ABOUT TOM WOODS

Thomas E. Woods, Jr., is the New York Times bestselling author of 11 books, including The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History and Meltdown (on the financial crisis). A senior fellow of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, Woods has appeared on MSNBC, CNBC, FOX News, FOX Business, C-SPAN, Bloomberg Television, and hundreds of radio programs... (Read More)



The Tom Woods App


American Spectator Dead Wrong About Ron Paul

26th August 2011      by: Tom Woods     

You know that article by Jeffrey Lord that’s been touted on the radio shows of Mark Levin, Michael Medved, and Rush Limbaugh?  It’s toast.

(For more on the Left, war, and intervention, see my 33 Questions About American History You’re Not Supposed to Ask.)

Unlearn the Propaganda!

  • Michael Shipley

    A better title for this post might be: Tom Woods takes Jeffrey Lord to the Woodshed.

  • RG

    Great Reply to the article!

    Tom please check out this youtube video “We The People”. If you like it make a blog/post about it please!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xoqY6CpgpSE

  • Anonymous

    Lord and his fellow “conservatives” are little red, socialist, babies who’ve never graduated from the nipple to even the sippy-cup intellectually. They will *never* learn to eat solid food since that would involve time and energy chewing on something substantial. I think the food you offer here is far too substantial and grown-up for them.

    Their time to be laughed out of the arena of serious debate has come. Great work, Tom. 

  • Anonymous

    I would hate to be Jeffery Lord right now. You’ve wiped the floor, Tom. I love it.

  • Anonymous

    The Jeffrey Lord attack is the best evidence to date that Ron Paul is spectacularly more effective than the neocons ever believed he would be.  Lord, Levin, Medved, and Limbaugh, tenured professors at Neocon Clown University, display quite effectively why they are tools of big government and the anti-Tea-Party.

    This is a fight for the soul of conservatism.  The Neocon Clown University version is an intellectually muddled excuse for militaristic big government.  The Ron Paul version recognizes that conservatives should live up to their marketing promises of limited government.  A Ron Paul presidency is almost certainly the last hope for America, and even if Ron Paul is the next president, saving America is a “long row to hoe.”

  • http://www.facebook.com/MichaelBBurch Michael Burch

    Tom, do you have the video clip of Hannity saying he’d never heard of the idea that FDR made the Great Depression worse? Please post if you do.

  • http://tomwoods.com Tom Woods

    It’s from December 6 or 7, 2004, before all clips tended to make their way onto YouTube. There may be a transcript.

  • Anonymous

    Levin and the neo-con trotksy wing of the GOP have been crushed by Woods again!  Like I said on the neo-con site, the skill difference is like watching Evander Holyfield in the ring with a local toughman competitor.   

    Only a few weeks ago, Levin was claiming that there was no groundswell of support for ron paul, yet now he is in third in both Iowa and New Hampshire, and third in national polling by gallup.  Paul is also within one point of Obama, yet neo-con sweetheart Sarah palin is losing by 17!

    What has to scare neo-cons like Levin and Rush the most though is that the latest Gallup poll with Paul in third has Paul number one by eight points in the 18 to 29 demographic!

    I think that explains this most recent attack by the terrified neo-con establishment.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XVW3HOOY3ROO2RSMDGN3ZNA55Q john

    Tom Woods is an American hero. Thank you, Tom, for dismantling Lord’s ignorance pawned off as intelligence by the neocon outlets.

    The neocons are simply in saving-face mode.

  • Anonymous

     Someone should do a photoshop of Tom Woods and Ivan Dragov from Rocky IV with the same dialog:  “Whatever he hits, he destroys!”

  • david

    Tom, I loved the video, but I have one complaint.  You mentioned Herbert Hoover as an example of a conservative noninterventionist.  But isn’t it true that Hoover was a  life long progressive who was in favor of expanding federal power and was against laissez faire? Didn’t he support Theodore Roosevelt, running on the Progressive Party ticket, for president in 1912? As Commerce Secretary, didn’t he oppose Harding and Mellon, who pursued a fairly laissez faire approach, and wanted the government to intervene during the Depression of 1920? As president, didn’t he increase spending by 50% his first three years in office, raise tariffs and taxes, and coerce business owners into keeping wages artificially high (all of which greatly exasperated the Great Depression? I’m sure you know all of this, but I’m wondering, in what way was he a conservative?  I love your videos and articles, and you obviously know far more about history than I do, but I’m just not seeing eye to eye on this one particular thing.  On a sie note, I know Hoover was involved in a lot of humanitarian efforts during World War I, but what was his position on US intervention? Thank you in advance for your time.

