Rule #674 Of Politics: If You Don’t Generate Enough Headlines Calling The President Elect Marxist, Accuse Him Of Attempting To Create A Fascist Dictatorship

After raising an insufficient number of eyebrows with his comments to the Martinez-Evans Rotary Club yesterday, Georgia Congressman Paul Broun (R-Can’t Get Sworn In) decided to up the ante in an interview with the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON (AP) — A Republican congressman from Georgia said Monday he fears that President-elect Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist or fascist dictatorship.

“It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he’s the one who proposed this national security force,” Rep. Paul Broun said of Obama in an interview Monday with The Associated Press. “I’m just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may — may not, I hope not — but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism.”

And just in case he didn’t set off enough crazy alarms, he decided to go ahead and invoke Godwin’s Law for good measure:

“That’s exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it’s exactly what the Soviet Union did,” Broun said. “When he’s proposing to have a national security force that’s answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he’s showing me signs of being Marxist.”

I remain skeptical of President-Elect Obama and his intentions, as I should have remained skeptical of President Bush and the Republicans in Congress over the last 8 years.  That said, I think if we as Republicans want to represent a credible opposition, we probably should fight actual battles as proposals are made, instead of diminishing the little capital we currently have with crazy talk like this.

In the mean time, I will continue to hope that our new President is actually successful, that America prospers under his leadership, and that we remain a country that is the envy of the world.  It is in that spirit that I will continue to support him until he actually proposes something I can’t support.  Then, and only then, will I consider calling him a Nazi to ensure that my protest and opposition is completely ignored.


  1. Doug Deal says:

    It could be brilliant icarus. If Obama and the rest of the Democrats ignore the Republicans, it will likely lead to a reversal in 2-4 years. One sided extremist governments never seem to last too long in this country.

  2. Vic says:

    Abu Graib is the closest the U.S. has come to being a Nazi regime and taking National ownership in and giving $2.7 Trillion to Banks and Insurance Companies is pure socialism. They were both authorized in part by Executive Orders of a Republican President, who still wants to conceal the true record from the public eye.

    congrats Republicans, sounds like you’ve elected another paranoid, right wing nutcase in this Paul Broun guy, keep up the good work…

  3. Icarus says:

    Well Doug, I learned one of my favorite lines standing in Sanford Stadium, after watching South Carolina attempt their 6th fake punt of the game under the direction of Lou Holtz.

    One of the guys in front of me turned to his friend and said:

    “You know, it’s a real fine line between ‘genius’ and ‘crazy old man’.”

  4. Vic says:

    “What ever happen to people like John Kasich or Dick Armey?”

    People like them started websites to track the Bank and Insurance Bailout and Nationalization process:

    This website was created by a Billionaire, activist investor and owner of the Dallas Mavericks to help you keep up with the Bailout and the secrecy surrounding it.

  5. Progressive Dem says:

    This is the kind of dipsh*t you get when reapportionment is conducted by elected officials. If his district was defined by traditional political and economic boundaries, his electorate would be comprised of a cross-section of the population. A thinking Congressman wouldn’t make such moonbat crazy comments in a competitive district. Instead, his district and nearly every other district is packed to the advantage of a party. We need competition in the congressional races.

  6. Icarus says:


    The only part the elected officials played in GA’s reapportionment was the renewal of the voting rights act. Judges ended up drawing the maps, and because of the criteria that the Justice department mandates, you end up with Paul Brouns and Cynthia McKinneys.

  7. atlantaman says:

    John Lewis and Paul Broun are actually cut out of the same cloth. While the demographics they are trying curry appeal are radically different, their tactics are identical.

    It would be funny to stick them in the same room and watch them call each other George Wallace, Bull Conner, Adolf Hitler, and Jane Fonda.

  8. atlantaman says:

    Now that Broun is safe he can go back to being a Constitutionalist. That nasty primary campaign caused him to put his ideals on hold as he sponsored such bold initiatives as banning boobies from military bases and blowing through his office budget to launch a taxpayer funded direct mail campaign. Alexander Hamilton would be proud.

  9. bpolitical says:

    I live in Paul Broun’s district and I voted for the man during this election cycle. It’s fairly obvious, however, that he’s a little off his rocker. I’m not sure what he’s attempting to do by making these kinds of uninhibited comments. They are obviously calculated and deliberate but serve no rational purpose other than providing some level of shock factor. Maybe he’s taking his re-election margin and approval ratings out for a spin.

