How to Overthrow the Government

Take it Back!

Ms. Huffington has hit a positive cord within the American body politic. She offers great advise for getting involved in politics and returning the government back to the people, combined with terrific biting quips. A great resource and 'how to' book.

1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

Not bad--Got the greatest yet it's interesting

This book might not be the written by the world's great political commentator, but it offers an interesting point of view and sets forth her positions in a clear manner and with conviction. Have I read better books about the state of the government? Yes, but it is good to see other opinions especially when they are so well articulated. Even if you don't agree with any of her issues, she does makes her points well.

A valiant effort

Huffington's depiction of an unequal society run by special interests is not only accurate, but wonderfully illustrated by countless examples gained from her years writing as a columnist. Unfortunately Huffington's work, although moderately well-researched, is scattered rather than a cohesive plan for change. The previous reviewer has missed the point entirely, and I'm guessing that's probably because he/she's one of the minority who have benefited greatly from the 'booming economy', not one of the majority who's income has remained static or fallen, despite economic 'good times', as the business press constantly informs us. Bottom line: if you regularly read politics and economics, particularly from a leftist approach, there's really not much new here. On the other hand, this is an approachable and readable book--Huffington's anger and indignance may serve to mobilize those who haven't got it yet.

Democrats and Republicans the same??

How odd can you get? Here we are in the most prosperous time in the history of the planet and in the most prosperous country on the planet, and Ms. Huffington wants us to overthrow the gov't that has played such a central role in everything that has happened to get us here? A book titled 'Counting our Blessings' would be far, far more logical. It would seem a sad confluence of events from her personal and professional life and has led her to be a strident reformer at exactly the least rational time in the history of the planet for reform. Accordingly, she stretches far to find issues that make sense and comes up very short time after time. She even downgrades her own arguments by calling them, pet peeves rather then real issues. Her biggest pet peeve seems to be that Archer Daniels Midland gets $300,000,000 a year in ethanol subsidies to nicely symbolize how special interest groups now run the gov't at the expense of little people. The truth is: 1) many agree with ethanol subsidies as insurance against the day when our oils supply finally runs out 2) The voters are a special interest who can vote out any politician who is too much in the pocket of any special interest. Any politician who takes a penny or casts one vote does so knowing his opponent in the next election will hold him fully accountable. 3) If the gov't really were for sale then the Nazi's, or big oil, or socialists, or Catholics would buy it, but instead it seems perfectly stable. 4) Given the unprecedented and widespread current prosperity it is silly to even consider the notion that special interests run the gov't for themselves. 5) We are all free to organize, raise money, and lobby the gov't , even if we want to lobby against what other lobbies are for. Perhaps her second biggest pet peeve is that very few people vote. She considers it 'scandalous' and just ghastly when in reality there is nothing to be concerned about. It is so tough to be a good reformer when there is so little to reform! If we passed a law that everyone had to vote then what: 1) Germans voted a lot and they voted for Hitler so we know that voting doesn't mean voting intelligently. It can actually lead to worse gov't; especially if you force people who didn't care enough or know enough to vote on their own. It is actually more logical to have voter qualification tests to insure that voters bring some expertise into the voting booth, and this would probably reduce rather than enlarge the electorate. It would seem you have to know something to vote intelligently just as you have to know something to perform surgery intelligently and we can be sure Ms. Huffington knows this at least when she needs surgery. Perhaps her third biggest pet peeve is that the Democrats and Republicans are the same; so voters, she claims, have no choice really. Well, this is just a self serving lie; at best. For example, the Democrats and Hillary wanted to socialize medicine while the republicans wanted to shut down the gov't. Several ratings groups, like the ADA assign numbers to each member of congress based on the way he/she votes and, surprise, Democrats overwhelmingly vote very differently from republicans. In fact Republicans strongly tend to vote in a Jeffersonian way for small gov't while Democrats tend to vote in a Hamiltonian way for larger gov't. This has always been the real and only central issue in American and world history and Ms. Huffington shamelessly steers the reader away from it. I would recommend to the reader 'Understanding The Difference Between Democrats and Republicans' which is still the classic on the real issue that has always faced America and the world and the real issue we have always and will always face each time we enter the voting booth.

0 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

No text was provided for this review.