Best State & Local Government
Subsequent immigrants didn't confront or assimilate into an “American” or “Canadian” culture, but rather into one of the eleven distinct regional ones that spread over the continent each staking out mutually exclusive territory. -- Publishers Weekly (Fall 2011 "Top Ten Politics" pick). "[American Nations'] compelling explanations and apt descriptions will fascinate anyone with an interest in politics, regional culture, or history" -- Publishers Weekly (starred review). "[A] compelling and informative attempt to make sense of the regional divides in North America in general and this country in particular....Woodard provides a bracing corrective to an accepted national narrative that too often overlooks regional variations to tell a simpler and more reassuring story. ".
Reviews
Find Best Price at Amazon"Whereas the first two-thirds were well-reasoned and well-supported, the last third devolved into stereotypes and generalities, and contained more than a few downright errors, particularly concerning the modern Deep South and Greater Appalachia. I could list at least a half-dozen factual errors in his presentation concerning the practice and influence of Evangelical Christianity in the Bible Belt, for instance, but would rather not bog down this review with nit-picking."
"One of the best books I've read on America and it's history."
"I have given it to at least 5 friends as a gift and the conversations it leads to are always fascinating."
"This is a fascinating, well-written book, introducing a conceptual framework that was completely new to me."
"The map on the "American Nations" cover showed me that I grew up roughly where the Deep South, Appalachia, and El Norte meet in eastern Texas. We said we were "Scotch-Irish" but seemed to have no knowledge of or interest in how we came to be there, nor did I ever know anyone who was aware that there were early Spanish missions in the pine woods of East Texas or that there had been a large Cherokee village not four miles from my home. Later I learned that my own family had entered the U.S. in South Carolina from Barbados in the 1680s; little is known about them except that they were poor whites, so now we know there is a good chance they were indentured servants to Barbadian slave lords. Now I have some insight into features of my county that have puzzled me for decades: why the tiny community where I attended school in the 1950s and 60s was clustered around its original plantation house, Cumberland Presbyterian church, and cotton fields (it was founded by a slave-holding family from Savannah, Georgia in the 1840s or 50s); why my neighbors had such casual contempt for blacks, Jews, Mexicans, Indians, Catholics, Chinese, and all other foreigners; why Ku Klux Klan actions were still fresh in older folks' memories; why blacks lived either in their own parts of town literally across the tracks or entirely separately in their own towns or isolated communities tucked away in the woods; why my parents were so puzzled that "our Negroes" seemed dissatisfied with our hand-me-down clothes and an occasional pig (I recall puzzled discussions of "What do they want?" ); why there was a deeply ingrained presumption that gentlemen rode horses and peasants walked, so any poor farmer that came into oil money bought horses immediately (Deep South cavaliers influence); why there was hardly any familiarity with or emphasis on attending college, and disdain for the (rare) "know it all college boy" (Appalachian ignorance and apathy influenced by Deep South resistance to education for the masses); why employers referred to employees as "hands"; why our relatives in far southwest Texas seemed to us to live in a different country (they did - El Norte), while relatives in Tennessee and business associates in Mississippi seemed to come from an earlier and more violent time; why Cajuns in south Louisiana and southeast Texas seemed like such an anomaly in the Deep South in their Catholicism and complete disregard of racial boundaries (New France egalitarianism); maybe even why some blacks in East Texas practiced a strange mixture of Southern Baptist services and voodoo lore - one local black church was even named the Voodoo Baptist Church, and the pastor roamed the area on foot wearing an animal skin cape and carrying a long shepherd's staff (West Africa via the West Indies). Lastly, I did not think Woodard unfairly favored the Yankees; his description showed the harsh, violent, and meddlesome parts of their Puritan cultural heritage along with the elements we still cherish (for much more detail see Fischer's "Albion's Seed"). The Deep South has been a reluctant participant in the U.S. federation and has routinely made threats to withdraw since the Articles of Confederation days; in the 2010 mid-term election we again heard southern politicians talk of secession."
"This book changed my basic view of American history."
