (except maybe the pitchforks).
I believe most Tea Party ascendants (Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Mike Lee, Nikki Haley, Ted Cruz) have distanced themselves from the brand due to a confused message. This is a shame, considering Liberty and limited government are principles that should appeal to all of us.
This book is light reading and well worth the time for anyone who wants to know what Rand Paul stands for.
With that qualifier, this was a great book!
Seriously though, this is a great book to get to know Rand Paul. I wish the title were different because it probably seriously limits the range of readers who might pick it up. Part of the book is dedicated to that challenge: the branding of the Tea Party. The Tea Party was arguably born out of Ron Paul's 2008 campaign and began as a conservative and libertarian movement. Like any insurgent movement, it faced fierce opposition from both established parties. The Tea Party was co-opted by any number of angry disenfranchisees, which made the movement an easy target for ridicule and scorn from across the spectrum.
Rand Paul has the same sense and realism as his father, but he is attempting to tailor the ideas for mainstream consumption. This is an enormous challenge and results in pragmatic variances from libertarian principles. The result is that the right thinks Rand Paul is "soft on defense", the left thinks he is a "crazy right winger" and so-called "true libertarians" think he is watered down and too willing to make sacrifices.
This book is part biography and part Tea Party manifesto, from the perspective of the man who knows what it was really meant to be about. Sadly, as a result of strife within the republican party and successful establishment (both republican and democrat) attacks, the Tea Party brand has been associated with racism and pitchforks. Nothing could be further from the original idea. (except maybe the pitchforks).
I believe most Tea Party ascendants (Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Mike Lee, Nikki Haley, Ted Cruz) have distanced themselves from the brand due to a confused message. This is a shame, considering Liberty and limited government are principles that should appeal to all of us.
This book is light reading and well worth the time for anyone who wants to know what Rand Paul stands for.
June 7, 2011
This is a pretty easy to read memoir covering the midterm elections in which Rand Paul became elected a U.S. Senator for the state of Kentucky, also covering the primary and moments of his life leading to him getting involved in politics.
Being from Kentucky, I followed this bazaar senate races very closely, the "Aqua Buddha" commercial, the commercial by his primary opponent criticizing Paul for being a Duke basketball fan, a Rand Paul supporter stomping the head of a MoveOn.org employee, a Jack Conway supporter pretending to be a Paul supporter while saying racist things in a attempt to discredit Paul, etc. There was literally something outrageous happening every couple of weeks. The book fortunately doesn't go into any detail about these incidents, only briefly mentions a couple of them.
I have to admit I am biased here, so take everything I say with a grain of salt. I voted for Rand Paul and I think he is a great asset to the Senate. As far as the book goes, I think he does a great job of explaining how non-interventionism is the true conservative foreign policy, contrary to what blowhards like Sean Hannity would have you believe. He also covers his father's 2008 presidential campaign and the grassroots movement behind it and the effect the grassroots movement known as the Tea Party had on the 2010 midterm elections.
Being from Kentucky, I followed this bazaar senate races very closely, the "Aqua Buddha" commercial, the commercial by his primary opponent criticizing Paul for being a Duke basketball fan, a Rand Paul supporter stomping the head of a MoveOn.org employee, a Jack Conway supporter pretending to be a Paul supporter while saying racist things in a attempt to discredit Paul, etc. There was literally something outrageous happening every couple of weeks. The book fortunately doesn't go into any detail about these incidents, only briefly mentions a couple of them.
I have to admit I am biased here, so take everything I say with a grain of salt. I voted for Rand Paul and I think he is a great asset to the Senate. As far as the book goes, I think he does a great job of explaining how non-interventionism is the true conservative foreign policy, contrary to what blowhards like Sean Hannity would have you believe. He also covers his father's 2008 presidential campaign and the grassroots movement behind it and the effect the grassroots movement known as the Tea Party had on the 2010 midterm elections.
March 9, 2015
Rand Paul is an interesting political figure who was elected to the Senate to represent the Commonwealth of Kentucky as a member of the group of Tea Party candidates. The book that he has written is a combination of his take on what the Tea Party is and how it operates, his campaign and what his positions on various issues are.
Paul spends the majority of time dealing with his campaign and relations with the Tea Party. His view of the Tea Party is quite different from mine, however I feel confident that his view is based on his actual experience with them.
Rand Paul's endorsement of the tea party principals and his true brief in them is clear. Hopefully, with his and other supporters of the Tea Party Principals our nation can get back to the need for individual responsibilities.I liked the simple message.