    Broun might be justified if he was simply trying to make the point that the American media needs to ask President-elect Obama what he means when he says that he wants to build a civilian security force that is as “strong” and as “well-funded” as the United States military.

    Taken in isolation, Obama’s remark is no less ridiculous and deserves no less ridicule than Representative Broun’s.

  10. Bill Hagan says:

    Rep. Broun should commended for his comments. However, we live in a nation where individuals inside our government would prevent the rise of a Hitler like figure at all costs. Obama may have the House and Senate but the FBI, CIA, NSA and Secret Service serve the American People not the President. When a President leaves office they remain to protect us.

  11. umustbekidding says:

    Bill – Do they really serve the people? I bet the FBI doesn’t look into anything in hopes of keeping their jobs. Let’s hope they are looking out for us.

    Call me crazy but I kind of agree with Broun.
    If the Fairness Doctrine is put back in place, that will stop talk radio from letting people know what all is going on under Obama. Then the guns will go.After that who knows what will happen.

    Everone likes to laugh off anything extreme about Obama. He admits in his book his love of Marxism. He is, once again, surrounding himself with people who have some extreme views. As long as he has the media ignoring everything and comedy central making a joke of everything else, he will get his agenda through and no one will know what hit them. He is promising Change, he never said what that change would be.

    Maybe I am crazy. I prefer to call it aware.

  12. Game Fan says:

    I’m not sure what type of cognitive dissonance is necessary for people to raise the alarm bells with Bush and the neocons’ power grab for years on end and then simply resort to name calling when a conservative Republican raises the alarm bells about a potential for abuse of power from the left. This isn’t reality. How does partisan politics get in the way of common sense when it comes to more power grabs from the Executive branch? And who the hell cares about image and votes and parties. You people need to grow up. Pathetic.

  13. Game Fan says:

    If you want to increase your party’s appeal then sometimes it may be better to raise above partisan politics and appeal to the growing number of independents. Of course the Ron Paul Republicans have been raising a stink about issues like DHS, snooping and spying, no-fly lists, executive orders, signing statements, Unitary Executive theory, ect.. for years.

  14. Andre Walker says:

    The only part the elected officials played in GA’s reapportionment was the renewal of the voting rights act. Judges ended up drawing the maps, and because of the criteria that the Justice department mandates, you end up with Paul Brouns and Cynthia McKinneys.

    Icarus, while the courts did re-draw the state House and state Senate maps, it was the Republican-controlled General Assembly that changed Georgia’s congressional maps in 2005.

    House Bill 499 was introduced by state Rep. Bobby Franklin on February 16, 2005 and signed into law on May 6, 2005.

    I just needed to clarify who was responsible for Georgia’s current congressional district maps just in case there was any confusion at all.

  15. Game Fan says:

    It will be interesting to see if the Democrats develop a similar outgrowth which actually goes AGAINST the President and the party line and the DNC.

  16. ramblinwreck says:

    If anyone in Washington, other than Broun and Ron Paul, paid any attention to the Constitution I would not be nearly as concerned about Obama’s administration as I am. Given the total lack of regard for the law of the land why would anyone think it would slow Obama from enacting virtually anything he wants to do? I think what Congressman Broun is doing is what we should have been doing with Democrats AND Republicans who have abused the Constitution, pointing out their flaws and in Obama’s case, his own admitted marxist leanings.

  17. umustbekidding says:

    Good point ramblinwreck.

    It worries the heck out of me. I have children and I am worried about what this country is turning into. Change is coming and it seems to be coming fast.

  18. ramblinwreck says:

    As one of my all time favorite politicians said: “I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” – Barry Goldwater

  19. cheapseats says:

    All this talk about what could happen to 401K’s based on this one egghead’s report to congress has been promoted to the level of “pending national policy” by no one other than the radical right-wing talk radio clowns.

    If you look back through the Congressional Record, you can find all sorts of lunatic ravings that were entered as “testimonies before a Congressional Committee” and none of them went anywhere.

    Don’t get your “news” from Rush and Boortz. I’m opposed to the fairness doctrine but I fully support efforts to improve the critical thinking skills of all Americans. Right wing talk radio is no more “informative” than John Stewart and Stephen Colbert. It’s just entertainment.

