not wipe out. just like that. and there will always have a base among the people if the people do not feel the government serves their interest which is the trouble of most latin american countries toda . .

>> the united states troop had authority under the treaty to help put that down. and so the united states established itself as always being a favor of putting down even democratic rebellions in order to preserve order and stability. and then after 1900, you know, in the roosevelt, munro doctrine and all this, it goes on and on and on. when was the last time we invaded a latin untry was in 1980? panama? and then you wonder why a politician can score points with crowds in south america by claiming to stand up to the damn

yankees. there is this heritage of there. i don't know if this country will ever be able to overcome this fear and suspicion, considering that the war was bad enough what went on for the next 150 years. you know, an old world power politics termed the united states is the natural hegemon of the western hemisphere. it is the most powerful economically, militarily. but you don't have to act like. and in the long run it's a losing thing. the sun has set on the british empire, for instance. >> what would be your view of the intercontinental north to south road -- >> everything i know about that,

there's some misbegotten highway structure construction projects that will probably never get off the ne. >> would you say it's so embedded and not to be forgotten by the south or mexico? i don't ever see harmony coming out of the. >> well, i would think so. i like mexico. it's a country with a sad, sad history. it started out almost without chance. so did the other latin america countries. but we could make more effort to listen to others before we, government takes a stance towards another country. whoever it is. might learn something about it might get some people to understand the language.

you know, not enough people can read or speak spanish. spanish ought to be the second language in the united states. and also learn more about the history that we are a very inward country. most of united states citizens don't know very much about canada either. you know, we invaded canada twice? they know it. they haven't forgotten it. a second time we did it, and i., we set off a chain of events that made canada canada. just like when the united states and mexico, set off a chain of events that made mexico mexico. in a slightly different way. and also involved, set off a civil war in mexico and it set off a bloody civil war in the united states. and in the long run, you know, if it wasn't for california

gold, i don't know if you would say the united states gain back its a.d. $7 million at cost to fight the war. was their hand over your? >> based on your great knowledge of history on the united states and mexico, as we go into the immigration reform after we get through with the health care reform, what is your view on just immigration? or if you are for immigration reform, what are the pros and cons in your mind based on your history? >> well, i would say that it's pretty well demonstrated that it's going to happen. people are going to cross borders. which the total in this country

is 12 million people now. majority came from europe or africa or asia, legally on visas, and then just stay. you're not going to find them. if it were legally possible, load them on schoolbuses, the train and buses would be 7000 miles long, and where are you going to put them? the united states economic policies towards latin american countries in the 20th century has not done very much to help the situation. it's changed some in recent decades, but they existed as colonies economically. they were there to provide

agriculture products and other raw materials to united states, and buyback manufactured products from the united states. it would have been better all the way around if this country had encouraged industrialization. a little bit more. but when we do, you knmw, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. have you ever heard of nafta? nafta, that sounds like a great idea. let's go encourage all of these factory developments all along the border. that's fine. with the united states also believes in free trade. antacids jeffersons administration. what we call globalization nowadays. well, sources of labor opened up in asia cheaper than what was in mexico, the factories went to asia and the spnrts that it event attracted to the border have jobs anymore. jobs formed in the united states a. another thing, immigration

reform. typically mexican and central american migrants across the border overstay about half the year. they need to go home. now they are afraid to go home because they will get arrested at the border. what kind of sense does that make? they are not only illegal aliens, they are unhappy about it not likely to attach themselves to affections of this country when they are trapped. >> so mexico is well populated, if i understand you correct. a lot of lower class people without jobs or advantages. however, that's a country that is rich in resources in silver and they have their own oil. is there a way that the masses of people in mexico can put the pressure just through numbers on the government to make their

lives better? instead of coming over here. >> far be it from me to be a family adviser. well, things are getting better. i hope. because of the breaking of one party rule that went on for more than 70 years, until the year 2000. and there's getting to be a little more real democracy, particularly in state and local governments. the more educated people now than there used to be. the indian land problems that have completely survived, i don't think there's any real fighting. but land distribution is still a