National Book Critics Circle Award Winner New York Times Bestseller. A New York Times Notable Book of the Year. A Washington Post Notable Nonfiction Book of the Year. A Boston Globe Best Book of 2016. A Chicago Review of Books Best Nonfiction Book of 2016. From the Civil War to our combustible present, acclaimed historian Carol Anderson reframes our continuing conversation about race, chronicling the powerful forces opposed to black progress in America. A sobering primer on the myriad ways African American resilience and triumph over enslavement, Jim Crow and intolerance have been relentlessly defied by the very institutions entrusted to uphold our democracy." "White Rage is a riveting and disturbing history that begins with Reconstruction and lays bare the efforts of whites in the South and North alike to prevent emancipated black people from achieving economic independence, civil and political rights, personal safety, and economic opportunity." "White Rage belongs in a place of honor on the shelf next to other seminal books about the African-American experience such as James Baldwin's The Fire Next Time , Isabel Wilkerson's The Warmth of Other Suns , and Michelle Alexander's The New Jim Crow ." "[A] powerful survey of American history as seen in the violent white reactions to black progress, from Reconstruction to the great migration to the current political landscape." "Anderson has shown, with her well-sourced (she has several hundred detailed footnotes) and readable book, why the fights over race and access to the perquisites of American citizenship grind on . White Rage lends perspective and insight for those of us who are willing to confront, study and learn from the present situation in this country." Though stretching a stand-alone essay into an extended study doesn’t work very often, White Rage operates efficiently and elegantly, offering readers new intelligence about American experience. Like a meticulous prosecutor assembling her case, Anderson lays out a profoundly upsetting vision of an America driven to waves of reactionary white anger whenever it’s confronted with black achievement." Reading through all the frightfully inventive ways in which America makes racial inequality a matter of law (and order) has a dizzying effect: like watching a quick-cut montage of social injustice spanning nearly half a millennium." "[F]or readers who want to understand the sense of grievance and pain that many African Americans feel today, White Rage offers a clearly written and well-thought-out overview of an aspect of U.S. history with which the country is still struggling to come to terms." "Anderson’s mosaic of white outrage deserves contemplation by anyone interested in understanding U.S. race relations, past and present." We are tethered to history, and with White Rage , Anderson adeptly highlights both that past and the tenacious grip race holds on the present. "White Rage is a harrowing account of our national history during the century and a half since the Civil War--even more troubling for what it exposes about our present, our deep and abiding racial divide. - Natasha Trethewey, Winner of the Pulitzer Prize for NATIVE GUARD and Two-term Poet Laureate of the United States. - David Von Drehle, author of RISE TO GREATNESS: ABRAHAM LINCOLN AND AMERICA'S MOST PERILOUS YEAR.
Reviews
Find Best Price at Amazon"It grew out of a 2014 Washington Post oped article Professor Carol Anderson of the Emory History Department wrote in response to the Ferguson, Missouri protests but also has root in her revulsion for the racially motivated attacks on the character and policies of President Obama. I accept her central argument that Black economic and political advances since the Civil War have prompted systematic politically motivated backlash. Professor Anderson’s best chapters are on the Great Migration and resistance to the Supreme Court’s 1954 Brown decision repudiating the legal doctrine of separate but equal segregation. Booth heard Lincoln lay out this proposal, told a compatriot it meant Black equality and vowed to “put him over.” We can’t know what Lincoln would have done in the face of persistent resistance to emancipation and Reconstruction but I believe it would have resembled the Civil Rights measures the Republican Congress passed. It does not distinguish between the cautious and unimaginative Waite Court (1874-88) and the hostile Fuller Court (1888-1910) which repudiated every opinion the Waite Court issued that could—with vigorous DOJ prosecution—have protected at least federal voting rights It lets the Court serve as a scapegoat for increasing Northern voter resistance to vigorous Army and DOJ suppression of terrorism. Anderson also neglected the 1890 failure of a Republican Senate majority to pass voting rights enforcement legislation the House crafted to build on Waite Court Fifteenth Amendment opinions."
"The book indicts both northern and southern states, which complicates the grade-school stereotype of a racist white South and an innocent, non-racist white North."
"A well-researched and deeply disturbing book about how states and the federal government have pursued an intentional, comprehensive and ultimately devastatingly effective effort to disenfranchise African Americans from, literally, almost the day after the Emancipation Proclamation was signed. “…white rage has undermined democracy, warped the Constitution, weakened the nation’s ability to compete economically, squandered billions of dollars on baseless incarcerations, rendered an entire region sick, poor and woefully undereducated, and left cities nothing less than devastated."
"This book is AMAZING."
"Great read with lots of historical context for the continued systemic oppression in our society."
"Should be required reading for everyone."