  20. Bucky Plyler says:

    Icarus, you’re off base with this. Obama is marxist & it is a legitimate concern to question his campaign speeches & proposed programs.

    To equate Paul Broun to be as extreme as Cynthia McKinney is REALLY a stretch.

    Thank God for reps like Paul Broun & my his tribe increase.

  21. rugby fan says:

    Keep in mind that no one, not Barack Obama or any of the leading Democrats has offered even tepid support for the Fairness Doctrine. Obama came out pretty strongly against it too.

    It is funny to see how Republicans and talk radio hosts are borderline paranoid over something that probably won’t even come to a vote.

  22. bird says:

    Per Cheapseats and Rugby’s comments, scaring up policies that the President-Elect has absolutely zero chance of supporting is fear mongering and it’s intellectually dishonest.

    Oh, and did I mention absurd? If Obama is a marxist, which he isn’t, then you should have plenty of ammo when he starts proposing or implementing actual policies. You’re gunpowder is wet, and you haven’t even gotten off a meaningful shot because your target is imaginary.

  23. EAVDad says:

    Paul Broun’s are clearly the most idiotic comments from a political simpleton that I have seen since the election (and that’s saying something) Guess it’s always good roll out “Hitler” when you’re trying to rile people up. What a buffoon.

    What I can’t believe is that there are people on this blog saying he should be “commended” or that he’s a “straight-shooter” or it might be “genius.” People — the most recent election was a complete repudiation of this ditto-head politics. If the GOP wants to be relevant again, get your head out of the sand.

  24. EAVDad says:

    Yes, imagine young black males being disciplined, inspired to success and involved in the political process. Horrors. What would we do? (Read with sarcasm, please)

  25. tinsandwich says:

    This is pretty sad. I will at least wait to see how the President elect attempts to govern the country before I criticize him.

  26. onthefence says:

    I think Paul Broun’s comment are irrational. Everyone keeps saying that Obama never told them what his CHANGE meant. I disagree.

    I was going through some of my old magazine subscriptions and ran across a few months of Foreign Affairs. These were the ones published in 2007 when each of the then candidates for POTUS wrote an article detailing their views and their strategies. Obama along with McCain, Romney, Clinton, etc. wrote articles detailing their strategies and policies if they were to win.

    I think it’s worth noting that in Obama’s article, “Renewing American Leadership”, he explains under the heading “Revitalizing the Military”,
    “…A strong military is, more than anything, necessary to sustain peace. Unfortunately, the U.S. Army and the Marine Corps, according to our military leaders, are facing a crisis….88 percent of the National Guard is not ready to deploy overseas….

    “We should expand our ground forces by adding 65,000 soldiers to the army and 27,000 marines. We must recruit the very best and invest in their capacity to succeed. That means providing our servicemen and servicewomen with first-rate equipment, armor, incentives, and training — including in foreign languages and other critical skills. Each major defense program should be reevaluated in light of current needs, gaps in the field, and likely future threat scenarios. Our military will have to rebuild some capabilities and transform others. At the same time, we need to commit sufficient funding to enable the National Guard to regain a state of readiness….”

    I think he’s been clear on his motives but it’s all for critiquing once the policies are introduced. Many people are overplaying their hands, in particular Congressman Broun.

  27. jsm says:

    For all of you who dismiss Obama’s Marxist tendencies and think those who mention it are “crazy,” the following link provides an interesting read:
    “As Election Day draws nearer, and I continue to read and hear about economic fallouts, bailouts and that ‘change’ is needed, I remember of what happened in Cuba when a young, eloquent leader was telling Cubans that we needed ‘a change’ based on redistributing the class wealth. By the time he was done, all Cubans were equally poor, which also carried the loss of our human dignity.”

  28. Icarus says:

    Bucky and JSM,

    My sentiments are probably most closely reflected in the final paragraphs in the above comments from bird and onthefence.

    With regards to President Elect Obama, the next few months will separate campaign rhetoric from actual proposed policies. If policies that are introduced are Marxist, expect plent of criticism from me and many, many others. But until then, it’s really all a bunch of noise attacking the person, not the ideas. I’m not willing to play that game.

