"What is a Libertarian?" - John Stossel Show

[Andalublue]

I'd be interested to know, do people here always think of the right-libertarians when they hear the term Libertarian? Does it always conjure up images of Ron Paul and free-market capitalism? Or do you also bring to mind left-libertarians like Hillel Steiner, Karl Hess and Chomsky? Or concepts such as common ownership or the state as promoter of economic elites?

Just interested to know whether the whole philosophical 'brand' of Libertarianism, if you like, has been predominantly appropriated by the rightist libertarians.

 

[DrunkenAsparagus]

Interesting videos. I enjoyed seeing how Libertarians present themselves when they are allowed to expound their ideas unchallenged. I know that the people on the show only represent one branch of libertarianism, the right-wing, pro-capitalist version, but their particular take on liberty, especially in relation to social inequality and treatment of the poor was astonishing in its lack of analysis on where responsibility for the welfare of the people comes from. One contributor made the issue really clear. They believe that the way out of poverty is through one of two routes: growth-based, free-market economic models - if the economy grows, everyone benefits, with no real answer to the question: if the economies fail to deliver growth, what then? The second route is family - families helping familes, ignoring the question, if you have no family, what then?

Well Right-Libertarians obviously see the free market as the best way to go. What this man said is simply one facet of his world outlook, a minimal government leads to a more prosperous society. Besides, what if socialist, anarcho-communist, or mixed economies fail to deliver? You're in the same exact rhetorical boat as this guy.

The boogie man for this kind of libertarian is the Government.

Any American style Libertarian can beat this strawman to death very quickly. I don't see why people still make it. The government isn't a boogie man. It is a tool to be used in certain situation to protect Liberty and for very little if anything else.

Not one of them addressed the issue of the corporate control of the everyday lives of the individual. The intrusions into everyday life of privately-owned corporations are as many and as severe as Government intrusions. Your kid goes to a private school? A private corporation controls your kid's education. You want to eat food that's healthy and safe? Private corporations work everyday to limit the choice of food outlets in many medium- and small-sized communities, places where a generation ago you'd choose from three or four butchers or greengrocers on the high street, you now have just one major chain supermarket, which has put the small suppliers out of business, providing no choice of product. The list of examples of the control exerted by the corporate culture over private lives is inexhaustable and these right-libertarians have no agenda for freeing the private citizen from this privatized version of Big Government.

Do these corporations force you to buy their product? Do they steal or poison you without your knowledge or consent? If they do something of their nature I and any Libertarian with a consistent world view will call for their punishment as loud as anyone else. Otherwise, they don't make you do anything. My small town has two supermarkets (never mind that each stocks thousands of competing brands inside) but numerous other food providers as well. Even the biggest companies find it almost impossible to squelch out all competition. Nobody can legally make you buy anything, besides the government.

 

[Andalublue]

Well Right-Libertarians obviously see the free market as the best way to go. What this man said is simply one facet of his world outlook, a minimal government leads to a more prosperous society. Besides, what if socialist, anarcho-communist, or mixed economies fail to deliver? You're in the same exact rhetorical boat as this guy.

Thanks for the response. This is a really interesting thread.

No, I don't believe that socialist, a-c, or mixed economies leave you in the same boat. All three of those have an agenda for ensuring that poverty is addressed. Socialism and the mixed economy through the use of welfare, a-c through the concept of mutualism and common ownership. Right-libertarianism's only safety net seems to be reliance on private charity which, as is demonstrable, declines rather than increases in time of economic crisis.

Any American style Libertarian can beat this strawman to death very quickly. I don't see why people still make it. The government isn't a boogie man. It is a tool to be used in certain situation to protect Liberty and for very little if anything else.

Okay, not ALL government, but government intervention in the social and economic arena.

Do these corporations force you to buy their product? Do they steal or poison you without your knowledge or consent? If they do something of their nature I and any Libertarian with a consistent world view will call for their punishment as loud as anyone else. Otherwise, they don't make you do anything. My small town has two supermarkets (never mind that each stocks thousands of competing brands inside) but numerous other food providers as well.

Yes, they certainly do. The anti-competitive behaviour of thousands of corporations are well-documented. Cases where supermarkets apply coercive conditions on their suppliers to undermine competition are rife, ask any farmer. Dumping, price-fixing, limit pricing and a whole list of other practices are commonplace in all markets. In a libertarian world, what would prevent these activities from running even further out-of-hand?