  • david

    Tom, I loved the video, but I have one complaint.  You mentioned Herbert Hoover as an example of a conservative noninterventionist.  But isn’t it true that Hoover was a  life long progressive who was in favor of expanding federal power and was against laissez faire? Didn’t he support Theodore Roosevelt, running on the Progressive Party ticket, for president in 1912? As Commerce Secretary, didn’t he oppose Harding and Mellon, who pursued a fairly laissez faire approach, and wanted the government to intervene during the Depression of 1920? As president, didn’t he increase spending by 50% his first three years in office, raise tariffs and taxes, and coerce business owners into keeping wages artificially high (all of which greatly exasperated the Great Depression? I’m sure you know all of this, but I’m wondering, in what way was he a conservative?  I love your videos and articles, and you obviously know far more about history than I do, but I’m just not seeing eye to eye on this one particular thing.  On a sie note, I know Hoover was involved in a lot of humanitarian efforts during World War I, but what was his position on US intervention? Thank you in advance for your time.

  • http://tomwoods.com Tom Woods

    All of that is all too true, as I myself have noted in the past, but by the 1930s and with the progress of the New Deal he became an outspoken opponent of FDR’s administration and I think it would be difficult at that point to lump him in with the progerssive Republicans.

  • http://tomwoods.com Tom Woods

    All of that is all too true, as I myself have noted in the past, but by the 1930s and with the progress of the New Deal he became an outspoken opponent of FDR’s administration and I think it would be difficult at that point to lump him in with the progerssive Republicans.

  • http://tomwoods.com Tom Woods

    All of that is all too true, as I myself have noted in the past, but by the 1930s and with the progress of the New Deal he became an outspoken opponent of FDR’s administration and I think it would be difficult at that point to lump him in with the progerssive Republicans.

  • Brian

    Jeffrey Lord’s anti-semite smear of Ron was indeed a convoluted argument.  How can anybody take this seriously?

    Pat Buchanan, conservative commentator and writer, is a non-interventionist as well; is Lord going to label him some sort of liberal?  Please.

    That Hannity had not heard the arguments against the New Deal is not all that surprising.  Rush Limbaugh admitted last year that he had no idea — not a clue — that the Bill of Rights was adopted to apply only to the federal government, not the states, and that the Supreme Court’s enforcement of the Bill’s provisions against the states is a recent phenomenon.  Here I thought most leading conservative commentators would have known this.  Even Edwin Meese, Reagan’s AG, argued that the “incorporation doctrine” was phony-baloney, an assault on the Tenth Amendment.  

    Limbaugh and Hannity are very much in the dark on a lot of really basic stuff, which is scary.  If this fact drives me crazy, I can’t imagine how it makes people like Tom and Kevin Gutzman feel.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TIETY5KLIIMOU3JLNTETFDQWTY silentnomore9

    I just got dumped from the Townhall.com website.  I have been sitting here for three days blogging on townhall.com and gopusa.com  trying to get people to go to Ron Paul’s website so they can get to know him from his own speeches and press releases.  Not only do they want to ignore Ron Paul, they want to ignore anyone who supports Ron Paul.  Is there a strategy in place to overcome this terrible media door slamming situation?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TIETY5KLIIMOU3JLNTETFDQWTY silentnomore9

    I just got dumped from the Townhall.com website.  I have been sitting here for three days blogging on townhall.com and gopusa.com  trying to get people to go to Ron Paul’s website so they can get to know him from his own speeches and press releases.  Not only do they want to ignore Ron Paul, they want to ignore anyone who supports Ron Paul.  Is there a strategy in place to overcome this terrible media door slamming situation?

  • david

    Thanks for the response Tom.

  • david

    Thanks for the response Tom.