From the email marketing director of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign and the co-founder of Run for Something comes an essential and inspiring guide that encourages and educates young progressives to run for local office, complete with contributions from elected officials and political operatives. Here’s what you do next: Run for something. To be specific: Run for local office and become the change you want to see in the world. It doesn’t matter if you don’t understand the first thing about running for office, or never even imagined you would. Amanda Litman, experienced in hard-fought state and national election campaigns, is here to give you guidance as well as wisdom and insight from elected officials and political operatives she interviewed for this book. He was literally a joke—the reality TV star was the butt of President Obama’s White House Correspondents’ Association dinner speech in 2011. (I’d say fair and square, but the Russians had something to do with it, so let’s leave it at he won the electoral college and move on.). “When I was knocking on doors I heard whispers and grumblings about me being gay, and I would say, ‘Listen, I’m not scared or afraid of my past. Let me be very clear right off the bat: I’m proudly gay, I’m HIV-positive, I’m Puerto Rican, and I’m formerly homeless. They want somebody who can relate to them—not somebody from a different stratosphere.”. —NELSON ROMAN, city councilor of Holyoke, MA, on owning his story. In 2014, Pew Research Center surveyed the adult population and found that approximately 2 percent of Americans have ever run for federal, local, or state office. And according to Pew’s “Profile of the 2%,” people who seek office tend to be exactly what we picture: white, male, and well-educated.1. “MALE”: Women make up only a quarter of the people who’ve run for office and are overwhelmingly underrepresented at all levels of government. The City University of New York Institute for State and Local Governance put out a study in the fall of 2016 that breaks it down.2. (I’ll get into who does this “recruiting” later, but if you’re impatient to find out, here’s a sneak preview: It’s often a bunch of men who work at a party committee, who ask their friends to run.). Countless academic studies show that we underestimate our abilities and assume we need to be even more qualified than men in order to run for office, or apply for that job, or raise our hand to speak. Every time I read an article that highlights research like this, alarm bells of self-recognition go off in my head. There are clear systemic problems holding women back: We’re often the heads of our households and/or primary caretakers of our kids or parents. The sad reality is that if women are going to be fairly represented in government, more of us will need to make the sacrifice, do the hard work, and run anyway. Finally, “OLD:” More than 40 percent of adults who have *ever* run for office are sixty-five and older, directly impacting the makeup of our government. But the only way you fix it is by running, winning, and then changing the system to let more people like you in. For example: Oprah Winfrey gave an interview after the 2016 election in which she told Bloomberg’s David Rubenstein she had always assumed she wasn’t qualified to be president. Oprah, the queen and dragon slayer herself, believed she wasn’t qualified to serve in public office. It is certainly going to be harder if you live in a place that voted for Trump by fifty points. But don’t wait for a plan on how to talk to Trump voters to come down from some mythical unicorn of a leader. You’re the progressive ambassador to your community—even if you don’t get their votes, you’ll make sure they aren’t just hearing a singular viewpoint. No one ever says to me: “I live in a competitive district where at any given point, either a Republican or a Democrat could win.” Whether you’d describe your community as red, blue, or something else entirely, remember: no one has it easy. However, they are sometimes shortsighted and often burdened by so much institutional bullshit that Democrats’ victories are frequently in spite of their work and not because of it. In the past, this has inherently limited the talent pool to a particular network, perpetuating a cycle of typically older white men and their staffs or friends running for office. It also limits the geographic reach of the party: If you’re a Democrat who wants to run in an otherwise safe district, you’re on your own. Until people vote, money is the clearest measure of which candidate is able to get support in a meaningful way. This means the party tends to search for people with wealthy networks, since a candidate’s first round of fundraising prospects will come from his or her immediate circle. Voter files (or subsets of them) make up the initial list of who candidates needs to talk to. Each time you change your address, the party needs to update your profile in the voter file. The party staff believes they know who deserves that help, where they should focus their limited resources, and who should ultimately win. For one thing, the party’s track record is iffy at best (in no small part because there’s a lot that happens during an election that is entirely out of anyone’s control). Put aside for a moment judgment on whether that’s good or bad—it’s proof that the pool of resources available for political engagement is growing. When the party limits access to important resources that candidates need to be successful, either because they don’t want to “play in the primary” or have chosen to protect the incumbent at the expense of allowing a new voice to enter the race and have a chance to succeed, the party is discouraging people from showing up at all. Nancy Pelosi and Kamala Harris come from California, a state with rich Democratic leadership. Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton came from New York, and President Barack Obama came from Chicago—both places that are flooded with Democrats. When Democratic candidates have to work harder, engage with voters, and articulate their positions, the party ultimately becomes stronger. So if you want to run against a Democratic incumbent, take a look at who represents you and decide whether you can make a compelling and positive case for what you believe and why your leadership would matter. I think there’s an automatic disdain for young candidates who are running for high levels of office for the first time. People think you need experience—to have been on city council or a county commissioner, or some other entry-level position in politics—before you can move up to the next level. But in Michigan, from my perspective, we need people who haven’t walked the traditional pathways to power to run for office. Rick Perry is the secretary of energy despite saying in a presidential debate that he’d nix the entire agency. Ben Carson said himself that he wasn’t qualified to run a federal agency and was then appointed the housing and urban development secretary. Maybe you’re a regular at the community center bingo night and you know all the folks at the local deli. You can get help from people who lovingly geek out over the tax code and who will patiently walk you through every line of a new zoning ordinance. You do have to be passionate about what drives you and be willing to listen, learn, and accept that objective truths exist and facts matter. I think the merits of being a good leader are surrounding yourself with people who know more than you or are experts in different things. We need more teachers, scientists, technologists, social workers, nurses, doctors, stay-at-home parents, veterans, janitors, professors, students, entrepreneurs, writers, artists, and whatever-you-ares to run for office. Your experience and your perspective will make you better at governing; you’ll come at this with fresh eyes and a unique viewpoint. There’s a concept in punditry and media theory called the Overton window—also known as “the window of discourse”—used to describe the range of ideas the public will accept. They’re the ones who get a little sassy on Twitter, or who Snapchat like a real person, or who post family recipes on the internet every holiday. When Trump signed an executive order promising to halt funding to municipalities that didn’t cooperate with his immigration rulings, mayors fought back. When Trump announced his intention to pull out of the Paris Accord, devastating the global fight to prevent climate change, city and state leadership stepped up to sign on themselves. Things That Don’t Make a Real, Tangible, Long-Term Difference in People’s Lives. Donald Trump can govern basically unchecked by Congress because we (“we” being progressives who give a shit about what happens to our country) didn’t push ourselves in a big way to get involved on the local level. According to partisanship scores commonly used by academics, Democrats have gotten a little bit more liberal and Republicans have gotten a lot more conservative.4. On the congressional level, gerrymandering has created a system in which the only contest that really matters is the primary. And that’s how we got a Congress that seems unlikely to ever impeach Donald Trump (although I hope I’m wrong about that)—and in fact will stand behind even his craziest acts and proclamations. (Best way to fix it: Get more progressives like you into local government and pushing for independent commissions to draw new boundaries. They’ve moved around hundreds of millions of dollars to fund state and local races with a particular goal: Win state Houses so they can gerrymander the fuck out of Congress (and drag policy-making on the local level as far right as they can). The Koch brothers have invested huge amounts of money in this and in talent development writ large—they’ve even set up an organization called the Leadership Institute, with an annual budget of more than $30 million. Democrats are a bit behind on this, for reasons that are beyond the scope of this book and are regularly debated on Twitter, if you’re interested. There is a type of campaigning that some folks have called “conviction politics”—that’s a jargony way of saying something simple: Run on your values and ideas rather than trying to adapt to fit the consensus or take positions that are popular in the polls. Saying your true opinion is honestly just so much easier than trying to figure out where the people are and then following their lead. If you’re not being true to your gut, you’ll end up tired on the trail one day and slipping up, doing your campaign more long-term damage by undermining your own credibility.
Reviews
Find Best Price at Amazon"I have started getting involved, going to democratic meetings, I am an independent."
"Bought multiple copies!"
"Great read/learning material if you’re into politics."
"the publisher put together a book that really *feels* like a manual."
"This book makes a good case for the power of local politics, and will leave you feeling a bit more empowered than before."
"It does at times go into the “silly” but I think that is just how the author chose to convey her style."
"It is very easy to feel hopeless and disempowered during the era of Trump, but this book will help you do something about it -- to turn anxiety into action."