Even the biggest companies find it almost impossible to squelch out all competition.

Being anti-competitive is not the same as being able to achieve a monopoly, although the end goal is the same.

 

[Coronado]

Well, maybe you just weren't paying attention.....

Take your condescention and shove it. You are just looking for a conspiracy and piecing one together the best you can and still failing.

How many libertarian conventions have you been to, Moot?

".....Worried about hyperinflation, social unrest or even martial law, she and her Tea Party members joined a coalition, Friends for Liberty, that includes representatives from Glenn Beck’s 9/12 Project, the John Birch Society, and Oath Keepers, a new player in a resurgent militia movement...."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/us/politics/16teaparty.html?pagewanted=1&hp

You can check the Friends for Liberty's affiliates and see the John Birch Society are on their list, and right below it, the Libertarians-Washington.....
Friends For Liberty

So some backwater organization lists a state party on their website and suddenly they are in lockstep with each other? The FoL lists the Constitution Party too, and they certainly don't see eye-to-eye with the LP. Get a ****ing grip, lady. You're tilting at windmills again. :roll:

If you can prove that these organizations are somehow branches of or affiliates with the Libertarian Party, you might have something. Right now all you have is guilt by association, but just barely.

 

[DrunkenAsparagus]

Thanks for the response. This is a really interesting thread.

No, I don't believe that socialist, a-c, or mixed economies leave you in the same boat. All three of those have an agenda for ensuring that poverty is addressed. Socialism and the mixed economy through the use of welfare, a-c through the concept of mutualism and common ownership. Right-libertarianism's only safety net seems to be reliance on private charity which, as is demonstrable, declines rather than increases in time of economic crisis.

These economies still have the chance of failing. To a free marketer, they're just spreading the poverty or letting the poor fall through the cracks.

Okay, not ALL government, but government intervention in the social and economic arena.

No, you need government for capitalism: settling contract disputes, protecting property rights, ensuring safety from coercion.

Yes, they certainly do. The anti-competitive behaviour of thousands of corporations are well-documented. Cases where supermarkets apply coercive conditions on their suppliers to undermine competition are rife, ask any farmer. Dumping, price-fixing, limit pricing and a whole list of other practices are commonplace in all markets. In a libertarian world, what would prevent these activities from running even further out-of-hand?

You could consider this behavior dickish, but even with all of that, you are no more obligated to buy from them than a mom and pop store.

Being anti-competitive is not the same as being able to achieve a monopoly, although the end goal is the same.

How so?

 

[Moot]

Take your condescention and shove it. You are just looking for a conspiracy and piecing one together the best you can and still failing.

For rude.

How many libertarian conventions have you been to, Moot? So some backwater organization lists a state party on their website and suddenly they are in lockstep with each other? The FoL lists the Constitution Party too, and they certainly don't see eye-to-eye with the LP. Get a ****ing grip, lady. You're tilting at windmills again. :roll:

What do you know if you've only been to gun shows?

If you can prove that these organizations are somehow branches of or affiliates with the Libertarian Party, you might have something. Right now all you have is guilt by association, but just barely.

I have been proving it, Koch sucker. When you can prove the evidence I've shown is wrong with some back up besides your attitude, then you might have some credibilty in this discussion.

 

[UtahBill]

There are consevative governments and liberal governments, has there ever been any libertarian governments?

Good question....wouldn't that be an oxy-moron?
I would put the GOP as currently fractured (thanks to the Tea Parties), the DEMS as post fractured (and may fracture again soon), and then the LIBERTARIANS, who have always been totally fractured...

 

[TurtleDude]

For rude.

What do you know if you've only been to gun shows?

I have been proving it, Koch sucker. When you can prove the evidence I've shown is wrong with some back up besides your attitude, then you might have some credibilty in this discussion.

"koch sucker"

now now just because you are getting your butt handed to you no reason to spew insults

 

[Moot]

Have you not been receiving your checks from Koch Industries? Mine usually come in the mail around the first of the month.

There's a long list of free loaders who get their charity checks in the mail from the Koch's. All they have to do is come up with a warm fuzzy name for a front organization to launder the Koch's money through and the Koch's get the charity tax deduction. It's quite the scam that only the wealthy elite can afford to play. The rest of us can't afford to buy faux charity organizations to filter our wages through to avoid paying taxes, darn it.

