Libertarian Think Tank

In response to the Washington Times article, Michael Goldfarb of the Weekly Standard manages to whine about an inferred victimization of his ethnicity and attack Ron Paul supporters in one fell swoop:

…but let me just say to Ron Paul supporters everywhere, and on behalf of the New Right (by which I assume Paul means the Jew Right), get lost.

Get lost? Chump, this is my party. First, God forbid we characterize big government conservatism with a term that rhymes with “Jew”. Sure, it’s your ethnic background we have beef with, as opposed to the more obvious ideoligical differences.

Second, you’re about to find out that conservatives (the definitive kind) aren’t just a wing of the Republican party. We’re the base. I cannot wait to watch your grimacing demogogue straight-talk his way out of a win. We *do* plan to get lost for this election. It’s gonna hurt you.

Third, I enjoy reminding you of this inconvenient fact: Paul is the favorite candidate for military donations and the troops comprise the biggest group of Paul donors. I love watching you Kristolites alienate the military.

Allah didn’t beat you to the punch. He just thought of something you didn’t. In response, I note that aside from his summary descriptions of Paulnut’s motivations (over which he would certainly get his ass handed to him if he engaged us in debate) and his musings over the left calling Paul the most principled Conservative, he forgot that McCain already made the same claim, “you are working for the most honest man in Congress [Ron Paul]” (Yes, it checks out).

Bring it. Both of you.

Thanks to Sully

I’ve read Andrew Sullivan being right before, but his statement about William F. Buckley takes the cake:

 So the most influential conservative of his generation endorsed both the Vietnam and the 2003 Iraq wars, and came to regret doing both. I think one of the great divides within conservatism today is between those conservatives who think war can solve problems and that government needs to be “heroic” and those who are skeptical of both arguments. These past few years have persuaded me that war is in fact the natural enemy of conservatism - because it enlarges government and destroys freedom and fans those emotions that most cloud judgment. Pre-emptive war, without any plans for the aftermath, may perhaps be the antithesis of every conservative impulse known to history. Pre-emptive war to seize non-existent WMDs is almost a text-book example of conservatism repealing itself.

I plead guilty in retrospect, but am reassured that changing one’s mind in the wake of new facts is not a crime or a sin. It is a conservative virtue - and one that Buckley, alas, didn’t share with most of his successors. Can you imagine Hugh Hewitt ever conceding that he was once mistaken?

So do many of us, Big Sully.  The sad fact is that many Republicans won’t plead at all out of sheer pride. They could be helping to push this country in a Classical Liberal direction but no one has opened the door to that ethos. I don’t think Republicans really care about what their demagogue leaders do. I mean…they do, but only because those demagogues keep reminding them to. They need new demagogues. Libertarian demagogues. Someone who can use Bush’s cowboy attitude to promote devolution and self-governance. You would think that would go over.

I’m inclined to write something long and thoughtful about Buckley, but for now, my email to the person who informed me of his death will have to suffice:

What a shame.  I watched his interview with Charlie Rose where he said he was ready to die. I think that’s fitting. Buckley wouldn’t die without deciding the terms and the time. I wish my generation had a Buckley. It almost seems fitting that the “Father of the Modern Conservative Movement would die as McCain rises to power and Bush ransacks the principles of conservatism. In fact, I think he died 7 years too late.

Buckley with Charlie Rose:

In hindsight, that email was selfish. Buckley was much more than what he was famous for. He should have died when he bloody well did, not synchronized with my notion of his place in history.

On the other hand, one cannot help but compare Buckley to the confused-o-cons who have tarnished the message, if not the image of conservatism. Here’s a pretty famous one who goes by the name of Mike Huckabee:

 ”So all conservatives owe Bill Buckley a great debt. Today, while our thoughts and prayers are with the Buckley family, we conservatives continue to draw inspiration from his life and work. But there is more to be done. It is up to us to carry on, fulfilling his enormous legacy.”

Huckabee taking up Buckley’s legacy? Buckley opposed the Iraq War and the War on Drugs. The ‘conservatism’ that Buckley fathered was hardly distinguishable from ‘classical liberalism’ which is, itself indistinguishable from ‘libertarianism’. Buckley was a huge Goldwater supporter and Huckabee’s opponent is Goldwater-Conservatism’s veritable legacy: Ron Paul. In fact, Goldwater Jr. endorsed Ron Paul against Mike Huckabee.

Meanwhile, Huckabee said he would be amenable to a nationwide smoking ban. If you are a conservative and you don’t know why that is contradictory, you are not a conservative.

Buckley debating Noam Chomsky:

Megan McArdle astutely explains why Clinton’s plan for the housing market is a very bad idea:

This is, of course, very nice for the people who bought more house than they can afford. It will not be so nice for anyone who wants to get a subprime mortgage in the future, since this move will probably destroy that market for at least a decade or so to come. It will, of course, be very bad for anyone who happens to be a mortgage lender–aka the people the rest of us want to borrow money from in order to buy houses. This move will leave them with a lot less money to loan out to anyone else, so hello, higher mortgage rates. Higher mortgage rates, for those following along at home, generally mean lower house prices, which means that the problem of negative equity will get worse.

In other words, Senator Clinton would like to destroy the mortgage market in order to save it.

Possible responses:

Democrats: ”You mean screwing with the market can screw up the market?”

Republicans: “Can I keep my job in Congress if I do this?”

Liberals: “McArdle doesn’t care about people!”

Conservatives: “What does it matter? We don’t exist anymore!”

The Market: “Really, I can breathe without a respirator”

We are sorry about your tragic loss.

Washington, D.C. - Following a solid McCain victory in the Super Tuesday primaries, the Libertarian Party has sent Republican headquarters a funeral wreath marking the death of limited-government values within the Republican Party.  The wreath was hand-delivered to the D.C. offices of the Republican National Committee.  “We simply felt the need to express our heartfelt sympathy for the Republican Party as they undergo this tough time within their party,” says Libertarian Party National Media Coordinator Andrew Davis, who delivered the wreath.  

 How apt. That’s how most of the party must be feeling. They should deliver them to the conservative pundits who sided with authoriarians and created McCain. I’m sure that’s how they’re feeling.