Left-Wingers Attack; I Yawn

Apparently there’s been a series against me over at the Daily Kos by a left-liberal lawyer. I no longer pay attention to left-wing attacks. It’s the same arguments every time. They pretend I haven’t answered them. I have. They idiotically call me a “neo-Confederate” (have they really not seen the zombie video, or are they trying to caricature themselves?).

The most recent one is only slightly different. For some reason, central to his argument is his claim that Thomas Jefferson was an Antifederalist. He was not. Jefferson was a supporter of the Constitution, though he wanted term limits for the president, as well as a Bill of Rights. This is all explained in a basic text like David N. Mayer’s The Constitutional Thought of Thomas Jefferson.

I am then accused of “mendacity” (because I stand to gain a lot by lying about nullification!) because I do not note that nine states spoke out against the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, which laid out the doctrine of state nullification. By my count, seven states issued statements against the Resolutions, and I have discussed them repeatedly, both in my book (which the author has not read, naturally) and online.

I am “mendacious” for leaving this out, even though I didn’t leave it out, but my critic is absolutely not mendacious for himself leaving out the reason that six of those seven states opposed Virginia and Kentucky: they favored the Sedition Act, and the principle that journalists should be thrown in jail for criticizing the president. Oops!

In fact, only one state actually spoke against the compact theory of the Union on which nullification is based. That was not controversial.

And as I also note in my book, within less than a decade, some of the very states that were lecturing Virginia and Kentucky in 1799 were suddenly all in favor of nullification when a Virginian president was in charge. Ever heard the expression “actions speak louder than words”?

And finally, my critic says I defend a “right to oppress.” This is preposterous, needless to say. I have repeatedly made clear that I hold no brief for the states. They are states, after all, and I am a libertarian (not a “neo-Confederate,” whatever that Marxoid neologism is supposed to mean). The point is that the federal government is far more likely to be a threat to our liberties, indeed to civilization itself, than the states — from which, in any case, exit is rather easier. There is absolutely nothing the states could do that would amount to a grain of sand on the beach compared to a new Middle Eastern war, but I am supposed to be super worried about what Montana might do next. Nice priorities.

And of course, nothing centralized regimes do ever, ever, ever discredits centralization.

As usual, I refer people to my Nullification FAQ.

Share this post:Digg thisShare on FacebookGoogle+Share on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on Twitter
  • Frank M

    Tom, did you see in the comments section where he said your only goal is to gain religious supremacy? This leftist lawyer is worse than a zombie. He’s a cartoon.

  • At Odds

    We yawn, too, because I don’t think most of us, if anybody, knew this guy existed. A bit of irony is that the only way we would ever read his “persuasive logic that would make us see the light of government-dependence-liberalism” is through the website of the one who he is criticizing.

  • Reinier

    I always see this when it comes to people not accepting certain ideas. Because you don’t agree with him on “A” then you must not agree with him on “B” and “C”. It’s like the right vs left argument. It’s very two dimensional.

  • anthony

    They don’t take a second to try to understand where we are coming from. Their arguments are entirely based on straw men. Bigots I tell you. It always ends with them blaming all of the bad in the world on us (b/c government wasn’t there to stop something) and claiming all of the good for their side.

    Gee, if Libertarians were in charge we’d still have slavery, no electricity, no internet and we’d still be relying on leeches to cure our ails.

    How do these dumb dumbs completely fail to understand our central premise?
    non-aggression principle

  • Mike

    LOL, yeah. Tom’s right, it’s ALWAYS the same, tired, long debunked, worn out accusations.The idiot Left always thinks someone who is not part of their Marxian paradise is either a “racist”, “neoconfederate” (cue “Interview With a Zombie” please) or some religious nut who wants to create some grand theocracy (which makes absolutely no sense given that we want government ABOLISHED or so small you can hardly see it with a magnifying glass. This type of stupidity or just willful ignorance is laughable.

    It’s like all of these fools were programmed and copied and pasted repeatedly over endless numbers of hard drives. They all act the same, make the same accusations, think (they do that?) the same thing, blah blah. The idiot Left has become VERY boring. They need some new arguments. There’s are SO worn out,

  • Mike

    “How do these dumb dumbs completely fail to understand our central premise? non-aggression principle”

    Simple. They don’t even bother to try. It’s self imposed delusion.

  • Dave in Ann Arbor

    These guys are such complete puds. They don’t even realize how foolish they look outside of their little cliques.

  • TJ

    Daily Kos’ response to this blog post:


  • Shimshon

    “It’s the same arguments every time.”

    This has been my experience. Talking (thought it’s not really even talking) with hard-core leftists is like having a conversation with a list of talking points. Just like in Interview with a Zombie.

  • Justin T. P. Quinn

    The Daily Kos?! I actually read an article on there saying the Scandal Salad is actually BOOSTING Obama’s approval rating. The Daily Kos is where all the social democrat wing nuts go to be willingly brainwashed and induced into delusions of grandeur by their own doublethink. The partisan of the partisan. Utterly detached from reality and hating humanity. I know, because I know a guy who reads it. He is all of those things.

