• "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

G. Gordon Liddy: Tea Partiers Need to Read Nullification

Here’s my interview with G. Gordon Liddy from earlier today.  He really likes Nullification.  This was my third time on his program, and the first on this subject.

  • Ivan

    Dear Tom,

    I am little worried that you consider Obamacare’s unconstitutional mandate to be not suitable for nullification. Obamacare repeal is an issue that has a very broad support at this moment. If we cannot mobilize enough support on the state level to abolish it, in spite of possible federal retaliation, then what we CAN do? Why then all this fuss about nullification?

    I think that you strongly downplayed the significance of the nullification procedure itself in this interview. Yes, nullification is a fine, elegant, “libertarian” solution, but please don’t try this at home, because federal government is not going to be nice to you. They are going to punish you financially. What’s the purpose of nullification as an alternative strategy at all, if the possibility of federal retaliation is the prohibitive counter-reason for action? Maybe, to nullify the less important laws for which federal government is not sufficiently interested to employ its financial sanctions?

  • http://www.thomasewoods.com Tom Woods

    You misunderstand me. My concern isn’t that the federal government won’t be nice, but that the state governments may be irrelevant in a case like that. How do you stop the federal government from grabbing people’s money?

    The book notes at the end that it may well be necessary to follow Professor Randy Barnett and his federalism amendment, which would restore real teeth to the states. That would make it much easier for the states to assert themselves. But in many instances the states can assert themselves right now, and that is the point of nullification.

  • http://tonyjamessite@yahoo.com Tony James

    Thomas, I enjoyed you on “Freedom Watch<" and am reading your book and think it is very informative. I am trying to straighten my thought out. Please take a second. You refer to Thomas Jefferson as a republican,but A. Lincoln is regarded as the first president elect republican. Republicans are offshoots of the whig party which has its roots in England. Why refer to him as a republican if he was part of the whig party unless this is another case of liberal miseducation. Thanks,
    TONY

  • http://www.thomasewoods.com Tom Woods

    Jefferson was definitely a Republican, but it is the Republican Party of Lincoln from which the modern GOP descends.

  • Ivan

    Tom, is there any indication that Glenn Beck or Rush, or any other conservative “big guns” could invite you in their program?

  • Gary

    I have listened to this book at audible.com.
    It is essential reading for patriots.