Below is a list of recipients listing the cumulative [annual] amount, unadjusted for inflation, granted by the Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation[3]

1) Cato Institute $8,450,000
2) Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation $6,025,375
3) George Mason University $2,311,149
4) George Mason University Foundation, Inc. $2,074,893
6) Heritage Foundation, The $1,004,000
7) Institute for Justice $1,000,000
8) Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment $810,000
9) Reason Foundation, The $642,000
10) Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, The $504,000
12) Institute for Humane Studies $455,000
13) Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy $385,000
14) Washington Legal Foundation $350,000
15) Capital Research Center $340,000
16) Competitive Enterprise Institute $254,460
20) Ethics and Public Policy Center, Inc. $190,000
22) National Center for Policy Analysis $175,000
23) Citizens for Congressional Reform Foundation $175,000
24) Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Inc. $125,000
25) American Legislative Exchange Council $120,000
26) Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty $115,000
28) Political Economy Research Center, Inc. $80,000
29) Media Institute $60,000
30) National Foundation for Teaching Entrepreneurship $60,000
31) University of Chicago $59,000
32) Defenders of Property Rights $55,000
33) University of Kansas Endowment Assocation $50,000
36) Texas Public Policy Foundation $44,500
37) Center for Individual Rights, The $40,000
38) Heartland Institute $40,000
39) Texas Justice Foundation $40,000
40) Institute for Policy Innovation $35,000
42) Center of the American Experiment $31,500
43) Atlas Economic Research Foundation $28,500
44) Young America's Foundation $25,000
45) Henry Hazlitt Foundation $25,000
47) Atlantic Legal Foundation $20,000
48) National Taxpayers Union Foundation $20,000
49) Families Against Mandatory Minimums $20,000
50) Philanthropy Roundtable $19,200
51) Free Enterprise Institute $15,000
52) John Locke Foundation $15,000
53) Hudson Institute, Inc. $12,650
54) Alexis de Tocqueville Institution $12,500
55) National Environmental Policy Institute $12,500
56) Washington University $11,500
57) Pacific Legal Foundation $10,000
58) American Council for Capital Formation $10,000
60) Institute for Political Economy $8,000
62) State Policy Network $6,500
64) Fraser Institute, The $5,000
65) Mackinac Center, The $5,000
66) Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation $5,000
68) Institute for Objectivist Studies $5,000
David H. Koch Charitable Foundation $2,000,000
Fred C. & Mary R. Koch Foundation $1,097,000
Bill of Rights Institute $992,000
Mercatus Center $400,000

And that's just the tip of the iceburg because the Koch's also have the Charles G. Koch Charitable Trust, and the David H. Koch Charitable Foundation, and the Fred C. & Mary R. Koch Foundation, and the Koch Family Foundation, and the list of charity recipiants is just long under each of them as it is under the Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation.

So how much is your charity check from the Koch's, Coronado?

 

[Moot]

"koch sucker"

now now just because you are getting your butt handed to you no reason to spew insults

My butt is still looking just fine, thanx. Koch (pronounced coke) sucker means someone who is being duped by the Koch's. How did you think I meant it?

 

[TurtleDude]

My butt is still looking just fine, thanx. Koch (pronounced coke) sucker means someone who is being duped by the Koch's. How did you think I meant it?

I have heard Koch Pronounced four different ways

 

[UtahBill]

There's a long list of free loaders who get their charity checks in the mail from the Koch's. All they have to do is come up with a warm fuzzy name for a front organization to launder the Koch's money through and the Koch's get the charity tax deduction. It's quite the scam that only the wealthy elite can afford to play. The rest of us can't afford to buy faux charity organizations to filter our wages through to avoid paying taxes, darn it.

Below is a list of recipients listing the cumulative [annual] amount, unadjusted for inflation, granted by the Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation[3]