Best Federal Government
Now free from the constraints of running, Hillary takes you inside the intense personal experience of becoming the first woman nominated for president by a major party in an election marked by rage, sexism, exhilarating highs and infuriating lows, stranger-than-fiction twists, Russian interference, and an opponent who broke all the rules. In these pages, she describes what it was like to run against Donald Trump, the mistakes she made, how she has coped with a shocking and devastating loss, and how she found the strength to pick herself back up afterward. It is worth reading.” — The New York Times “ What Happened is a raw and bracing book, a guide to our political arena.” — The Washington Post “The writing in What Happened is engaging — Clinton is charming and even funny at times, without trying to paint herself in too flattering of a light…. While What Happened records the perspective of a pioneer who beat an unprecedented path that stopped just shy of the White House, it also covers territory that many women will recognize.... She demonstrates that she can mine her situation for humor.” — People “This is an important book, and anyone who’s worried by what happened last November 8 should pick it up.” — Entertainment Weekly Hillary Rodham Clinton is the first woman in US history to become the presidential nominee of a major political party.
Reviews
Find Best Price at Amazon"She was less convincing on this front as virtually nothing Sanders said against HRC during the primary battle was new; his criticisms of HRC were general talking points before Sanders ever entered the contest. The book whitewashes the DNC's actions against Sanders during the primary, actions that turned a good number of Sanders supporters (HRC continues use of the odious "Bernie Bros." epithet) against her. HRC praises the hard work of Donna Brazile but fails to mention how Brazile was caught stealing debate questions (for the debate with Sanders) from CNN and then leaking those questions to HRC and not to Sanders. What is telling in HRC's memoir and analysis are her own blind spots, her weakness as a campaigner who fails to inspire, her over-reliance on her status as "first female Presidential nominee from a major party" (53% of white women voted for Trump, but HRC doesn't examine why), and her refusal to acknowledge how the DNC, during the primary, alienated the progressive voters she would later need to win the general election. (Even here, though, we have figures now indicating that 12% of Sanders supporters went over to Trump, whereas in 2008, after HRC lost the primary to Obama, 24% of her supporters went over to McCain. In other words, Sanders supporters were still more supportive of HRC than HRC's supporters were of Obama by 2-to-1.)."
"I wrote a verified purchase review and it has been deleted 3 times."
"I'm a non-partisan who has actually read this book and have to agree with many of the negative reviews here."
"what happened to the negative reviews?"
"In my previous review I referenced her book Hard Choices...."Believe it or not I actually liked this book.""
"I voted for Bill Clinton in both Presidential elections and voted for Hillary Clinton against Trump last year. I think that there are some good things to be said about Hillary Clinton. But still, this book seems to crystallize for me a lot of the problems that I have with Hillary Clinton at this moment in time, and the problems that I have with the Democratic party, and in general why I think that they are currently doing so badly. Although Clinton does attempt in the book to explain why she lost the election, in the end, she really seems to have no idea. If instead the book had been called "What Campaigning in the 2016 Election Was Like for Me," likely I would feel comfortable giving the book another star. So if the goal of the reader is to learn more about Hillary Clinton, as a person, then perhaps this book is worth reading. What the book does not do is to provide any reasoned or persuasive discussion on what I see as the key questions that political leaders need to be discussing with regard to the 2016 election and the current state of affairs. In my opinion, the biggest question that Clinton does not discuss at all in this book is how much the Democratic party has turned all of its focus toward the goal of making rich people (like Jeff Bezos, no?). Not once in the book does she consider the possibility that perhaps the reason that Sanders was popular was because the Democratic party (as well as the Republican party) had focused too much of its attention on the 1% (or, more specifically, the 0.0001%) and had left the rest of the population out in the cold. In general, the impression that I get from this book about Clinton in general - in terms of her political life and her personal life - is that she believes she is right about everything, that she is very very defensive about the idea that she is right about everything, and that she is very slow to change in the face of new information. All of those are the LAST things that I would use if I got sick, and the idea of Hillary Clinton forcing them on me anyway makes me wonder what other kinds of outmoded, counterproductive things she would have tried to force on the American public had she become President."
"I voted for her."
Best Legal System
Scalia Speaks will give readers the opportunity to encounter the legendary man more fully, helping them better understand the jurisprudence that made him one of the most important justices in the Court's history and introducing them to his broader insights on faith and life. "Reading Scalia Speaks — the marvelous collection of his speeches, lovingly compiled by his son and a former law clerk — brought Nino back to life for me." -Alan M. Dershowitz, The New York Times Book Review "This marvelous book surely will be required reading for anyone seeking to understand the mind of this great jurist and conservative thinker. “A treasure that captures Justice Antonin Scalia’s brilliance, wit, faith, humility and wide range of knowledge...Scalia speaks in his own words in this magnificent volume that should be on the bookshelf of every educated American.”. - Washington Post. Christopher J. Scalia , the eighth of Justice Scalia's nine children and a former professor of English, works at a public relations firm near Washington, D.C. His book reviews and political commentary have appeared in The Wall Street Journal , The Washington Post , TheWeekly Standard , and elsewhere.