    With regards to Congressman Broun, he strikes me as someone who aims to be the Republican’s new direct mail king. After his embarassing campaign franking from this cycle, he appears to be positioning as the person who will resort to any level of hyperbole to appeal to the donors on the far right. It’s a successful strategy for fundraising, but doesn’t work so well to actually promote the causes he claims to be so dear to him.

  29. jsm says:

    Does Obama’s record mean nothing? Do the philosophies he has championed in every facet of his life to this point mean nothing? I AM speaking of “ideas,” Ic.

    A man’s history means something to me, especially when he supposes to be my leader. It’s difficult to make nice with someone I believe to be dishonest and untrustworthy. He’ll have to prove me wrong for me to change my mind.

  30. jkga says:

    jsm – For a different look at Obama’s record, check this out:

    Obama & Harvard Law Review

    snippet from Brad Berenson, Harvard Law class of ’91, associate White House Consel 2001-2003

    “It [his performance as editor] confirmed the hope that I and others had had at the time of the election that he would basically be an honest broker, that he would not let ideology or politics blind him to the enduring institutional interests of the Review. It told me that he valued the success of his own presidency of the Review above scoring political points of currying favor with his political supporters.”

    That’s the guy we elected.

  31. umustbekidding says:

    The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.
    This includes the type of people one surrounds himself with.

  32. Chris says:

    Does Obama’s record mean nothing?
    Obama’s record is nothing. You can’t vote “present” as the Chief Executive, even though I wish the current occupant tried more often to do so.

  33. jkga says:

    GOPeach, you should know, people sometimes get a little enthusiastic about their candidates. There’s no idolatry going on here.

    Chris and umustbekidding, I just posted a link to an in-depth report about Obama’s *record* in a leadership position. Read it, seriously. His editorship of the Harvard Law Review may not have given him the experience to be President, but if “the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior” he will be a fair President who is committed to the good of the country rather than to any particular ideology.

  34. atlantaman says:

    Voting “present” is the same thing as voting no, so perhaps Obama will be able to vote “present” on some of the more controversial issues.

  35. Decaturguy says:


    You are really going to compare a genuine American hero like John Lewis to the extreme, right wing, nutjob like Paul Broun?

    And GOPeach, the only idol worshiping I have seen in election is from extreme right wing nutjobs like yourself for Sarah Palin. Come on, admit it, you LOVE her.

  36. jkga says:

    GOPeach and Sarah, sittin’ in a tree…

    As far as the “present” votes – it shows that he’s someone who has a sense of nuance and subtlety. I know a lot of you don’t agree, but we live in a complicated world, and we can use a leader who sees shades of grey.

  37. jsm says:

    jk, get me a link to, or a quote from, something Obama wrote as president of the Harvard Law Review.

    Chris, I know his record is essentially “nothing,” but the little we do know is really not good. All O has done is “talk and write,” so we must review the things he has said and written. I’ve yet to hear or see anything from him about preserving freedom or making people personally responsible for their own decisions. He has made clear that he feels that economic injustice exists in this Nation and that this must be corrected. That alone shows that he does not value hard work and entrepreneurship and that he believes some are being held back by an oppressive society rather than by their own lack of effort. Therefore, he feels that those who have been successful somehow have an unfair advantage and must be taxed to help those “behind” them.

    Philosophies make policy, and either O’s philosophies will change or his policies will strangle the American economy.

  38. onthefence says:

    jsm take a look at the link i put up from the foreign affairs article. there are glimpses of his perception of hard work, etc. that you’re concerned about. i think that his life shows that he’s not intending to make the U.S. a welfare state. it seems that you’re assuming something about the man b/c of the overwhelming amount of blacks that voted for him (“held back by an oppressive society rather than by their own lack of effort”). read what others thought of the decisions he made as a result of his leadership position on the harvard review. that’s the experience you also want to add into your equation of what O may or may not do during his tenure as president.

    also, i’m not sure how much more our economy can be strangled considering the huge amount of debt our country has and many of us have personally. this is the time to be fiscally conservative. i believe that will happen and that everyone will suffer an increase in taxes in some respect (sales tax, property tax, etc.).

  39. jkga says:

    jsm – You are now saying you have a different political philosophy and view of the way the world works than Obama. That’s fine. I’m not going to argue that with you.

    I would like to try to convince you that he is not “dishonest and untrustworthy” – unless by “untrustworthy” you mean “has a different political philosophy than you do.”