1) Cato Institute $8,450,000
2) Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation $6,025,375
3) George Mason University $2,311,149
4) George Mason University Foundation, Inc. $2,074,893
6) Heritage Foundation, The $1,004,000
7) Institute for Justice $1,000,000
8) Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment $810,000
9) Reason Foundation, The $642,000
10) Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, The $504,000
12) Institute for Humane Studies $455,000
13) Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy $385,000
14) Washington Legal Foundation $350,000
15) Capital Research Center $340,000
16) Competitive Enterprise Institute $254,460
20) Ethics and Public Policy Center, Inc. $190,000
22) National Center for Policy Analysis $175,000
23) Citizens for Congressional Reform Foundation $175,000
24) Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Inc. $125,000
25) American Legislative Exchange Council $120,000
26) Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty $115,000
28) Political Economy Research Center, Inc. $80,000
29) Media Institute $60,000
30) National Foundation for Teaching Entrepreneurship $60,000
31) University of Chicago $59,000
32) Defenders of Property Rights $55,000
33) University of Kansas Endowment Assocation $50,000
36) Texas Public Policy Foundation $44,500
37) Center for Individual Rights, The $40,000
38) Heartland Institute $40,000
39) Texas Justice Foundation $40,000
40) Institute for Policy Innovation $35,000
42) Center of the American Experiment $31,500
43) Atlas Economic Research Foundation $28,500
44) Young America's Foundation $25,000
45) Henry Hazlitt Foundation $25,000
47) Atlantic Legal Foundation $20,000
48) National Taxpayers Union Foundation $20,000
49) Families Against Mandatory Minimums $20,000
50) Philanthropy Roundtable $19,200
51) Free Enterprise Institute $15,000
52) John Locke Foundation $15,000
53) Hudson Institute, Inc. $12,650
54) Alexis de Tocqueville Institution $12,500
55) National Environmental Policy Institute $12,500
56) Washington University $11,500
57) Pacific Legal Foundation $10,000
58) American Council for Capital Formation $10,000
60) Institute for Political Economy $8,000
62) State Policy Network $6,500
64) Fraser Institute, The $5,000
65) Mackinac Center, The $5,000
66) Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation $5,000
68) Institute for Objectivist Studies $5,000
David H. Koch Charitable Foundation $2,000,000
Fred C. & Mary R. Koch Foundation $1,097,000
Bill of Rights Institute $992,000
Mercatus Center $400,000

And that's just the tip of the iceburg because the Koch's also have the Charles G. Koch Charitable Trust, and the David H. Koch Charitable Foundation, and the Fred C. & Mary R. Koch Foundation, and the Koch Family Foundation, and the list of charity recipiants is just long under each of them as it is under the Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation.

So how much is your charity check from the Koch's, Coronado?

Well, while we still have a democrat in the WH, I suggest some congressman present a bill that limits tax deductible charitable contributions to 15% (of gross) for income that exceeds $250,000....and that would include donations for political causes....

 

[Moot]

Well, while we still have a democrat in the WH, I suggest some congressman present a bill that limits tax deductible charitable contributions to 15% (of gross) for income that exceeds $250,000....and that would include donations for political causes....

Well, I don't know about that because without the charity tax deductions the rich wouldn't give anything at all to charity and there are some legitimate charities out there. As a side, I heard on NPR the other day that Britain is discussing making their arts programs (museums, theatre, etc.) which are now all currently government funded into following the US model which relies heavily on the charity tax deduction to inspire the wealthy to let loose some of their money.

 

[TurtleDude]

Well, while we still have a democrat in the WH, I suggest some congressman present a bill that limits tax deductible charitable contributions to 15% (of gross) for income that exceeds $250,000....and that would include donations for political causes....

dems are always finding more ways to confiscate wealth

Political contributions are normally not tax deductible

and why do you want to hurt contributions to schools, churches etc?

 

[TurtleDude]

Well, I don't know about that because without the charity tax deductions the rich wouldn't give anything at all to charity and there are some legitimate charities out there. As a side, I heard on NPR the other day that Britain is discussing making their arts programs (museums, theatre, etc.) which are now all currently government funded into following the US model which relies heavily on the charity tax deduction to inspire the wealthy to let loose some of their money.

what lying BS.

 

[Johnny]

This was a great show. John Stossel is my favorite journalist. I've been watching him since 20/20. I miss his "Give me a Break" segment. You gotta love Judge Napolitano. If only all judges were as honorable as him. After seeing this I'd have to say Libertarian is the best label to describe me.

 

[pbrauer]

A libertarian is a person who will use legal means to screw their neighbor out of every penny they have. Dog eat dog. It's the "me" society.

 

[Coronado]

What do you know if you've only been to gun shows?

Reading fail.

I have been proving it, Koch sucker. When you can prove the evidence I've shown is wrong with some back up besides your attitude, then you might have some credibilty in this discussion.

No, you have the burden of proof. So far you have failed, as I have pointed out. Google "guilt by association" if you want to keep from making more idiotic posts.