Overall, the book is an interesting and quick read that should be read by people of all political persuasions. I don't know what Paul's future in politics holds, however I sense he may be a leader and is therefore someone to watch in the coming years.I would recommend the book to those who want to understand the Tea Party
Paul spends the majority of time dealing with his campaign and relations with the Tea Party. His view of the Tea Party is quite different from mine, however I feel confident that his view is based on his actual experience with them.
Rand Paul's endorsement of the tea party principals and his true brief in them is clear. Hopefully, with his and other supporters of the Tea Party Principals our nation can get back to the need for individual responsibilities.I liked the simple message.
Overall, the book is an interesting and quick read that should be read by people of all political persuasions. I don't know what Paul's future in politics holds, however I sense he may be a leader and is therefore someone to watch in the coming years.I would recommend the book to those who want to understand the Tea Party
March 23, 2019
An easily understandable explanation of the Tea Party and its war on the status quo. "Voters fearful of growing government and debt [we owe trillions to foreign countries and billions in interest rates] have found a voice in the Tea Party phenomenon...." Mr. Paul explains "why his party has to stand by its limited government rhetoric and why the federal government must be stuffed back into its constitutional box. Given the problems our nation faces, these are … moral imperatives ….and those who voted for him want to stop borrowing, end the bailouts, and entitlement and the spending." As a Senior Citizen, I found chapter 9 particularly fascinating as it outlined the overspending/overcharging involved with Obamacare, from hidden taxes and the hiring of hundreds of people to oversee that everyone has health coverage, additional IRS personal [who then targeted Republicans' tax returns], and the creation of the Independent Medicare Advisory Council to determine which seniors would be likely to benefit from services and which would not. [This group was called by Sarah Palin "The Death Panel" . As a parent, I found the inflation of our federal budget under Obama and how it will negatively the future of upcoming generations. We, as individuals, have to live within our budget. The federal government should do the same instead of putting the nation in jeopardy. The Federal Reserve needs a close audit and we have to get ride of riders/pork/addons on bills.
May 5, 2015
take govt back revolution, bottom up, Rand Dostoyeski, Hyatt, Reagan each generation renew defense of liberty, bailout when fear bail, neo were not conservative, a real party of no, Goldwater book, ½ world defense budget dod largest employer, Wilson fdr progressives go to war for world defense, Reagan less military use than all after, arab blowback, subsidized poverty and foreign military, drones create terrorists, military use definite and limited as govt per founders, 1day per 20 pages of bill, let markets be markets, privatize profits socialize losses not, housing crisis when govt lowered rates subsidized bad loans blanket explosion caused boom then correction, financial markets too regulated, fannie Freddie and no political contributions, Keynes failed, consume borrow greater than production saving, Austrian economics predicted Woods book, audit federal reserve, most bad govt when too much govt, biggest risk debt, medical needed cost fix and could have been paying for insurance verses govt control of when/not treatment, lasik halved cost, increase hsa accounts not lower, spending problem and earmark abuse sunset regs, for job creation not against creators, just do what you say in politics.
February 28, 2018
Many senators write feel good memoirs and stray away from policy discussion. Rand pulls out all stops on controversial policy and talks about healthcare, debt and military spending. Rand also gives an overview of the Tea Party. This book is a quick read with many references to other conservative books. Regardless of your political stance, this book will help you see a policy driven approach to government.
A few random observations on this book:
A few random observations on this book:
February 24, 2011
Well I made it through this last night, after it was given to me yesterday.
Wow! He's more radical (Departing markedly from the usual or customary) than I realized, even stating that our parties are unconstitutional.
A must read to understand the new radical movement, of which the last large one gathered in the 60-70's. He and apparently his followers believe that the constitution doesn't allow for federal-education or federal anything else. That's one view, but I find the arguments weak and self-serving.
He writes a lot about his anti-war policies, ending all foreign-aid, not selling weapons to Muslim countries unless they support Israel, and so forth. Not just limiting, but ending all immediately. And that's my real problem with his ideas. He doesn't advocate taking these things slowly and weigh the results, but a re-work of our systems 100% full-steam ahead.
Let me know if you'd like me to pass you my copy.
Wow! He's more radical (Departing markedly from the usual or customary) than I realized, even stating that our parties are unconstitutional.