    In the piece I linked to before, there is evidence that Obama did such a good job in editing the work of a *conservative* (Michael McConnell) that he recommended Obama for a job at U. Chicago. Another quote from Bradley Berenson, a member of the Bush administration:

    “He was unwilling to undermine, based on the way I viewed it, meritocratic outcomes or democratic outcomes in order to advance a racial agenda. That earned him a lot of recrimination and criticism from some on the left, particularly some of the minority editors of the Review.”

    All of this points to a temperament of fairness and putting the greater good ahead of ideological agendas.

    Btw, the editor of a law review is responsible for running the operation and overseeing the submission and editing of articles, not for writing his own opinion pieces, so I don’t know if there’s anything he wrote in his position that I could link to, even if I were willing to run around finding stuff for you. 🙂

  40. jsm says:

    “it seems that you’re assuming something about the man b/c of the overwhelming amount of blacks that voted for him (‘held back by an oppressive society rather than by their own lack of effort’).”

    Wow. You’re kinda reading into my statement there, aren’t you? Does everything have to be made into a racial issue? How pathetic. There are people of all colors who choose not to work, claim that society is against them, and expect the government to keep them up.

    And BTW, judging by the last couple years, don’t expect fiscal conservatism from this democratic Congress.

    “Btw, the editor of a law review is responsible for running the operation and overseeing the submission and editing of articles, not for writing his own opinion pieces, so I don’t know if there’s anything he wrote in his position that I could link to, even if I were willing to run around finding stuff for you.”

    My understanding is that he never wrote anything for the Review as its president. Those who hold that position usually write at least an article or two for the publication during their tenure.

  41. jkga says:

    jsm – I was interested in your comment and looked into it.
    [Dang! I ran around looking things up for you after all! 🙂 ]


    “All student writing is unsigned. This policy reflects the fact that many members of the Review, besides the author, make a contribution to each published piece.” I’m not sure how one could tell whether he wrote anything in that position.

    Anyhow, I hope you’re willing to concede (since you aren’t arguing it) that in this case the evidence (see my original link) shows Obama being fair-minded, listening to and working with people with different political philosophies.

    The country would be best served with the GOP as a reasonable, loyal opposition that offers substantive criticism of Obama’s policies – not knee-jerk ad hominem scaremongering and innuendo.

  42. umustbekidding says:

    Here are a few good Obama gaffes

    · Last May, he claimed that Kansas tornadoes killed a whopping 10,000 people: “In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died — an entire town destroyed.” The actual death toll: 12.

    · Earlier this month in Oregon, he redrew the map of the United States: “Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go.”

    · Last March, on the anniversary of the Bloody Sunday march in Selma, Alabama, he claimed his parents united as a direct result of the civil rights movement: “There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama, because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born.” Obama was born in 1961. The Selma march took place in 1965.

  43. Progressive Dem says:


    You are off base on Congressional reaportionment. GOP controlled General Assembly chose those districts, not courts. Courts influenced Ga. House and Senate districts.

    I agree that McKinney and Broun are byproducts of non-competitive districts. And I’ll stipulate that “Booby” Kahn bears responsibility for pefecting a bad idea. Unfortunately the GOP kept going down the wrong path on reapportionment. Georgia’s districts are a joke. In a year of major political realignment there wasn’t one competitive race for Congress (maybe Marshall) and Georgia is now one of the larger electoral states (2nd largest for GOP).

    America is built upon competition: competing political ideas and competing economic enterprises. Competition is what makes us unique, creative and dynamic. Georgia has to change its reaportionment system. Otherwise we end up with idiots like Broun and McKinney who are totally marginized and become ineffective. Arnold tried to change California’s system where Democrats have gerrymandered districts to their advantage. I don’t know results?

  44. Icarus says:

    PD and Andre,

    I’ll admit to forgetting about the congressional map clean up, but the result of that map was that more counties were included as contiguous units, and many districts became more competitive, not less, than the maps that the courts drew.

    Under current law, you can expect districts to continue to be drawn that favor the extremes of both parties, not competitive centrist districts.

  45. Dave Bearse says:

    Broun’s paranoia and the run on the gun shops for guns and ammo once widely known elsewhere in the US is exactly the type of thing to turn a purple state blue. Indeed there’s no easier way to lower expectations for President Obama than for his opponents to lower themselves as the alternative.