  • david

    Thanks for the response Tom.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TIETY5KLIIMOU3JLNTETFDQWTY silentnomore9

    They do take it seriously.  They need to hear rational explanations of why it is wrong because they are going with the momentum of the lying doctrines they manufacture.  They take the thread and spin it until there is no recognition of what Ron meant when he said whatever he said.  It doesn’t matter what he says, they turn it into a lie.  The only solution I see is for someone to come up with a short list of the things Ron says that are turned into a lie with an short but complete explanation of what he really meant based on understanding.  If I had something I could carry with me and hand out, then I could engage people in conversation and encourage them in what is true.  I believe people are open to the truth, the media liars just won’t allow the truth to be exposed.  The truth defeats their hot air too quickly for them to allow it to be released.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TIETY5KLIIMOU3JLNTETFDQWTY silentnomore9

    Where is this poll.  The ones on the conservative blogs show Ron Paul much further down.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TIETY5KLIIMOU3JLNTETFDQWTY silentnomore9

    Where is this poll.  The ones on the conservative blogs show Ron Paul much further down.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TIETY5KLIIMOU3JLNTETFDQWTY silentnomore9

    Where is this poll.  The ones on the conservative blogs show Ron Paul much further down.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TIETY5KLIIMOU3JLNTETFDQWTY silentnomore9

    I just want to see Tom Woods on the air in the big media coverage zones.  It does little good to win the argument if only the faithful few see the other players in the game.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TIETY5KLIIMOU3JLNTETFDQWTY silentnomore9

    I just want to see Tom Woods on the air in the big media coverage zones.  It does little good to win the argument if only the faithful few see the other players in the game.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TIETY5KLIIMOU3JLNTETFDQWTY silentnomore9

    I just want to see Tom Woods on the air in the big media coverage zones.  It does little good to win the argument if only the faithful few see the other players in the game.

  • Tenshinaito

    Tom,

    Your video here was just mentioned on the Michael Medved show–and handled terribly, I might add.  It was in the third hour of the show, and a caller specifically mentioned this response of yours to Lord.  Medved, who said he had watched the video, claimed that you only addressed minor issues, and never the core argument of Lord’s article: that the founding fathers (contra Ron Paul) did not subscribe to an anti-interventionist foreign policy.  Regrettably, the caller failed to call Medved out for being completely wrong here.  (Of course you rebutted this argument!  You dedicated nearly the first five minutes to that specific charge!)

    Medved even went on to specifically cite Washington’s invasion of Canada, as if you had completely skipped over this aspect of the debate (such as it is).  Again, the caller missed this glaring opportunity to defend your position.

  • Anonymous
  • Anonymous
  • Anonymous
  • Anonymous

    Everything Tom said is true.

    However, even if the Neo-clowns are right about interventionism and the founding fathers, the type of intervention now practiced by the US amounts, at best, to spreading Clintonista socialist democracy to third world countries that desperately need private property and sound money instead.  The entire Keynesian/socialist program undermines private property rights and thus leads to poverty and police states.  The Neo-clowns are basically advocating the spreading of commie style policies and using our troops to do it as they get their legs and jaws shot off.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TIETY5KLIIMOU3JLNTETFDQWTY silentnomore9

    Thanks, I think that 17% could be increased if we keep hammering at Perry’s having supported WTO, illegal immigrants in tax funded schools, and he signed the Texas Halal Law that allows special halal meals to be brought in to public schools for Muslim children.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TIETY5KLIIMOU3JLNTETFDQWTY silentnomore9

    That may very well make you feel very intellectual, but it won’t help you get the votes from the simple people.  Simple people live simply and think simply and they are in general much happier than anybody on any of these blog sights so, in general, being simple is only a problem when it comes election time and the simple people have to vote to save the lives of their families.  Then they are listening to sound bites and talking to their neighbors (who are as simple as they are) and the night before election day, they take a few minutes and decide who to vote for.

    By that time, if we have failed to make Ron Paul seem like Paul Revere in the flesh, a national hero for having stood faithfully for 35 years saying, “NO” to the unwinnable, unjust and undeclared wars that cost us the lives of our men and boys, with the trillions of dollars of debt and saying no to all the big government grabbing of personal property, and big government spending on social welfare spending that brought our nation to the brink of bankruptcy.

    Ron Paul wants to get our men and boys back home where they belong, wants to get rid of the intrusive executive orders that have stolen our property rights and our freedom of religion! 

