-10 votes

Ron Paul Vs Tom Woods?

There appear to be some members here who feel Tom Woods is a much better judge of character than the good doctor. So I'm curious to know how many here trust his judgement over Dr. Paul's?

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

To be fair

Tom Woods called out benton during the campaign and was as nice about it as one could be. I have always questioned Ron Paul's being nice to people that perpetually stab him and his supporters in the chest.

It's nothing against Ron, he doesn't like being rude, or mean even. Personally I invite and like confrontation.

If it's about that specific ability (judging character)

then yes, based on evidence, Tom Woods has a better ability for that. But it isn't about Ron Paul vs Tom Woods, that is just one ability that one of those individuals is better at than the other, everyone has strength and weaknesses...

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom — go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, an

I have nothing against Tom Wood

But if you want truth...or read between the lines you have to listen to Doug Weads past explanation of things...I think and I'm not 100% but people here hates Jesse Benton and how he ran 2012. But I think the whole Sorenson dirty money was probably part of Jesse's plan. We all hate politicians who will say and do anything for the money. Sorenson is that kind of people. And it's a good thing someone rooted him out. To me Doug knows the inside and he understand our side so even if he can't say what he wants he will give you a clear picture of the situation.

what is the purpose

of this post?

I believe you mean 'whom.'

In which case both are on my 'trusted sources' list and I'll leave it at that.

Defeat the panda-industrial complex

I am dusk icon. anagram me.

Why do I have to trust anyone?

I evaluate everything that both of them say with a critical mind. Both have provided valuable information for me to become more informed on certain issues.

Trust implies following blindly. I am not a follower. I will continue to listen to both for information as they have proven good sources. I am thankful to both for that.

Tu ne cede malis.

Candidates for Liberty Webpage:

2016 Liberty Candidate Thread:

Tom Woods Vs Ron Paul

People and their wedges. Tom Woods is awesome and a valuable asset to Liberty. I am sure Ron Paul would agree.

They tried to bury us, they didn't know we were seeds. -mexican proverb

to do what?

correct me if i'm wrong, but did this post come about because of the recent fallout over paying off sorvenson, and the weasels who sabotaged ron paul's campaign? i seem to recall tom being critical of some of those people. would tom have been a better choice than benton? i would say yes, or at least he could have hired the right crew. this isn't a matter of trust, but rather skills. ron is not superman. he cannot be brilliant at everything.


Simply a false choice. I trust both 100%. Period.

This is a false choice

Ron Paul is writing the foreword to Tom Woods' next book. This thread is trying to create division where none exists. That's not helpful.


Never trust. Consider and evaluate every idea for yourself.

Tom Woods is a snake

When my brother and I were trying to publish the pro-freedom book we wrote for 20-somethings we reached out to Woods in search if publishing advice and he got back to us in a very rude manner. This guy is only interested in the liberty movement to sell books, make money speaking, etc. He doesn't actually care to help people. He's got a nice gravy train with dissatisfaction with governemnt and doesn't want to jeopardize it.

Coincidentally, we reached out to Ron Paul during our project and got a phenomenal response, despite the fact that he was in the middle of a Presidential campaign.

Don't trust Woods

Why so shy about the details?

Give us your message to him, and quote his response, so we can evaluate. Otherwise, it's just whining.

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." -- Joseph Goebbels


"he got back to us in a very rude manner"

Not getting back to you would have been rude. What exactly did he do that gave you the impression he was rude and that he is a snake?

Strange Attack

Every single day on the Tom Woods Show someone else's work is being praised and promoted, so this is an awfully strange criticism.

I rather suspect someone could earn an awful lot more money in many other fields than in writing books---writing books earns authors next to zero---for the liberty movement, or preparing 600 homeschool videos to help kids learn Ron Paul's ideas.

Ugh I apologize

I realize today how rude my comment was, and I apologize to Mr. Woods.

Really there is no excuse. There's not enough nice people in the world and I am not setting a good example.