A must read to understand the new radical movement, of which the last large one gathered in the 60-70's. He and apparently his followers believe that the constitution doesn't allow for federal-education or federal anything else. That's one view, but I find the arguments weak and self-serving.
He writes a lot about his anti-war policies, ending all foreign-aid, not selling weapons to Muslim countries unless they support Israel, and so forth. Not just limiting, but ending all immediately. And that's my real problem with his ideas. He doesn't advocate taking these things slowly and weigh the results, but a re-work of our systems 100% full-steam ahead.
Let me know if you'd like me to pass you my copy.
January 21, 2016
- From the Founding Fathers to Barry Goldwater to my father, Ron Paul, conservatives today have always pointed out that the primary purpose of government is to protect our liberties (mentioning his father and Barry Goldwater, does he mean all the losers?)
- Americans were not happy with the direction of the country by Obama (But they again voted him in 2012)
- that our time is much different than Reagan's in justification of the Tea party agenda (but just in defense policy, how about other issues?)
- throughout the 1980s we sent billions of dollars and allegedly even chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein, in an effort to contain Iran (Who gave them to Iraqis? Of course Reagan's administration, The Tea party Hero)
- Americans were not happy with the direction of the country by Obama (But they again voted him in 2012)
- that our time is much different than Reagan's in justification of the Tea party agenda (but just in defense policy, how about other issues?)
- throughout the 1980s we sent billions of dollars and allegedly even chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein, in an effort to contain Iran (Who gave them to Iraqis? Of course Reagan's administration, The Tea party Hero)
May 14, 2014
This is a book that was ghost written for Senator Rand Paul by Jack Hunter, a man who I respected until he tried to convince me that Glenn Beck was a libertarian. Written immediately after Rand’s Senate victory in 2010, it details his platform as it stood at that time, and it is discouraging to see how much has changed. It is absurd the way he pretends to represent the grassroots, while dealing with Beck, Dick Armey and the like, all of whom have had designs on co opting the Tea Party. Rand has done some things I can get behind, but by and large I am disappointed, and hence, find this book to be largely a waste of time.
October 28, 2013
Rand Paul, Tea Party leader, is standing up against the political machine for the average person! Except when he's endorsing major nanny-state politicians within his own party....
Much like the rest of Rand's career, I was excited at the outset and disappointed the further along things progressed. His criticisms come across as well articulated, and Rand even seems like a likable enough guy; but a lot of it sounds hollow, after looking at Rand's so-called "pragmatic" voting record.
Rand Paul is a charismatic politician. Let's see how far it gets him.
Much like the rest of Rand's career, I was excited at the outset and disappointed the further along things progressed. His criticisms come across as well articulated, and Rand even seems like a likable enough guy; but a lot of it sounds hollow, after looking at Rand's so-called "pragmatic" voting record.
Rand Paul is a charismatic politician. Let's see how far it gets him.
October 16, 2012
It wasn't groundbreaking, but I really enjoyed the book and am glad to see Rand follow in his father's footsteps (no matter what the pro-Ron, anti-Rand crowd says). At his core, he is our best voice right now in the Senate. Very few others tackle the liberty minded issues we care about. Thsi book chronicles his campaign and how the Tea Party changed the Republican Party, at least until they were co-opted by neocons. It's a good read as he captures the feeling the Tea Party created.
Read
December 8, 2020I read Ron Paul's book, The Revolution: A Manifesto, quite a while back (when I was on break from writing reviews) and enjoyed much of what he had to say. When I ran across a reference to his son, Rand's book, I decided I ought to check it out. Rand is now considered to be one of the leaders of the Tea Party movement in America, and he represents a growing sentiment in our country that things have gotten off-track and out of hand in our government.
"Voters in our survey said that they believe that the current leadership in both parties has failed to achieve policies that address their most pressing concerns - creating jobs and fixing the economy. Furthermore, respondents were clear that they want a pro-growth agenda, fiscal discipline, limited government, deficit reduction, a free market, and a change from politics as usual."
Contrasting the main stream media's portrayal of the Tea Partiers:
"...when discussing the subject of welfare, liberals are always quick to defend welfare programs despite the many recipients who take advantage of the system. When discussing Islam, respectable journalists are always careful to note that terrorists and radicals do not define that religion. But the Tea Party is regularly held to an entirely different standard, where if a few people show up - out of a crowd of thousands - with signs comparing the president to a fascist or communist dictator it becomes enough to disparage and dismiss the entire movement."
