• "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

Opinion Police Out in Force Against Nullification

The thought controllers over at the Daily Beast are unhappy that Rand Paul has used the word “nullify.” Nullification does not appear on the 3×5 card of allowable opinion, so he is to be condemned without being refuted — the usual procedure for dealing with someone who strays from the Sacred 3×5 Card.

The Daily Beast writes: “No, Senator Paul, we do not nullify things in this country. I know Tom Woods is an intriguing writer, and I too love my liberty, but this is no longer the antebellum era.” (I do appreciate the reference, though.)

As soon as I saw this post, I thought up this meme:

Unlearn the Propaganda!

  • Luke Sunderland

    That’s right. We don’t nullify things in this here country. When our wise overlords command something, we obey!

  • http://TheInterventionistParadox.wordpress.com/ Bharat

    Haha, this is quality, well done.

  • Jim

    The comments in response to this little post are just gold. My favorite comment:

    “Seriously, this is stuff you learn about in 3rd grade civics class. The fact that we’re even having this discussion in the 21st century just goes to show how far off the deep end conservatives have fallen.”

    Agreed entirely that the Daily Beast is 3rd grade civics class material. Our Overlords will inform us of when to rebel and what forms need to be filled out and submitted.

    Of course, a 3rd grade civics class education is nothing I’d boast of, but don’t let ignorance of the entire opposing argument in favor of nullification slow you down.

  • anon

    like!

  • Anonymous

    This nullification discussion is so interesting.

    Frankly, there are multiple layers of thought current here.

    For one, there is an awakening that perhaps the federal government not only is, but has for a long time been in violation of the constitution. The paleo conservatives used to try and fight this fight, but somehow the New Deal America became the eternal status quo.

    Secondly, there is a growing awareness that we are not in fact a ‘constitutional democracy’ with a unitary national government based in Washington that preserves these administrative units called states, but that this is an actual federation. This fight, unfortunately, has only really ever been fought over racist policies.

    Third, even more so than the awareness of the federal nature of our country, is this Jeffersonian idea of self-government. This is a fight we’ve had since the constitution was ratified, but good that we haven’t forgotten about it.

    And finally, there’s this little tool called nullification which is as legitimate as it is illegitimate. The argument for it is solid. It would only take a gutsy and sharp legislature to really do it, and then we would see what happens. Until that day this is all just imagination.

  • A.J. Walker

    “the federal government not only is, but has for a long time been in violation of the constitution.”
    Multiple violations here. The constitution (sorry!, “Constitution”), is a violation and is illegitimate itself. I may be wrong, but weren’t the elites there to ratify the Articles of Confederation and not to totally send it to the trash-heap? Some even call it a coup. As I’m a libertarian sort, either would be a violation of my natural/god-given liberties. It’s a shame I don’t have a coercive police state to back me up to set y’all straight! ;-)

  • devo

    what wrong with being a sheep? pretty ‘lax days, good head of hair, and you make some mean lamb chops. wait…. that was my cousin, but my master told me…. oh dear god.

  • Thomas Manning

    Nullification seems entirely appropriate. It is a push back. A power balance that has legal and moral standing.

  • Clay

    Condemnation Without Refutation –
    Brought to you by Government Stream Media (GSM)