serious proble i would say if the mexicans central government wanted to start their one thing, quit concentrating everything on mexico city. it's the biggest city in the world. 22 million people. is ridiculous but it's hagiographical, which he said he has a hard time putting out there but what about the other cities in mexico? some of these factors could be in there, that's for sure there's a tendency, this one on under the spanish. it went on under the aztecs. it went on before them. this was going to be the hub of the empire, and therefore everything would come in and serve it. like venice. but mexico city's industrial overhead and population could well be dispersed a little better, or be a lot more

economical instead having every thing she attended a place. but that's as far as i'milling to fight anyway. [inaudible] >> does the government suppress education gaer? >> oh, no. since the 1968 disturbances, that has really gotten a lot better. and mexico has got some real fine universities. to it needs more. >> the war seems to have trained a lot of leadership, ulysses grant, a number of people. is that any of the mexican leaders that had their beginnings, their skills honed

in this war? >> yes. >> who are the ones we should know about? >> most of the famous names during the time of the war with the united states, got shoved out of the picture. but there is a whole younger generation that comes along that either indirectly produce abated in that war or hadnough of that background, so when the war of the reform starts, they are ready to go. what the heck is that? diaz, he actually -- he was in the army during the war of the united states. he comes in as a very young

officer in the wars of the reform, and then when the french invade in 1862nd 1863, he is a great hero of that war. they did learn a lot from the mistakes of their mismanaged armies. particularly in the later stages of the war with the french. but both wars and the war of the french were most guerrilla wars on each side. really savage. if he took prisoners you shot them. on the united states side, of course, we already mentioned a few of them. ulysses s. grant was a lieutenant down there, sherman was in california. robert e. lee was onef sco's

engineers, and this whole roster of junior officers who become generals in the u.s. civil war. so you get a little of that on the mexican side, but most of that was later. the three reasons the united states, if you did say it one more, and i'm not sure they did, what it did was one of disorganization and weakness on the mexicans at the second, was the superiority of the united states field artillery which was the best in the world at that time. and look at the devastation it wreaked on both sides when it was over. and the third was these west point graduates who were few and company grade officers, the generals were all incompetent. whether they were politically appointed or not, because the ones that had been in the army were moth-eatenld relics of the war of 1812.

really not up to -- they got themselves mired in politics, taylor especially. that sething west point is learned, that politics and military service don't mix. polk didn't understand. he put he interfere with the army every day and really threatened with the safety of american lives just to score points. and his successors generally followed the lead of the west pointer, and those who did not learn lessons of the folks have done so at the peril. it keep the politics at home and the mmander of chief's job is to facilitate the military campaigns. >> many historians see this war as a great tempest of

nationalism on both sides. i take it with your emphasis on sort of federalism and rebellion, you would take that to be some degree. >> the rampant nationalism where we were the greatest and we got the mission of the civilized world. i was already there in the united states. that had been sent practically the ink dried on the declaration of independence. and xico, i think the stresses of the war in a postwar period finally create a mexican national identity, which revolves around by the way i interpret your waterloo than, who revealed to an indian that you look like an indian, but in early 1820s tooker over because she supposedly represented them. they were, with their white

spanish catholic heritage and they were born in mexico. but by the end. and i have the thing right describe this change, but the way the war, the treaty was signed, they were trying to hold onto their power at the top. and they were willing to give away half their country just to stay there. they had more troops at the end of 1848 out fighting their own people in these rebellions and ever put in the field in united states. and the ones who are rising up and a few indians like torres, get the idea maybe we could do a little better, and at the end of this one chapter i say the virgin was not her. she was mexicana.

she had really been strong as a patron. i think i'm being told to shut the heck up. [laughter] >> it's true and his books that there are lots and lots of things in there that are tremendously interesting and well expssed their we will bring us to a close now. arremember, we like people to check out books. would also like people to buy books. so be sure and patronize our table, and then david will be able to sign some books for you. thank you all for coming. [applause]