  • Mike

    “There’s are SO worn out,”

    Okay, my last sentence was AWFUL. Terrible typing on my part. It should read: “They’re SO worn out.

  • Mike

    raaaaccciiissmmm! Neeeoocoonfeeederaaaate!

    Incredible isn’t it? :P

  • Mike

    ….raaacciiissmmm! Neeeooocooonfederaaate!

    Heh, incredible isn’t it?

    You see this is why zombies eat brains….because they don’t have any. :)

  • BB

    I have a good friend of mine who’s a hard-core lefty. He’s well credentialed to say the least – Mayo clinic cardiologist with an MBA from Kellogg in Chicago, but he’s has to be one of the most frustrating, intellectually dense people I have ever met. It’s comical at times when he gets heated and thinks he’s setting me straight with some of the oldest, tiredest, anti-intellectual leftist rants that I’ve ever heard – all the while thinking he is bashing me because I believe in God. Sometimes I wonder how I’ve managed to remain friends with him for so long.

  • Steven

    Bottom line…there will NEVER be a Libertadian POTUS…

  • Anonymous


    Have any leftists made you a nice poster? They made me one.


  • Anonymous

    I love how the author refers to a section of Tom’s as a “strawman”, all in the middle of an enormous strawman article. Nobody ever said the left was self-aware. I’d love to see how he justifies nullification as part of some great Catholic plot, on anything other than Dr. Woods is Catholic.

  • Anonymous

    The comments are priceless.

    “For a certain type of mind, the ability to practice their religion requires making society over in the image of that religion and removing secular influences. We see this in Orthodox communities as well as Woods-type Catholics and conservative fundamentalists. Of course that means denying everyone else the ability to practice their religion, or no religion, but that is ok because by definition those are all false faiths.”

    This zombie doesn’t seem to realize that their description is a pretty good description of the Pietist-movement of the 19th century, from where we get modern progressives. Again, nobody ever said the left was self-aware.

  • Mike

    Too bad the idiot wasted so much time and effort. But then, given their worship of government and its waste I shouldn’t be surprised that they spend more time producing waste instead of being productive.

  • Mike

    Oh, boy. “A Catholic plot”. Is he one of those idiots who think Jesuits rule the Earth? God I hope not. I’d like to think that person’s IQ is actually above 40. I have to listen to Jack Chick Fundy idiots claiming that the Vatican is out to unify the whole Earth into a one world government in order to reveal the “Black Pope” as the Anti-Christ while also listening to idiot Leftists thinking that breaking up countries into smaller entities (decentralization) is a Catholic plot (and for the record I’m not Catholic).

    LOL! Wonderful education system we have isn’t it? It seems to foster endless stupidity. The West is a goner man.

  • Mike

    Yeah. It’s so ironic that they hiss and boo Christianity and yet are completely unaware that their big government progressive movement began in Protestant Pietism. It’s just so ironic that it’s hilarious.

  • irondutch

    Acknowledging that Tom is not a “neo-Confederate” and that the charge constitutes petty name calling, I still wonder, exactly what is wrong with being a “neo Confederate? By the way, you would think a lawyer would know better.

  • Nick

    There’s great irony in the fact that socialists and neocons rarely know that there were slave states which stayed in the Union, or that Robert E. Lee spoke against slavery while Ulysses Grant favored it. Perhaps if the statists realized that, they may start applying the term “neo-confederate” to themselves in an attempt to look good! Stranger things have happened.


  • Dave in Ann Arbor

    But I notice there are roads!

  • Mike

    They’re reading the candy cane version of history. They think everything is so simple, dried and cut without any sophistication at all. North good. South bad. End of story. LOL! It’s not quite that simple. I also find it absolutely bizarre that so many people act like slavery came out of states rights even though giant big government projects all over the planet for thousands of years practiced slavery. In every blasted civilization for crying out loud! I mean, hello?!

    Hell, colonial slavery only made it to the New World because BIG GOVERNMENT brought it over. You know, those things called The British, Spanish, Holland, and Portuguese for example.

    Geez people THINK for a change.

  • No

    Neo-Confederates ignore many of the anti-liberty actions taken by the Confederate government.

  • therealliberal

    Not clear – Is Tom saying that Jefferson was a federalist? Or is that what the article is claiming Tom is saying?

  • http://tomwoods.com Tom Woods

    I can’t remember what his point was, but he absolutely insisted that Jefferson was an antifederalist and that I was misleading people on this point. I don’t recall saying anything about Jefferson’s view on this question one way or the other, but as a matter of historical record Jefferson was a supporter of the Constitution.

  • Anonymous

    It’s a safe bet that most of them would love the Confederate government’s monetary policy. They love it when Bernanke copies it.

  • Anonymous

    Is this supposed to be an attack on libertarianism?

    Judging by the awful record of nearly all POTUS, that’s not a club that most libertarians would seek to aspire to.

  • http://on-a-mountain-she-sits.tumblr.com/ Andreja Wilson

    Why are you still friends with him? I would have booted him to the curb a LONG time ago.

  • Anonymous

    Slavery was important to the Capitalist based economies. Both imperial and corporate. Both of them used it for a very long time.