I can empathize

The sense I got from the original comment was that you were a young liberty sojourner that perhaps felt scorn from a liberty trailblazer who did not share in the enthusiasm of a freedom project during a time many of us freely collaborated with one another. To this feeling, I can say that I empathize. You see, during Ron Paul's 2007-2008 run, I joined a local meetup group where I met many kindred minds and enthusiastic folks. The organizer offered her house as a HQ of sorts for our first meeting and to gather campaign materials. But I got a sense towards the end of the campaign she was either disenchanted or overwhelmed by the responsibilities that an organizer must attend to such that by the 2011-2012 run she was no longer an active organizer. By 2012, I tried my hand in organizing a smaller meetup while also remaining active in the larger regional meetup group. The challenge when trying to organize is that people will turn to you to lead or, if not to lead, for advice or for information. While the temptation, especially when you are not used to managing human assets, is to pass the buck or plea ignorance, somehow you grit and bear it for the success of a shared objective. In hindsight and after the chaos of grassroots politicking, you wonder if anything you've said came out terse and unfriendly; certainly I wonder if this was the case here between you and Dr Woods.

I came by Ron Paul through Dr Woods in 2007 and so I speak with some empathy given his unfaltering support for Dr Paul during the last two campaigns. Since that time, as I learned more about Dr Paul, I've also learned more about Dr Woods; for example, he came by his writing bona fides through the traditional scholarly writing route (e.g. PhD dissertation, historical, academic journals, etc.). His relationship with major publishers only followed after his exposure through academic circles.

I imagine the term "snake" is what caught people by surprise. A snake, or serpent in biblical sense, is a great deceiver. It is someone who seems disingenuous, someone like a Jesse Benton. Had Dr Woods prescribed a path to publishing that did not entail getting your college degree from the Ivy League, submitting papers to be published in academic journals, and networking with people from the Mises Academy, then you would be completely justified in calling out Dr Woods as a snake. On the other hand, had he recommended his path as the only path to writing, we could be tempted to call him out as an academic snob. Thinking back to my meetup organizing days, politics has a way to be taxing on one's physical and mental health--liberty not excepted.

100% agreed. Woods has some

100% agreed. Woods has some very, very stupid arguments to defend his positions (look at his weak-sauce defense of his view on the 14th amendment). He's surprisingly cagey about several of his views...

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

Tom Woods

Is a little 'r' republican that comprehends and is mostly okay with the anarchy argument.

In my opinion.

In other words, he likes anarchy, but is personally comfortable with a lot of the minarchist trappings.


Ron Paul disagrees with you. The whole thread is about Ron Paul as a judge of character, and he obviously likes Tom Woods, as he has made clear many times and in many ways.

There are 11 Tom Woods books out there, plus who knows how many articles and videos. I do not see "stupid" arguments in these. This is why Judge Napolitano, Peter Schiff, and Barry Goldwater Jr. endorse his books. So we are not to listen to Ron Paul, Judge Napolitano, Peter Schiff, or Barry Goldwater Jr.? They're too stupid for you? Maybe you're on the wrong website.

Peter Schiff's views on the

Peter Schiff's views on the constitution are actually quite different from RP's and Woods. In fact, I'd argue that Schiff is a practicalist...he wants certain policy, and doesn't care if the constitution supports it or not.

Napolitano also has different views. Napolitano believes that the 14th amendment applied the BOR to the states. Ron Paul doesn't (and he's never really offered an explanation as to why it doesn't). Tom Woods is in RP's camp, yet his argument for why the 14th amendment is being misinterpreted is very weak (personal attacks against the author of the amendment by Tom Woods).

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

Phxarcher87's picture


Yeah Tom Woods never has any guests on his show discussing liberty books by his guests. That Dr. Woods sure doesn't put his stamp on anyone trying to make money off the liberty movement.

James Madison


A hallmark of the movement that has brought us together on this page, is an understanding that trust in men should be limited.

Asking 'who do you trust more' implies you have abandoned reason. I'll be assessing or comparing Ron Paul with Tom Woods only by investigating the views they hold, as well as their ability to express and teach liberty.


Woods is basically Ron Paul

The Revolution was written by Thomas E Woods.

Follow me @L_Commentary for libertarian commentary

I disagree

Tom Woods is an Anarchist, as he describes himself.

and Ron Paul is a minarchist.

The Revolution was written by Thomas E. Woods - is this aFACT???

I'm interested in this statement Liberty Commentary. Was Woods his ghost writer? Please tell us more. Thank you.

SteveO24's picture


the toughest question of all time. I trust both.