>> we are the 2009 bookexpo america booksellers convention at the javits center in your city. where are the birth of bloomsbury and walk their time here with peter miller of bloomsbury book at what you have been apostol? >> the most ambitious and exciting @ook is the one that is over my sold shoulder which is "logicomix." is a graphic novel. we decided this one because it's a hrical biography of bertram russell. industry as a botaged an interesting nod novel and the two people who are behind our mathematicians and computer science expert. they decided to approach the idea of the foundation of mathemics in the life of bertram russell as told in comic book for because for them the big idea like that, what bertram russell was pursui was actually as heroic and as, you

know, as life-and-death as anything you'd find in a superhero tale. so it's a book that's been getting a lot of atttion before this convention, and a lot here. we have been getting a lot of the galley. and just everybody seems to be very excited to embrace this medium for that particular subject extract what else do you have coming out? >> the other interesting sort of work of nonction in the fall is this book called "the age of comfort" by john dejean and she is a scholar who has sort of takes a look at the period in the late 17th century when public life became sort of injury arrived in places like her sigh which is louis the 14th great creation, was not built for comfort at all. it was for enormous blender and so of public events and grandeur but these were not private spaces at all. as with all meant to be lived in

the open. and accurately the 14th died his son takes over. there is a movement of the because of new technologies are coming in and domestic life is changing. that suddenly things are starting to be designed around the idea of comfort. at evething starts to get turned into a secondary private area. and bursitis of the perfect metaphor because it is all retrofitted by louis the 15th at his mistresses and women into his court to create two worlds, the world of the public sees and the world behind. things were introduceduch as soap and the flush toilet, the private bedroom. it, suddenly with that comes having a private life versus a public one. this is a real important work of scholarship details in a completely new way. and not just a book about design but an important moment in

history. >> the 10th anniversary of bloomsbury u.s.a., and bloomsbury books was originally based were still based in the u.k. what was the decision to start up in print he in the u.s.? >> well, i think at that point they were growing significantly in the u.k. and the like they needed american presence. and we didn't want to jt sell the rights to a lot of their books for publishers in the u.s. the u.s. is one of the largest market in the world for book publisng, so they were taking that next step if they were a publisher of harry potter in the u.k. so i thinthey took that opportunity and establish a foothold here. in a very small way 10 years ago, and now it has grown considerably. and george gibson who is the publisher of walker can talk about the various, how it is expanded in those deniers and all the different divisionshat it now encompasses. >> also joining us, peter ginna from bloomsbury press people is

a difference between bloomsbury press and bloomsbury u.s.a.? >> bloomsbury press is a small imprint that is devoted entirely to serious nonfiction. we get a lot of history, politics, biography,urrent events, economics, science and that kind of thing. so it's much less general and more focused which is general audience, general last. >> what you have coming out this fall you are excited about? >> one books i'm excited about is this one called "half moon." henry hudson and avoid redo the map of the new world. this september ia 400 anniversary of hudson's discovery of the river that bears his name and his exploration of new york harbor. and that was an adventure that really changed the course of history in north america, who was a very ding voyage for a lot of reasons that he was pposed to go ithe opposite dresher. he was supposed to sell to china over the northern coast of russia and he sort of took a left turn and came to north

america instead, which led him to his discoveries here and is expiration of the river. the author is a druid writer and resecher and also as a sailor so he has done his own kind of forensic navigation and redrawing the map, the plots of hudson's voyage to sort of give us new insight as to what that trip was really about. >> we are joined by george gibson, publisher director of walker books. georgia, walker books is celebrating its 50th anniversary. what is walker books and who is the founder? >> walker and company is a division of bloomsbury u.s.a. did was founded in 1959 by sam and beth walker, was a completely independent company until january 12005 when we were acquired by blosbury pixel are now a division of bloomsbury along with bloomsbury press and the main bloomsbury division. and we are one of them. >> how long have you been with walker books spewers i've been with with walker since 1993. as a publisher of walker, and

then became the publishing director of bloomsbury u.s.a. last sumr. so that's much more recent development. but i've been involved with walker for the past, what is it now? 18 -- 15 years, 16 years. >> so what books are you excited about this whole? >> a couple of walker books, a book called "an artist in treason" by a man called andro linklater who wrote a book force a few years ago. is the story of the greatest traitor in american history, but it would've a complex man named james wilkinson who was a revolutiary war hero, in general, younger generation the continental army who became the leading general in the american army, 15 years later at the same time he became aged 13 and a spanish secret service and was asked by forcing for the next 20 years at the same time as he led the american army. but the amazing thing was every president he worked for, washington, adams, jefferson, madison all knew that he was a traitor. and they kept him in his position for very strategic