On the subject of who's really governing in Washington:
(regarding the bank bailout bill) "My father, a Congressman, told me that he had banking lobbyists calling him and asking him about certain sections of the bill, and he said 'What bill?' He didn't have a copy yet. They replied, 'We do, would you like to see it?' You know government is out of control when lobbyists have the bills before members of Congress."
He has quite a bit to say about the most recent Republican administration's profligate spending. As one might expect from his father's rhetoric, and his history, Paul is adamant that we must decrease federal spending in all areas, including the heavily Republican-defended Defense budget. He quotes former Reagan advisor Bruce Bartlett:
"The point is that George W. Bush has never demonstrated any interest in shrinking the size of government. And on many occasions, he has increased government significantly...big government conservatism...is a contradiction in terms."
I think many of us in America today have the gut reaction that if we are required to make our household budgets balance to avoid ruin, we must demand that our government also balance its budget, and quit spending needlessly and frivolously, no matter how good its intentions, lest our country also fall into ruin.
On the ever more present security state:
"We should also ask, despite all their groping and intrusive tactics, has the TSA ever caught a single terrorist or intercepted a single bomber? With our vast security apparatus why were there no red flags over Fort Hood terrorist Nidal Malik Hasan or intelligence sharing concerning the Christmas Day underwear bomber? Why, a decade after 9/11, has government not come up with a better method of recognizing frequent fliers and cutting down on unnecessary inconvenience, something a privatized system would likely have already accomplished. Why has the federal government not better addressed our porous borders an illegal immigration problem with eh same level of focus it now devotes to policing American citizens who choose to travel?...how much are we spending to be treated in this manner, and when, exactly, will our lives return to normal"
Amen! I've long been saying that the Israelis already have a method that works incredibly well to keep terrorists off El Al airlines. Why in the world don't we just borrow their methods and technology? I go on the same rant about high speed rail and pebble-bed nuclear reactors, as well - our American arrogance evidently demands that if it wasn't made in America, it's no good. Don't get me started.
However, the point of the preceding quote is that we're spending millions, perhaps billions, to allegedly defend our country from terrorists, and all we're really doing is building a work force and bureaucracy that grows ever more restrictive of our freedoms. Everyone seems to trust that the feds will act in our best interests when their own party is in power and enacts ever more stringent measures, but when they are out of power, suddenly we're concerned with civil liberties. Let's keep all of these people's hands and eyes out of our wallets and bedrooms.
There's been a bit of kerfluffle in the news recently about lottery millionaires keeping their food stamps. Paul mentions an even stupider bit of government oversight:
"Months after the 9/11 attacks, some of the dead nineteen hijackers were even reissued their student visas."
Quote of the book:
"No political party has a monopoly on hypocrisy; it seems to be a bipartisan trait."
He seems to have had a fairly ordinary upbringing as the son of a successful doctor, and our sole avowed libertarian congressman from Texas, becoming an optometrist, marrying and raising very presentable children. His book tends to wander on and off topic a bit, and he doesn't do that skillful of a job of weaving his personal narrative into his political philosophy, but overall it's pretty good.
"Voters in our survey said that they believe that the current leadership in both parties has failed to achieve policies that address their most pressing concerns - creating jobs and fixing the economy. Furthermore, respondents were clear that they want a pro-growth agenda, fiscal discipline, limited government, deficit reduction, a free market, and a change from politics as usual."
Contrasting the main stream media's portrayal of the Tea Partiers:
"...when discussing the subject of welfare, liberals are always quick to defend welfare programs despite the many recipients who take advantage of the system. When discussing Islam, respectable journalists are always careful to note that terrorists and radicals do not define that religion. But the Tea Party is regularly held to an entirely different standard, where if a few people show up - out of a crowd of thousands - with signs comparing the president to a fascist or communist dictator it becomes enough to disparage and dismiss the entire movement."
On the subject of who's really governing in Washington:
(regarding the bank bailout bill) "My father, a Congressman, told me that he had banking lobbyists calling him and asking him about certain sections of the bill, and he said 'What bill?' He didn't have a copy yet. They replied, 'We do, would you like to see it?' You know government is out of control when lobbyists have the bills before members of Congress."