 

[TurtleDude]

A libertarian is a person who will use legal means to screw their neighbor out of every penny they have. Dog eat dog. It's the "me" society.

that sounds like you dems. libertarians don't use the government's monopoly on force to screw others out of what they earned

democrats do

 

[Coronado]

There's a long list of free loaders who get their charity checks in the mail from the Koch's. All they have to do is come up with a warm fuzzy name for a front organization to launder the Koch's money through and the Koch's get the charity tax deduction. It's quite the scam that only the wealthy elite can afford to play. The rest of us can't afford to buy faux charity organizations to filter our wages through to avoid paying taxes, darn it.

Money laundering? :lamo There are probably hundreds of organizations that work like this. It is totally legit. I would ask you to show me how this meets the elements of money laundering, but I know you can't and won't.

So how much is your charity check from the Koch's, Coronado?

Not enough to afford whatever it is you're smoking, I'm sure ...

 

[Coronado]

A libertarian is a person who will use legal means to screw their neighbor out of every penny they have. Dog eat dog. It's the "me" society.

It's probably a good idea to know what the **** you are talking about before typing out your posts. Just an FYI.

 

[Mensch]

Interesting videos. I enjoyed seeing how Libertarians present themselves when they are allowed to expound their ideas unchallenged. I know that the people on the show only represent one branch of libertarianism, the right-wing, pro-capitalist version, but their particular take on liberty, especially in relation to social inequality and treatment of the poor was astonishing in its lack of analysis on where responsibility for the welfare of the people comes from. One contributor made the issue really clear. They believe that the way out of poverty is through one of two routes: growth-based, free-market economic models - if the economy grows, everyone benefits, with no real answer to the question: if the economies fail to deliver growth, what then? The second route is family - families helping familes, ignoring the question, if you have no family, what then?

The boogie man for this kind of libertarian is the Government. Not one of them addressed the issue of the corporate control of the everyday lives of the individual. The intrusions into everyday life of privately-owned corporations are as many and as severe as Government intrusions. Your kid goes to a private school? A private corporation controls your kid's education. You want to eat food that's healthy and safe? Private corporations work everyday to limit the choice of food outlets in many medium- and small-sized communities, places where a generation ago you'd choose from three or four butchers or greengrocers on the high street, you now have just one major chain supermarket, which has put the small suppliers out of business, providing no choice of product. The list of examples of the control exerted by the corporate culture over private lives is inexhaustable and these right-libertarians have no agenda for freeing the private citizen from this privatized version of Big Government.

I do have to admit that John Stossel is NOT my favorite libertarian, though his yellow journalism does tend to make the topics more interesting (and I do take his assertions with a grain of salt). Here's a far more engaging video regarding the foundation of Libertarianism:



I'll respond to your other points in part two of my response.

 

[Mensch]

Interesting videos. I enjoyed seeing how Libertarians present themselves when they are allowed to expound their ideas unchallenged. I know that the people on the show only represent one branch of libertarianism, the right-wing, pro-capitalist version, but their particular take on liberty, especially in relation to social inequality and treatment of the poor was astonishing in its lack of analysis on where responsibility for the welfare of the people comes from. One contributor made the issue really clear. They believe that the way out of poverty is through one of two routes: growth-based, free-market economic models - if the economy grows, everyone benefits, with no real answer to the question: if the economies fail to deliver growth, what then? The second route is family - families helping familes, ignoring the question, if you have no family, what then?

The boogie man for this kind of libertarian is the Government. Not one of them addressed the issue of the corporate control of the everyday lives of the individual. The intrusions into everyday life of privately-owned corporations are as many and as severe as Government intrusions. Your kid goes to a private school? A private corporation controls your kid's education. You want to eat food that's healthy and safe? Private corporations work everyday to limit the choice of food outlets in many medium- and small-sized communities, places where a generation ago you'd choose from three or four butchers or greengrocers on the high street, you now have just one major chain supermarket, which has put the small suppliers out of business, providing no choice of product. The list of examples of the control exerted by the corporate culture over private lives is inexhaustable and these right-libertarians have no agenda for freeing the private citizen from this privatized version of Big Government.

Part 2

I realize there is this thing called libertarian socialism. Every individual has the freedom to self-identify as whatever term they wish to use. If there are "Jews for Jesus," there can be "compassionate conservatives" and "Libertarian socialists." I would argue that the libertarian party is the most diverse political party, which can be good and bad for the party's vitality. However, there has to be a line drawn on the fundamental basis of the ideology. Libertarianism is the support of individual freedom and respect, as well as a very limited government. Socialism is the antithesis of libertarianism.