reasons. it's a fascinating, untold story and unknown life. that, and then another book -- biography by an unknown but fascinating figure in history, joanna, queen of labels. the only woman to rule in her own name in the 14th century. she was every bit as dynamic a role as elizabeth i of england. ruled over a glittering court in naples at an incredible turbulent time. it is a very revealing look at the 14th century through the lens of her life. >> something out of a catalog that you want to show is coming up this whole? >> ashley on the bloomsbury list, a book called "meltdown iceland" that i think is going to be a fascinating way into the economic crisis that hit us last year. this is the story of the meltdown of iceland, the economic collapse of the country. d we will publish on the one year anniversary of the collapse come october the seventh book is a fascinating insight story of

greed, overreach, all of the things that happened in this country happened in iceland but they are understandable and microcosm. and i think that is was quick to make this choice of fascinate. >> you said you'd been with them since 1983. how has the publishing industry change since then? >> wow. well, it is changing all most every way and yet it hasn't. that sounds contradictory, but the marketplace has changed enormously. obviously. in 1993, even the chains were not nearly as common as they are. amazon hadn't even been invented. and the price clubs and the warehouse clubs and airport shop that sold so many books today, sold practically none. so the number of outlets for books has multiplied geometrically in the last 15 years. in terms of publishing, it is still all about getting good writers to do good work. and in finding media outlets for them. the media has changed a lot, particully in the last five

years as there are fewer outlets for print reviews. the classical ways of promoting books has really declined, but now there are all sorts of opportunities on the internet that all publishers need to learn how to use. the whole bible network, social networking. it's a brave new world for publhers, and we're all at having to get used to that spirit with the walkers recognizer publishing company today? >> good question. sam passed away a good number of years ago. i think he would have trouble and this will. i think it's a very different world than the one he had. but that is actually quite fluid and a new technologies, as i go i think she is rather enjoying it. >> you are joined by peter miller, peter ginna and peter dixon from the blueberry walker a book. thanks. thank you anduch. >> here are some bestsellers from "the new york times."

>> from freedomfest 2009 in las vegas, the presentation by david boaz, author of "the politics of freedom: taking on the left, the right and threats to our liberties." this is 30 minutes. >> thank you. thanks to all of you for being here so early, much earlier than i normally would be here if i were at the speaker. but i appreciate your being here. ever since i published libertarianism of primakov and then "the politics of freedom" a couple of years ago people been asking me if i have another book. so i'm here so i'm here to tell you today that i've come up with another book idea and i think it might actually sell better than my previous books. i got this idea early this year, my new book idea is called tax tips for democrats. and it will give democrats ide th they need to understand about the tax system. and i was really thrilled that when it went around washington asking prominent democrats to tell me things they think people should know about tax system,

that i really got a lot of cooperation. i went to the chairman of the house ways and means committee, charlie riggle. and i said what you people need to know about the ince tax. and charlie wrangle said you know, when you get a thousand dollars a night in rental income from your ill in the dominican republic, you have to pay taxes on the. so that's a good thing to know. and i went to tom daschle, the former senate majority leader and i said what you people need to know, and he said when a business associate gives you $80000 in consulting fees, it turns out you have to pay taxes on that. and i went to tim geithner, the treasury secretary, and he said when you are emplod to go after money to buy your social security tax and you've signed up for my dog and that's what the money is for, you ashley had to pay the social security tax is. some people say the best thing about electing a democratic credit is all the back taxes we get to collect from their appointees. well as a karl marx would say that the farce.

