It's not perfect. A stronger proofing would eliminate some errors - ''hear, hear'' not ''here, here'', ''out of sight'' not ''out of site'' and ''borders'' not ''boarders'', for example. And the time travel section could have been more subtle, I think. From the moment the Founding Fathers arrive in the twenty-first century, the lessons they are given by Dr Benton and his team read as polemic. I think Hendrick could have played his cards closer to his chest for a while and been both more successful at drawing in undecided readers and creating some narrative tension. Instead, he rather played to the gallery. Not that there's anything wrong with playing to the gallery, if that's your purpose!
But these are nitpicks. For British readers in particular, ''What if They Knew'' provides a full-throated, salty, polemical and, above all, passionate advancement of the US conservative case for what's best for its nation, rooted in its founding history. Individual freedom,personal responsibility, small government, patriotism - it's all here. And it asks the question: did the Founding Fathers get it right? Could it all have been different had they been given the gift of foresight?
That one, you'll have to decide for yourselves.