• "Well written, well researched, and the thesis put forth is well argued.... Woods has opened up an area of historical analysis that should invite further study."
    -Journal of American History

  • "During these times that challenge our freedoms there is no one more qualified to make U.S. history relevant to the fight against big government than Thomas Woods."
    -Barry Goldwater Jr.
    Former Member of Congress

  • "I strongly recommend Woods's work."
    -The Honorable Ron Paul,
    U.S. House of Representatives

  • "Written with great clarity and fluency, making the complex philosophical and theological concepts approachable."
    -Journal of American Studies

  • "A must-read."
    -Barron's

  • "An excellent reading source for anyone interested in financial markets, and much more so for anyone interested in learning about capitalism without all the misinterpretations being thrown about in the financial media."
    -Asia Times

  • "Provocative, well-written, and deserves to be read."
    -Catholic Historical Review

  • "An engaging and important contribution to scholarship on the history of American Catholicism."
    -Journal of the Historical Society

  • "Woods and [co-author Kevin] Gutzman appeal to both left and right in this constitutionalist jeremiad…. The authors' exegeses of the Constitution and court decisions, heavy on original intent arguments, are lucid and telling."
    -Publishers Weekly

  • "A marvelous read. Every chapter taught me something new and unexpected."
    -Tom Bethell, senior editor,
    The American Spectator

  • "The hottest book today is Meltdown, by my friend Tom Woods."
    -Judge Andrew Napolitano, senior judicial analyst,
    FOX News Channel

  • "Should be required reading."
    -Economic Affairs (London)

  • "Woods, one of the best classical liberal [libertarian] scholars of his generation, has once more placed us in his debt with this lucid and tightly argued book."
    -David Gordon, The Mises Review

  • "Tom Woods is one of my dearest allies in the struggle against wrong-headed and dangerous economic policy."
    -Peter Schiff

Chuck Hagel Is — What Else? — ‘Anti-Semitic,’ Say Hysterics

Hagel doesn’t accept 100 percent of the neocon foreign policy program, so he is a vile human being at whom career-destroying epithets will be thrown, over and over again. Interestingly, Richard Haas, who heads the Council on Foreign Relations, in a rare public rebuke criticized senior fellow Elliott Abrams as “over the line” for his “anti-Semite” smear of Hagel.

But as usual, and with thanks to Robert Wenzel, Ben Stein takes the cake. If you support the nomination of Hagel, you are indifferent to the incineration of millions of Jews:

You really cannot, in fairness, blame President Obama for naming “Chuck” Hagel, one of the most clearly anti-Israel, anti-Semitic members of the Senate (or ex-members in his case) to be Secretary of Defense. President Obama has not changed his views on Israel since his first speech at the Democrat convention in 2004, when he made it clear that his sympathies in the Middle East lay with the Palestinians. In a way, you have to admire his consistency. Of course, he has to pay lip service to Israel when he visits Miami Beach, but how he must laugh at the audiences that applaud him….

I hope the people who are supporting Chuck Hagel know that by confirming him, they are cementing at 100 percent that odds that Iran will get a nuclear capability without U.S. interference. Whether Israel can survive an Islamic bomb is questionable at best. This means a vote to confirm Mr. Hagel is a vote that expresses no interest in whether Israel survives.

There isn’t any evidence that Hagel is anti-Semitic, but everyone in American society knows there doesn’t need to be. This is simply how the game is played. If you don’t adopt the party line on the Middle East, you obviously “hate Jews.” Republicans who play this game are the worst hypocrites of all: they can’t protest loudly enough when Democrats accuse them of “hating minorities” because they (in theory, anyway) oppose affirmative action. But as soon as they can play the “hate” card on their own enemies, they do so with glee.

Unlearn the Propaganda!

  • Sabrina Liukin

    Sounds like Piers Morgan talking… If you don’t agree with me politically, you’re a vile person who doesn’t care for children and Jews alike.

  • http://www.facebook.com/TylerKubik2 Tyler Kubik

    I don’t think the question is whether Israel can survive a nuclear bomb from Iran. The question is whether Iran could survive one hundred nuclear bombs from Israel. What a nice piece of propagan…I mean research…by Ben Stein

  • Anonymous

    Man this stuff gets tiring sometimes. Every little thing is anti-semitic. Don’t they know they’ve overused and ruined that word? It doesn’t mean anything anymore.
    -Thorax232
    ——————————————–
    Family Survival Course Book

  • Jimi

    Just because Hagel doesn’t support Israel 100% of the time does not make him a Jew hater. That’s virtually no different than calling someone a racist because they happened to hire a white person over a black person. It’s so stupid and immature. Politics of division.

    The neocon agenda has really screwed up the conservative base. And the sad thing is even a lot of conservatives who claim to not be neocons are really some of their biggest supporters. They don’t realize they’re neocons themselves.

    Remember 10 years ago it was considered to be “unpatriotic” to vote against the Iraq war or vote against the PATRIOT Act? Remember that? At the time only very few conservatives held their own and voted against and didn’t support these measures. Even some conservatives that initially voted for these things at least regretted their votes and support soon afterwards while Bush was still in his first term. And remember when these conservatives were considered to be on the fringe, weird, and un-American by the mainstream? But now, 10 years later, many mainstream conservatives are just starting to realize that Iraq was a mistake. Yet these same conservatives still don’t give these other paleoconservatives — who’ve been right all along — the time of day. And it’s these same paleocons who’ve been predicting the financial collapse as well. But they were never taken seriously either. It boils my blood a bit. It’s insane.