the rest of what is going on in washington is tragedy. freedom is under assault in the united states. i'm going to talk about some of the ways. i want to remind you that when i say freedom is under assault, i am not talking about just the last four months. did about the past eight years that we went through. we went through during the bush administrations, the excesses of the patriot act, the intrusion of the federal government into local schools, state decisions on marijuana and end-of-life choices, state marriage law, the biggest expansion of entitlement in 40 years, a law to sharply restrict poor political speh, the steady a cumulation of power in the executive branch ald in the person of the president, and unnecessary and still floundering war. the assertion and exercise of the president's power to arrest and incarcerate american citizens on american soil without access to a lawyer or a

judge. an increase in federal spending of more than a trillion dollars and a near doubling of the national debt. and all of that before the last 100 days of the bush administration. people talk a lot about the first 100 days of a presidential administration. the first 100 days of fdr, the first 100 days of lbj. now they are excited about the first 100 days of obama. but the last 100 days of the bush administration were pretty disastrous. it just seemed to me that duri the period from september 2 -- from september to the end of the bush administration does one assault on freedom and free enterprise after another. i'm back in september and october specializing a lot of us, a lot of free market folks, freedom of the people were just feeling shellshocked by one below to market capitalism after another. you had a federal takeover of

feigning me and freddie mac, the bailout of aig, the all power to henry paulson plan. the collapse of washington mutual, congressional passage of the power to henry paulson, plus pork plan. a sharp drop in the dow jones average, the federal reserve board unprecedented decision to lend directly to nonfinancial companies. the government partial nationalization of major banks. paulson's announcement that he would use his bailout money for something other than what he told congress it would be for. the automobile bailout and interactive client of a congressional vote and so on and on. and one of the problems, especially for think tank in washington, was that there was no time to fight any of these measures. most of them were just aounced as done deals. every monday morning, the secretary of the treasury and the chairman of the federal rerve would hold a press conference to announce what they had nationalize over the weekend. there was no debate. there was no time to argue about

it i no time to challenge it or analyze it with the incumbent president in charge, both presidential candidates going alone, most members of congress afraid to challenge these are dire warnings of catastrophe. it was impossible to create any real debate. defenders of capitalism were reeling. and adding insult to injury, every day i wou pick up the washington post or "the new york times" and i would read a claim that a problem that had been caused by the fedal reserve corporate tax law and federal housing regulation was, in fact, some have to be blamed on the free marketnd the workings of capitalism. that was really rubng salt into wounds. there were even a few people, jacob weisberg in newsweek declared that this crisis could be traced to libertarianism, as if there had been libertarians and the clintons and bushes ministrations making decisions. in fact, everybody in this room

knows big government used this crisis. big government causes massive oblem over and over, and then demand more money and more power in the claim that that will fix it. and it does that again and again. and from the government's point of view, if it can cause problems big enough to be called a crisis, so much the better. you get a lot more power if it's a crisis that if it's just a problem. 20 years ago robert higgs wrote a book called crisis and leviathan. what hsaid in the book was some people think government in the united states is just grown 1 percent a year until they got as big as it is. but the fact is government grows in times of crisis. war, economic depression, maybe natural disaster pic that's when the government gets new powers and new money and then after the

crisis against some of the powers or money back but never all of it so there is a ratchet effect so that government keeps growing during these crises. more recently, a woman named naomi klein wrote in book that was a bestseller a lot of people thought was an interesting book. sheet explaining what she was talking to was the shock doctrine is a political strategy that the republican right has been perfecting over the past 35 yearto use for various different kinds of shocks. they could be wars, natural disasters, economic crises, anything that sends a society into a state ofhock. to push through what economists call economic shock therapy. she had a point. take 9/11. that was a big shock to the system. the bombing, the destruction o

american buildings. and what did we get out of 9/11? we got the patriot act, the department of homeland security, the federalization of airport screeners, arguably we got the war in iraq. but naomi klein would have you believe that after crisis edd regulation and free markets. and obviously we didn't see any of that coming after 9/11. government take advantage of crises to amass more money and more power. there is a very smart liberal writer named jonathan chait who writes for the new republic, and he wrote a devastating critique of her kopecky said it was not a very sharp book. one of the things he said was precisely what i am saying that she says it's the right that takes advantage of crises, but in fact it's often been the left that takes its advantage to and here's what he wrote. liberals could not have enacted the new deal without the great

depression. communist revolutions have generally come about in the wake of wars. the liberal economist victor fusion once wrote that national health insurance will probably come to the united states in the wake of a major change in the political climate, the kind of changehat often accompanies a war, a depression, or large-scale civil unrest. unquote. so i wouldn't have the nerve to stand here and compare communist revolutions to the new deal and national health insurance, but a rider into new republic says yes, the left uses these things. so he said it, not me. but he is making the same point that usually it is in fact more power that the government sees in time of cut crisis, not a diminution of its power. so in 9/11, you did have all these things that happened after the shock. then we had the economic shocks