Reviews
Find Best Price at Amazon"In his later years on the bench, he became the most prominent member of the federal judiciary as he published law review articles, granted television interviews, and gave talks across the country. In a speech to the Dominican Order, the justice explained Thomas Aquinas believed any written code opposed to natural law was immoral and invalid. For him, Roe v. Wade and its case law progeny were a tragedy, not just as a member of the Catholic faith, but also for reading into the United States Constitution a right to abortion contained nowhere in the text. Another was the concern of many that the Constitution is a relatively barebones text and legislatures are often lethargic or unresponsive in crafting laws supported by broad swaths of the public, so Justice Scalia’s philosophy did not account for the challenges of the modern era. Whether those criticisms have merit is left to each individual reader, but undoubtedly Justice Scalia’s views continue to have an outsized influence on legal interpretation. Justice Scalia covered a wide range of other issues, including his general hostility to using foreign law to interprete American rights outside rare circumstances, eulogies lamenting the passage of time and friends, his pride in being a Catholic and Italian-American (emphasis on American), the value of a college education for newly-minted graduates, and an encomium on turkey hunting that may be the best defense of sportsmanship by a federal official since Herbert Hoover’s advocacy of fly fishing. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg noted in her touching foreword, “Now and then he would call me, or stop by my chambers, to point out a slip I had made in an opinion draft. Justice Scalia homed in on all the soft spots, energizing me to strengthen my presentation.” With the bitter partisan bickering that plagues both the Republican and Democratic parties, it is nice to know that tucked away in the far corners of government some people still have the capacity for personal respect during instances of professional disagreement. Even on occasions when one disagreed with him, the force of his character and intellectual acumen challenged his opponent’s preconceived notions and pushed them to make their own arguments sharper."
"The speeches range on faith, character, tradition, ethnicity, education, turkey hunting, and even the games and sports that a young Nino played on the streets of Queens in the 1940s."
"Beautifully written....Judge Scalia is a legend and, I believe, history will show him to be one of the most honorable judges to sit onthe bench... a man of great wisdom. In reading this book, the reader is quick to relate to this great man and his great compassion for those he serves...ALL the people."
"Each speech is expertly seasoned with lovely and personal stories that cover the span of his life, thus, making each one a "delicious" read, leaving the reader craving the next one. At a time when America seems so divided by ideological lines, this book reminds us that we are blessed to live in a country where the character and contributions of one of us transcends politics and that true affection for those with whom we disgree is possible because people are so much more then any particular point of view. One final thought, as a longtime admirer of Justice Scalia who always seemed so much larger than life and exceptional in every way, I was thrilled to learn that he was not, much like me, a gifted speller."
"This is a must read for everyone."
Best Legislative Branch
Early marriage and motherhood seemed to put even that dream out of reach, but fifteen years later she was a distinguished law professor with a deep understanding of why people go bankrupt. In this passionate, funny, rabble-rousing book, Warren shows why she has chosen to fight tooth and nail for the middle class—and why she has become a hero to all those who believe that America's government can and must do better for working families. This is a passionate memoir of one woman’s personal story and the larger story of corruption in financial circles and the need for reform that balances the interests of the American middle class against those of the corporate sector. HIGH-DEMAND BACKSTORY: The senior senator from Massachusetts and former Harvard law professor here gives the backstory on her fight for the middle class in a memoir that is sure to attract interest beyond the book-review section.
Reviews
Find Best Price at Amazon"I didn't know much of anything about Warren before reading this book."
"A Fighting Chance is a great read -- it's well written (very readable), interesting on both personal & professional levels, very informative from the perspective of real/common people's lives, and well referenced."
"Very interesting reading."
"Outstanding book!"
"She has studied why people go into bankruptcy, and she strongly disagrees with Senators and Wall Street bankers who blame deadbeat borrowers for the problem."
"Elizabeth Warren tells the story of her amazing life - going from the daughter of middle class parents, working her way through college, becoming a law professor and finally a U.S."
"But I love her now."
"Made me appreciate E. Warren (personally) and made me appreciate the perspective on how our society has changed."