  46. umustbekidding says:

    Bill – I just questioned your statement. I know the FBI, CIA, etc.. should be looking out for the country to prevent anything extreme from happening. But what if it happens through laws, a little at a time, would they see it? Could they stop it?
    What do you think?

  47. allen9us says:

    Anyone that would have half a brain, would know better to listen so some right wing nutcase such a Broun. He is the epitimy of brainless, right wing republinuts. Here he is trashing the newly elected President, voted in by a MAJORITY of Americans and Broun acts like we are in the middle of the elections. There is NO excuse for vile, untrue, and hateful comments now. Apparently, Broun is so upset with the election outcome he is in withdrawals of having it his way (or the republinut way). Those days are over, and come next election the state of Georgia will be primed for a total Democratic sunami. Broun has just showed the American public how childish the republinut party has become. In my book Broun has shown the American people just how ignorant and stupid he is. In the next election we WILL get a REAL American to take his place. With ideologies like Broun, this country can never unite and be great again, cause all he will do is make stupid comments that will divide this nation. The republinut party has already done this before this election and I think they will continue for another election cycle. Enough is enough, it’s time to quit this petty mudslinging, and worry about helping our new President bring this country back to what it use to be before the Bush’s took over. We will put you out of office next election Congressman Broun!!!!!!

  48. onthefence says:

    jsm i will concede that point. i did make it racial where you had not. i will say that i have heard that type of innuendo from others and ASSUMED that you were making the same point. my apologies. =)

  49. Icarus says:

    Congrats to Paul Broun. He can’t get sworn in, but he’s getting an entire segment on the Daily Show to mock him as we speak!

    Now that the national media knows who you are, there’s no way they can deny swearing you in now.

  50. Eff The Dems says:

    Actually, that AJC article was incorrectly written. Broun actually said he “regretted that some people took offense at the way he said Obama reminded him of Hitler…”

  51. laura says:

    Obama is a Hitler in the making. He’s a demagogue who has promised everyone everything. (Hitler was a demagogue who did the same thing.) Obama has horrible communist and terorist background and willful associations that are ASTOUNDING. SDS, NP, friends, attending communist this that and the other.

    Obama is so Hitler it’s ridiculous. He thinks he’s God (so did Hitler).

    His associations are horrific, his ideology is Marxist, and he’s a megalomaniac.

    Duh. Of course he’ll go for dictator if he can. He’s a class psychological profile. He has ZERO experience qualifying him for this position, people have NO track record to go on to know him… he’s dangerous.

  52. Quoth onthefence:

    I was going through some of my old magazine subscriptions and ran across a few months of Foreign Affairs. These were the ones published in 2007 when each of the then candidates for POTUS wrote an article detailing their views and their strategies. Obama along with McCain, Romney, Clinton, etc. wrote articles detailing their strategies and policies if they were to win.

    Funny, I went through my old issues of Foreign Affairs, and can’t find where they printed the views, strategies and policies of the only POTUS candidate who has been correct on foreign affairs: Ron Paul.

    I guess we’ll just have to rely on his entire book, A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship.

    “Ron Paul has always believed that foreign and domestic policy should be conducted according to the same principles. Government should be restrained from intervening at home or abroad because its actions fail to achieve their stated aims, create more harm than good, shrink the liberty of the people, and violate rights. Does that proposition seem radical? Outlandish or farflung? Once you hear it stated, it makes perfect sense that there is no sharp distinction between the principles of domestic and foreign policy. They are part of the same analytical fabric. What would be inconsistent would be to favor activist government at home but restraint abroad, or the reverse: restraint at home and activism abroad. Government unleashed behaves in its own interests, and will not restrict itself in any area of life. It must be curbed in all areas of life lest freedom suffer. Ron Paul’s singular voice on foreign affairs has done so much to keep the flame of a consistent liberty burning in times when it might otherwise have been extinguished. He has drawn public attention to the ideas of the Founders. He has alerted people to the dangers of empire. He has linked domestic and foreign affairs through libertarian analytics, even when others have been bamboozled by the lies or too intimidated to contradict them. He has told the truth, always. For this, every American, every citizen of the world, is deeply in his debt. We can’t but be deeply grateful that Ron Paul’s prophetic words have been collected in this book. May it be widely distributed. May its lessons be absorbed by this and future generations.” — Foreword to A Foreign Policy of Freedom, by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

Comments are closed.