of 2008. almost seven years to the day after 9/11. and what happened in? did threpublican administration summon up the spirit of golden friedman and deregulate and privatize and cut government spending, as naomi klein wld predict right now, post the picketed the government always do in times of crisis. it sees new powers over the economy. it dramatically on the federal reserve and ejected another trillion dollars of inflationary credit into the banking system. it partially nationalized the biggest nks and appropriated $700 billion with which to intervene in the economy. it may general motors and chrysler wars of the federal government. wrote a bailout bill giving the secretary of the treasury extraordinary wers that could not be reviewed by courts or other government agencies. that's what gornments do in time of crisis, and that is a reason that the freedom movement needs to be prepared and get up

whenever we anticipate a crisis like that and now the obama administration is continuing to strive toward centralization and government domination of the economy. i could throw a lot of numbers at you but the numbers change so fast it's impossible to keep up with them. a government budget that is about double what it was nine years ago. , tibet is the fault of george w. bush, but the last $200 billion obviously come from this new admistration. a federal deficit of one point april $10, that's the size of the federal budget when bush became president. 's how far we have moved in the eight and a half years sin clinton left office. and one of the interesting things about the obama administration is this idea of the shock doctrine is absolutely right. governments use crises to seize power. but they don't usually say so.

they don't usually say that's what they are doing. this administration is happily going around telling people that what they're doing. rahm emanuel the white house chief of staff said on a nationally televised interview the economic crisis facing the country is an opportunity for us. after all, he said, you never want a serious crisis to go to waste. and his crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not do before. such as taking control of finance, energy, education and health care. and the really interesting thing is when a manual said that, people did pointedut that i put about a. some other people wrote about and talk about a. on tv. they said look, rahm emanuel is ying they're going to use this crisis to seize power. and this did not face this administration. hillary clinton what do europe and said the same thing. joe biden said the same thing. and in his weekly radio address, president obama said something

very similar. were going to use his crisis to do things we couldn't do otherwise. thinks the american people would have resisted had it not been for this crisis. and in that, they are absolutely learned the lesson of 9/11. some pple say the stimulus bill is the last 9/11 days or the last patriot act it because after 9/11 you have to pay to act what sort of threw in everything law-enforcement had wanted for a decade, but couldn't get through a skeptical congress. all of a sudden after 9/11, it sails through congress in a couple of weeks. and a stimulus bill? what is the stimulus bil is a package of stuff the left has wanted to spend money on for years, but couldn't get through congress in a time that was not a crisis. so now they've got it all. you know all the headline things the obama administration is doing. they are trying to turn health care over to the federal government. they are trying to turn education over to the federal government if they are trying to

take over energ for the federal governme. obviously, they are trying to impose huge new federal regulations on the finance industry. but there is an under the radar of salt on a lot of aspects of the american economy. without anybody really noticing, people in the obama adminiration are moving to take control or to regulate out of existence 401(k)s, private health plans, workplace flexibility to use antitrust to break up companies and industries, to impose a pay regulation not just on companies that take federal money but not all companies because they think that larry summers, tim geithner and barack obama know what the pay of american executives should be, better than stockholders and corporate managers do. they want to take all these things over. and then they have a listed as long as her arm of the taxes they want to raise to pay for the stuff. and even with all those taxes

they are projecting, unprecedented deficits as far as the eye ca see. as i said a minute ago, i think for a long time lots of us were just shellshocked by the daily barrage of assault and economically. i think know that's how i felt picking up the newspaper every morning last alternative or also to other factors that i think have been hampering the freedom movement. first, too many small government advocate always felt some ambivalence about taking on the bush administration. bathos somehow republicans really do believe in smaller government and free markets to matter how many trillions in new spending they ruup or how many americans they invest without lawyers. and that mperception limited our ability to organize a broader freedom movement to protect freedom during the bush administration. and second, during the height of

