The Revolution: A Manifesto
by Ron Paul
(Grand Central Publishing) $21
The Revolution, in true dunderheaded Ron Paul fashion, is a
book that was published at least a year too late—not even soon
enough to be a fitting punch line for the presidential campaign whose
one true achievement was successfully renting a blimp. It’s arrived for
the party after everyone else has gone home or passed out, but it’s not
too proud to lecture, loudly, everyone who isn’t paying any
attention.
People have called Paul a Libertarian, but that’s not strictly true;
neither is he a strict Constitutionalist, as many of his single-minded
followers insist. Paul is the kind of nerd who still owns issues of the
Objectivist journal that were published in 1966—he named
his son Rand Paul in honor of Ayn Rand, after all. The president Paul
claims most respect for is the nerdy, ineffectual Taft.
“This is how the founding fathers thought,” he swears again
and again, once even in emphatic italics, claiming that there’s only
one way to read the Constitution. He puffs up at one point like an
ancient high-school civics teacher who’s mad as hell and isn’t going to
take it anymore: “Now isn’t our Constitution a ‘living’ document that
evolves in accordance with experience and changing times, as we’re so
often told? No—a thousand times no.”
By describing what the Constitution means, of course, Paul is really
saying, “How I interpret the Constitution,” which is through an
objectivist lens. But this flimsy philosophical netting only holds
unless Paul personally disagrees with something, as with abortion: “If
we can be so callous as to refer to a growing child in a mother’s womb
as a parasite, I fear for our country’s future all the more.” Paul
continually compares his foes to Nazis, the last-ditch effort of a
mediocre mind trying to defend itself, a tactic generally left to
internet message boards and the guise of anonymity.
He sees no need for things like pollution control, or civil rights,
because he believes that business and the people will straighten things
out. It’s hard not to picture Paul writing the whole book with a quill
pen and wearing a powdered wig. He clearly believes that he’s the only
person fit to interpret the Constitution, and as such, the dictatorship
in his head finally earns the one –ist that explains all of
Paul’s drafty beliefs: He’s the world’s first Ron Paulist.
Ouch! This is bad.
Is this a rough draft for a high school book report? I went to public school, too… but c’mon!
Does the Stranger pay you for this drivel?
Gee, Pete, who’d you vote for in the Republican primaries this year? And what, in particular, is bad about the review?
I don’t usually engage people in the comments field of my stories like this, but you’re clearly huffing and puffing because your kooky little blimp captain isn’t President. If you’re going to criticize, be specific.
Thinly-veiled Ad Hominem attacks now pass for book reviews? I’m astounded.
You seem to confuse interpreting the Constitution with reading it.
How can you read without interpretation? It’s impossible. There is no one way to interpret the Constitution. That’s why we have a legal system.
How can you read without interpretation? It’s impossible. There is no one way to interpret the Constitution. That’s why we have a legal system.
“Kooky little blimp captain”?
“A mediocre mind”?
this supposed to be an objective review?
Ron Paul’s “mediocre mind” has him respected by intellectuals around the world and in a position of power, while yours has you writing obscure book reviews that resemble the rantings of a demamogue.