    Quite frankly folks, you have the right message, you are just making it too complicated.  Stop hating Christians, start loving God, start telling everybody Ron Paul is going to get rid of the intrusive federal government, restore the foundations of the Constitution — all of rural America with come out to vote.  That is what the media is afraid of.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TIETY5KLIIMOU3JLNTETFDQWTY silentnomore9

    That may very well make you feel very intellectual, but it won’t help you get the votes from the simple people.  Simple people live simply and think simply and they are in general much happier than anybody on any of these blog sights so, in general, being simple is only a problem when it comes election time and the simple people have to vote to save the lives of their families.  Then they are listening to sound bites and talking to their neighbors (who are as simple as they are) and the night before election day, they take a few minutes and decide who to vote for.

    By that time, if we have failed to make Ron Paul seem like Paul Revere in the flesh, a national hero for having stood faithfully for 35 years saying, “NO” to the unwinnable, unjust and undeclared wars that cost us the lives of our men and boys, with the trillions of dollars of debt and saying no to all the big government grabbing of personal property, and big government spending on social welfare spending that brought our nation to the brink of bankruptcy.

    Ron Paul wants to get our men and boys back home where they belong, wants to get rid of the intrusive executive orders that have stolen our property rights and our freedom of religion! 

    Quite frankly folks, you have the right message, you are just making it too complicated.  Stop hating Christians, start loving God, start telling everybody Ron Paul is going to get rid of the intrusive federal government, restore the foundations of the Constitution — all of rural America with come out to vote.  That is what the media is afraid of.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TIETY5KLIIMOU3JLNTETFDQWTY silentnomore9

    Also, rural people home school their kids — GETTING RID OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION is a really big bonus.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TIETY5KLIIMOU3JLNTETFDQWTY silentnomore9

    Also, rural people home school their kids — GETTING RID OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION is a really big bonus.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/2A6HIPLFALQCHLNVDFOHJ5TZAM Barton

    Hey neocon, sure hope you hop over to the other page, having a wingding debate with jaynie59, and I wish Tom would go back there, and shoot these fools down. It is so hard to get through these progressive idiots.

    Tom, I want to thank you for at least popping in on the other “conservative” page yesturday. Still, no one wants to discredit you at all. Also, if I am not mistaken, when you were on Church’s show a few years ago, the day after, I believe I heard Mr. Church say you were from Belton, Tx?? 

    And one more thing for Mr. Woods………..GO AGGIES!!!!! GO WRECKING CREW!!!!

  • http://tomwoods.com Tom Woods

    Thanks.  Actually, I’ve never lived in Texas.  I grew up in North Andover, Massachusetts, then lived in Cambridge during my college years, New York City for grad school, Long Island for seven years, then Auburn, Alabama, and now we’re in Topeka.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/2A6HIPLFALQCHLNVDFOHJ5TZAM Barton

    Ok, I thought I had heard something about either you or Gutsman, might have mistaken. Thanks for the repsonse. Hope your day goes well, will be posting more often now. Especially after the attacks that I have taken over at that other site you snuck off to yesturday. 

  • Anonymous

    I wasn’t speaking about “the simple people” or rural folks so much as those country-club Republicans, a huge swath of college-educated “baby boomers,” who desire nothing more than their government entitlements to continue perpetually. It is this sector I hear, more often than not, belittling Paul’s campaign.

  • http://profiles.google.com/fatlibertarianinokc Fat Libertarian

    It appears they turned off comments on that article.  What a non-surprise.

  • Anonymous

    The only thing that would have made this video better is if you would have spiked a football at the end. This was a touchdown!

  • mike

    Tom you are clearly correct, but as you mention at the very beginning of this article… this whole “conservative” semantics game is a waste of time.  Any rational thinker can see that the Levins and Limbaughs are contradicting themselves… Liberty! Limited Government! Free Markets!…. and Militarism????

  • neocontrotksy

    I noticed that comments were closed when I just checked it out.  Maybe they didn’t want to deal with the editor of American Spectator having the same views they just trashed…

  • El Indio

    I remember you!

    You posted for a brief period, on the BIG sites.

     

  • Dan

    Medved called him evil and un-American on December 29! He said anyone who supports him is evil and un-American.  I lost all respect for Medved.



Find me on Google