the financial crisis, some siness people and even some free market economists felt uncertain about opposing the emergency powers claimed by paulson and bernanke. one economist told me if ben bernanke have seen all the data and really feels this is necessary, then i'm inclined to believe him. well, think i was the wrong attitude. but i understand that some people thought liquidity crisis, credit cards, these are propagated issues. we can be sure that we should be marching in the street, riding the op-ed pieces opposing this. well, that's all over that now smaller government people feel no ambivalence about taking on the obama reid, pelosi, government and its assault on economic freedom across the board. and instead of his financial rescue package, which was sort of complicated, insteaof that, we are now facing an old fashion throw money at the problem,

kitchen sink spending attitude. the obama budget, all of that free market people, small government people, understand these are bad ideas. most free market economists felt no ambivalence of the stepping up to oppose the stimulus bill. johncock at the university of chicago i thought had a great line. he said the premise of a fiscal stimulus is that americans do not borrow enough and do not spend enough. the idea is where going to make people borrow and spend more money. robert merrill of harvard called it probably the worst bill that has been put forward since the 1930s. so that started to get people back in again. and i think the reaction to this so-called stimulus bill may have been the beginning of the renaissance of the free market moment. freed from the burden of feeling some connection to a republican president. republicanvoted overwhelmingly

against both bills in congress. libertarians played leading roles in galvanizing the opposition. i hope all of you saw a full-page newspaper ads the cato institute ran with 300 economists saying it is not true that there is a consensus of economists in favor of this spending bill that we ran in "the new york times" and the wall street times, washington post. [applause] >>f nablus talked about on television. it w held up by republican senators at a press conference. it seemed to energize the free marketeers who had felt her voice had beehurting national debate over the past few months. in addition, americans for prosperity posted an anti-stimulus petition on the web. libertarians led deep arctic. freedom works is planning a taxpayer's march on washington for september 12. all of these things are a sign that the good news is the free market movement is back in gear. the bad news is that's because

the welfare state is on the march. that's what itas taken to get our movement back into your. but we americans, we freedom loving americans have faced dark days for american freedom before. think about the first great fight for american freedom, the revolution. july of 1776 was a wonderful date in human history. not only did adams smith public the wealth of nations in england, but on the side of the atlantic, americans declared that they would stand for the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. and they would take on the greatest empire in the world in order to defend those rights. and six months later, the state of the american revolution was such that thomas paine issued his essay, the crisis, that began these are the times that try men's souls, the summer soldier and the sunshine patriot

will end this crisis, shrink from the service of the country, but he that stands by it now deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. and that was december of 1776. and just a year later, just before christmas777, if you remember your high school history, you know what was going on. christmas 1777, washington's army took up winter quarters at valley forge. and they face a cruel race with time to get crude hs erected before the soldiers, barefoot and half ned, froze to death. many other forces actually did starve to death, and for the army starvation was a real danger. and then came the fight against slavery, an institution that had existed from time and immoral and virtually all parts of the world. until the rise of libertarian ideas in england and america

created a movement for abolitionism. and we've all read of the horrors of the middle passage and the regime of legalized violence thasustained slavery on the plantation. rerts and novels about the reality of slavery helped to change people' mind, but the fundental principle that motivated the abolitionists was liberty. if you readhe writings and speeches of frerick douglass and william lloyd garrison and sarah and angelina green tea, that's the thing you see. angelina green key wrote the great fundamental principle of abolitionist is that man cannot rightfully hold his fellow man as property. therefore, we affirm that every slaveholder is a man stealer, a man is a man. and as a man, he has uninbitable rights. liberty and self ownership fundamental principles of american freedom of western freedom. that's what made the case

against slavery. and eventually after all those centuries, abolished chattel slavery. and tn compare to the hardships of valley forge and plantation slavery, the new deal may seem like a minor problem. but it did present a fundamental challenge to economic freedom and constitutional government. and in the 1930s, we heard phrases like the market has failed. we're in a crisis atmosphere. we saw pseudo- solutions pathing panic, just like today. and the forerunners and the founders of the libertarian movement reacted in horror. th is really when the libertarian movement began in reaction to the new deal. frank knight, the great chicago economist, told the younger chicago economist at that time that the new deal represented a general movement of western european civilization away from