Libertarianism does stand for a fundamental idea of personal responsibility. The strong and far-reaching rights of individual freedom entails a tremendous amount of personal responsibility. You have the right to abuse drugs, but be responsible to yourself when it comes time to pay the bodily expense. All adult individuals are responsible for themselves FIRST. The family has more welfare responsibility than the official state. The local community comes after the family, but the federal government is nowhere responsible for the monetary welfare of citizens. A government large enough to give you everything is also large enough to take everything away.

If there is no family, it is the role of local communities and private charities. Read the book Scratch Beginnings by Adam Shepard. He voluntarily became homeless to see if the American Dream was truly dead. In his journey, there were many services by local organizations and local governments that helped Shepard rise up out of poverty. Ultimately, it came down to his own ambition. But the services were avilable, and they helped. They included homeless shelters and soup kitchens, things you would normally think of helping the impoverished. These charities DO NOT need federal funding. If a state or local government wants to impose a new tax to provide better services to the poor, I don't feel they should be restricted by other states or by the central government.

Economies do often fail to deliver growth. The common misconception about libertarians is that we're idealists. In all cases examined, free-market economics is in accordance with reality. We don't always prosper because we're human beings. We're not perfect. However, we have politically exchanged the occasional hiccup in the market (bank runs, financial panics reminiscent of the turn of the 20th century) for a system of privatized profit and socialized losses. The Great Depression was caused by a contraction in the money supply by the Fed, as well as major protectionist acts in congress. Our recessions last longer than ever, companies are exempted from assuming full liability for their business decisions, and our government (persuaded by popular, public opinion) enacts foolish laws that inhibit growth, constrain American business abilities in the face of a gigantic global marketplace, and bail out businesses that fail (just at the top of my head).

The last paragraph is quite nonsense. Government is the only organization that can legally coerce you on a daily basis. Private businesses have absolutely no authority over you. You brought up the evolution of the supermarkets and claimed this natural process created corporate authoritarianism! That is pure nonsense. You're acting as if you want all businesses to be small and local. As if we should forcibly limit the success of businesses so that we can all shop at a mom and pop store! You forget that all major corporations started as mom and pop stores! Most successful businessman were once faced with complete bankruptcy but persevered. You still have the freedom to shop where you want, when you want, and trade with whom you want. And businesses still have the freedom to reserve the right NOT to trade with you, because businesses are private organizations that have been spontaneously created through human specialization. That's the difference between a government telling you what to do and businesses persuading you what to do. Businesses can persuade government to tell you to do something, and THAT is why we need a strict boundary between politics and economics.

And NO, a private school does not have control over the education that your child receives. YOU do.

Walmart does not have control over your diet and consumption. YOU do.

You also neglect to realize that libertarians are strong opponents of corporatism. Socialist governments are the epitome of corporatism.

 

[Mensch]

Have you ever heard of Cleon Skousen?



Give it what ever label you want, but there's not a lot of difference between what Cleon Skousen preached and what the JBS preaches: "the commies are comin, the commies are comin." Fred Koch was co-founder of the JBS and his sons were raised as JBS Libertarians. The Koch brothers fund Reason Magazine whose editor, Nick Gillispe is the guy in your avatar and who wrote the "The Official Koch Industries Reply..." to Jane Mayer's article, "Covert Operations" in the New Yorker, an investigative journalist magazine. Charles and David Koch have their fingers in almost everything the US government does or doesn't do, especially when Bush was president. But now that Obama is president they are hell bent on destroying him. Anyway, I must say, for a Libertarian you don't seem very aware of who is the driving force behind all your opinions.


The Billionaires Bankrolling the Tea Party
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/opinion/29rich.html?_r=1

The Tea Party, Glenn Beck, JBS, and all the rest do not represent me or my views. I am the driving force behind my own opinions. This reminds me of the debates I have with strong pro-Zionist individuals. Any time there is criticism of Israeli foreign policy, these individuals will argue that I'm cahoots with Hamas and Hizballah, because we both share some similar opinions. If you share some similar opinions with Karl Marx, does that make you a marxist?

 

[Mensch]

And I like reason magazine and reason.tv. I like Nick Gillispe. Is that so horrible?