  • kirk

    b. stein said r. paul was anti semitic, as well. r. paul would cut foreign aid across the board, israel included. apparently fairness and equitable treatment are anti semitic in the mind of b. stein, at least where israel is involved.

    it seems it is becoming easier to describe what is not anti semitic.

  • Anon

    Democrats and Republicans are not ‘enemies’, but tight buddies.

    Hagel is a neocon alright, just as republicans are. I doubt Obama and that gang of thugs would let an outsider in. Hagel is one of them. I trust they will pick one of them, and they certainly did with Hagel.

    Hagel has noted things like the Israeli lobby is ‘intimidating’, etc.. Those kinds of comments probably is what has people labeling him as an anti-semite. I don’t think these same people had a problem when he was in the Senate and voted just as his repub/dem neocon counterparts did.

    Hagel is disturbing in not acknowledging that jihadists use their Islamic religion to justify killings and terrorizing with threats.

  • Jeremy

    Sigh….You know….this “you’re anti-Semitic” if you don’t worship Israel is getting VERY tiresome.

  • Franklin

    They are bereft of arguments and resort to libelous insults. It works.

  • JP
  • guest

    For the Neocons, the issue isn’t about minorities, or hating people who have a different religion.

    The Left has historically been NOTORIOUSLY anti-semetic (groups like Code Pink come to mind), because they believe that it’s “Zionism” that’s responsible for our exploitative paper money system, and they believe that Capitalism would be exploitative even without paper money.

    Many Jews are in high positions within banking, so, in their view, Zionism must be the problem.

    Conservatives may be wrong in making their support of Israel a national issue (America really does need to butt out of other nations’ affairs), but the Left is wrong for siding with those for whom it is a religious duty to subjugate and kill Jews; A consistent Muslim wants to kill Jews. It’s in their Koran.

    (Also, look into Taqqiya – it’s a real threat.)

    Conservatives, on the other hand, wouldn’t care less about the Muslims except that they are perceived as nut jobs who will issue Fatwahs for any reason at all, and desire to subjugate the rest of the world under Shariah laws.

    Yes, the Conservatives need to be educated about America’s [collectivist] imperialism; But once you can show them that our country has gone to war to secure oil for a country to whom it didn’t belong, then they are as horrified as they are over crimes committed by the Communists.

    As Tom Woods has noticed, it’s easier for him to reach those on the Right. That’s because we believe our government has been attempting to obey the Constitution. When we find that it hasn’t, we oppose our government; Or, alternatively, when we find that we’ve misunderstood the intent of the Founding Fathers, then we want to change our understanding – because we understand that a correct understanding of the Constitution is the basis for our government’s legitimacy, and we don’t want to be taken advantage of by our own government.

    So, those who oppose Israel are very much likely to be Leftists who blame – and see, it’s not America, PER SE – free markets (and by EXTENTION, America and Israel) for poverty in the world.

    Conservatives don’t hate brown people. They [generally] believe in private property rights and the rule of law, even if they don’t understand what that implies for the role [or lack thereof] of government.

    Conservatives are wrong for believing that the government can have a territorial monopoly such that foreigners may be kept off of non-private lands within the collectivist national border; But the belief in a national border is based on the belief in contract rights. Only parties to a contract get a say in the matter.

    And that’s true as far as it goes.

    But since there’s no such thing as “publicly owned” resources, then no one has a right to prohibit anyone from doing anything to a non-private resource. So, conservatives have unwittingly adopted a collectivist belief about government.

    But notice that the basis of their belief about illegal aliens is not race-based. It’s based on a belief in property rights. Conservatives don’t care what color person is a party to what is percieved to be a property-rights-based contract – so long as that person intends to adhere to the contract. Otherwise, they can go find another contract to which they wish to be a party.

    I invite the Conservatives to check out these resources:

    Ron Paul Predicted 9/11 a Decade Ago!!!!!!!!!!!!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hJTisovvjc

    Is Ron Paul serious? Blowback in 1979 from a 1953 coup?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldgbOxDX6DE

    War, Ron Paul, and Conservatism
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLUoWhWsOWk

    The Phony Case for Presidential War Powers
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkZT96zJrUQ

  • http://www.facebook.com/charlie.giargiari Charlie Giargiari

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCoNjwaHUZk

    Did you see this on Meet the Press this weekend Tom?

    “There’s a sense among his critics, that he views this in an even-handed way. That they equally share the blame, Israelis and Palestinians, for the failure to achieve peace.” – David Gregory referring to Hagel

    Even-handed!?!?

    Equal Blame!?!?

    How dare he! Doesn’t he know that the Israelis are far superior to those worthless “invented people” in Palestine!

  • Anonymous

    Interestingly, the same people that are very quick to yell “anti-semite” are often the same people who complain of being wrongfully called a racist when they criticize Obama.

    Stein may be an exception here, but this is very often the case. As for this instance of yelling “anti-semite”, I would just like to say that I’ve never read a Stein piece that was factual, or that could stand even the smallest criticism or challenge. The guy’s a hack.

  • Anonymous

    I have no interest in whether Israel or the United State survives.