liberalism to authoritarianism. the failure of the project of a society based on freedom and intelligence, the one fairly favorable chance ever seen in history, and the like of which will probably never be seen again. george to go, another chicago economist, said th henry simons told him the basic values of civilization would beost. this is how freedom lovin americans were responding to the w deal. it was a scary time. isabel paterson, a great writer, said it was not correct to say that the new deal was like fascism. the new deal is fascism, she said. and then after eight years of thnew deal, unemployment still high, the economy still in the doldms, king world war. and the great austrian economist at harvard, josephaid in 1941, talking about the new deal and what he saw as the likely

effects of war, i cannot help feeling that this will be the end of the american way of life. and then move forward a couple of years to 1943. you have been through 14 years of depression and new deal, and now war. and if you look at the map of europe in 1943, you see that hitler is in control of europe from stalingrad to north africa to the english channel. and the part that hitler isn't the joint is controlling by stalin. imagine being a lover of freedom in 1943. and in that dark and terrible year, three women stood up and america and launched a movement for freedom. isabel paterson wrote a book called the god of the machine, taking on the humanitarian argument for big government. rose wilder lane published a book called the discovery of freedom in which she talked about how in all of human history in her view have been

only three moments of real attempt to create freedom. and we're about to give up the third one. and in most famously of course in 1943, the third of those great women, ayn rand published a book called the fountainhead which became a huge bestseller, became a movie, a hit movie, created an entire movement behind that book. if those women had not stood up, who knows what kind of movement we might have. the next year in 1944 friedrich hayek published a book called the road to serfdom. and that book had more of an impact on creating an intellectual movement. it was read by academics it was read in particular by young graduate students and college students who would go on to be great academics. but it was not just an academic book. it was certainly the least academic of hayek's book. high-tech body since it was a book for the intellectuals. but it turned out there were a lot more intellectual and

america than hayek realized. the book became a bestseller that it was excerpted in the british digested with turned into a comic. had a really impact there. and in two years later, as the war ended, leonard re-created the firs free market think tank in america, the foundation for economic foundation. so americans did rpo to the new deal with a new movement to restore freedom and constitutional government. and now freedom is under assault against it we are being told that it is time for a new new deal to the cover of newsweek says are we al sociasts now? the article was a little ambiguous, but yes, the basic argument was just. stages and is on the march. help once again by an atmosphere of crisis and panic. and it is easy to get discourad and it is easy to let the intensity of the challenge intimidate us.

but the immensity of the challenge didn't stop thom paine. it didn't stop frederick douglass but it didn't stop iran and friedrich hayek, and we must not let it stop us. spking of summeroldiers and sunshine patriots, a few weeks ago i was joking about some free market economist who chose not to sign the cato institute as opposing the stimulus. and there are many good reasons that people might have done that. data outside of the people's rights. they say i do my own writing. titles i and other peoples think that i don't sign joint statement. i disagree with some small part of the statement even though i agree wit the crux of the. scientist advising people to want to sign other people's manifestoes and so on. i was joking with these days with some of the peoe who have declined to sign and i told one of them, someday you'll be sorry your name wasn't on that roll of honor. and i quoted as saying crispin's day speech from shakespeare's henry the fifth to him.

we few, we happy few, we band of brothers, for he today that sheds his blood with the shall be my brother. and gentle man in england now a bit, go make themselves accursed they were not here. and hold their manhood cheap while in he speaks that stood with us upon saint crispin's day. i think that its important that we stand up, and i think the person i said that you will be sorry tt he didn't do that. the challenge we face will not stop us. don't let it stop you. more than 200 years ago, thomas jefferson and s fellow signers of the declaration of independence committed themselves to the cause of american liberty with these words. and for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.

and they weren't getting. 12 signers had their homes ransacked and burned by the british. nine more died from wounds or hardships of the revolutionary war. none, however, lost their sacred honor. and you know, we talk about the statesman and military leaders and the philosophers who made us free, but their work was made possible by the farmers and the merchant and the printers to provide thkind of support without whh these great deeds could not have een done. if you read jim powell's book, the triumph of liberty, you read about people who were not geniuses and he rose who made the freedom movement were. think about the quaker merchant who provided money andodging for william penn and john blmck when they needed to. or elizabeth katie stam, the housewife and mother who spent 50 years campaigning for women's rights. the great libeia