He has quite a bit to say about the most recent Republican administration's profligate spending. As one might expect from his father's rhetoric, and his history, Paul is adamant that we must decrease federal spending in all areas, including the heavily Republican-defended Defense budget. He quotes former Reagan advisor Bruce Bartlett:
"The point is that George W. Bush has never demonstrated any interest in shrinking the size of government. And on many occasions, he has increased government significantly...big government conservatism...is a contradiction in terms."
I think many of us in America today have the gut reaction that if we are required to make our household budgets balance to avoid ruin, we must demand that our government also balance its budget, and quit spending needlessly and frivolously, no matter how good its intentions, lest our country also fall into ruin.
On the ever more present security state:
"We should also ask, despite all their groping and intrusive tactics, has the TSA ever caught a single terrorist or intercepted a single bomber? With our vast security apparatus why were there no red flags over Fort Hood terrorist Nidal Malik Hasan or intelligence sharing concerning the Christmas Day underwear bomber? Why, a decade after 9/11, has government not come up with a better method of recognizing frequent fliers and cutting down on unnecessary inconvenience, something a privatized system would likely have already accomplished. Why has the federal government not better addressed our porous borders an illegal immigration problem with eh same level of focus it now devotes to policing American citizens who choose to travel?...how much are we spending to be treated in this manner, and when, exactly, will our lives return to normal"
Amen! I've long been saying that the Israelis already have a method that works incredibly well to keep terrorists off El Al airlines. Why in the world don't we just borrow their methods and technology? I go on the same rant about high speed rail and pebble-bed nuclear reactors, as well - our American arrogance evidently demands that if it wasn't made in America, it's no good. Don't get me started.
However, the point of the preceding quote is that we're spending millions, perhaps billions, to allegedly defend our country from terrorists, and all we're really doing is building a work force and bureaucracy that grows ever more restrictive of our freedoms. Everyone seems to trust that the feds will act in our best interests when their own party is in power and enacts ever more stringent measures, but when they are out of power, suddenly we're concerned with civil liberties. Let's keep all of these people's hands and eyes out of our wallets and bedrooms.
There's been a bit of kerfluffle in the news recently about lottery millionaires keeping their food stamps. Paul mentions an even stupider bit of government oversight:
"Months after the 9/11 attacks, some of the dead nineteen hijackers were even reissued their student visas."
Quote of the book:
"No political party has a monopoly on hypocrisy; it seems to be a bipartisan trait."
He seems to have had a fairly ordinary upbringing as the son of a successful doctor, and our sole avowed libertarian congressman from Texas, becoming an optometrist, marrying and raising very presentable children. His book tends to wander on and off topic a bit, and he doesn't do that skillful of a job of weaving his personal narrative into his political philosophy, but overall it's pretty good.
March 29, 2011
I probably would not have read this book if First Reads hadn't sent it to me. I am very interested in seeing what the Tea Party is all about, and Rand Paul explains it quite well in this book. I hope the Tea Party succeeds in revamping the Republican Party. Go, Rand Paul. I enjoyed reading about his family and their political ideas. I have always been a supporter of his dad ... Ron Paul.
July 14, 2011
An interesting take on the tea party movement from inside. As with many books written by politicians it's repetetive and not very polished writing. It's also more about the Pauls (Ron and Rand) than about the movement, per se.
July 29, 2013
I'm a big fan of the idea that you can't say you disagree with someone if you've never listened to what they actually believe. I'm a big fan of Ron Paul, so I thought I would read his son's book about the Tea Party and see what I thought.
January 12, 2019
Rand Paul is just. So. Reasonable. Reading this in 2019, it's easy to see why Trump stood a chance in the 2016 election. The political process as is just can't stand. I wonder what he would say about his progress after a full Senate term and halfway through another.
June 8, 2011
I read this to see if it would make for good discussion fodder for my "Intro to Politics" class this fall. I'll post a review up on the blog shortly.
August 31, 2012
I'm a huge fan of the Paul dynasty, and I think this book properly explained the Tea Party phenomenon from a "leader" of the movement's perspective.
March 31, 2020
Informative on modern conservatism in the USA.
February 9, 2014
Seriously, do not ask. Just don't make eye contact and back away slowly.
September 16, 2014
Interesting perspective. Turing to learn as much as possible about potential 2016 presidential candidates.
December 20, 2014
Stand with Rand!
September 24, 2016
Thought provokimg
Great story of rand Paul, his climb to the senate and the policies and beliefs of the tea party and why the believe what they believe.
Great story of rand Paul, his climb to the senate and the policies and beliefs of the tea party and why the believe what they believe.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 34 reviews