by Eric DonderoReason Magazine/On-line Chief Editor Matthew Welch, has a barnburner Editorial up this morning at the New York Daily Post: "The Real Reason Americans are angry - It's the Big Government Stupid"
It leads off:
It's been a hilarious August, watching media supporters of President Obama's health care package puzzle over the obscure motivations of the noncompliant Americans rallying against it.
While the commentariat's condescension is almost comical, the whole evil-or-stupid explanation misses the elephant in Obama's room: Americans of all stripes, it turns out, aren't very keen about the government barging into their lives.
Ironically, though, it was Welch himself, and a number of other so-called libertarians, who helped to bring about the demise of the Republicans in 2008, which allowed big government 'O' to get elected and pass through all these horrendous socialist policies. Welch, for example, was quite coy about who was going to vote for in the '08 election. Despite the fact that Libertarian Bob Barr was not on the ballot in the District of Columbia, Welch, who was residing there at the time said, he'd "probably throw a bone to a third party candidate."
Note - Welch admitted to having vote Socialist in 2000 (Ralph Nader), and Democrat in 2004 (John Kerry).
These Beltway libertarians and Policy Wonkers pulled the lever for the Socialist
In October of '08, Reason On-line posted a lengthy article "Who's Getting Your Vote - Reason's 2008 Presidential Poll." They "asked a variety of policy wonks, journalists, thinkers, and other public figures" to respond. Out of 42 respondents, 15 said they'd be voting for Obama. Many demurred. 13 said Barr. Only 4 definitively said McCain/Palin. (Interestingly, those 4 included Reason's former longtime Chief Editor Bob Poole.)
Here's a List of the prominent committed "Libertarians" for Obama:
1. Bruce Bartlett, D.C. Public Policy (photo)The enthusiastic backers of Big Government Libertarianism
2. Tim Cavanaugh, Reason Editor
3. Steve Chapman, Chicago Trib. Editorialist
4. Craig Newmark, Founder of Craig's List
5. Steven Pinker, Sociologist
6. Ryan Sager, former Syndicated Columnist
7. Julian Sanchez, Reason Contributor
8. Dave Weigel, Reason Asst. Editor (photo)

During the '08 campaign, at least two "Libertarians" for Obama sites popped up in the blogosphere. One of the sites even got featured in The Economist, which also endorsed Obama. The larger LFO site listed additional "libertarians" favorable to Obama, including:
1. Carol MooreNote - The latter is the official site for so-called "libertarians" in the Democrat Party. They receive approx. 90 unique visitors a day, in contrast to Libertarian Republican which receives 800 to 1,000.
2. Megan McArdle
3. AntiWar.com (Justin Raimondo & Eric Garris)
4. Freedom Democrats
To the Lists above, I'd add two other big "libertarian" names who I noticed were openly hoping for the demise of the GOP in '08: Policy Analyst Doug Bandow, and the Cato Institute's Dave Boaz.
Still Standing by their Man? Zogby released new poll numbers on Friday. Obama is at a record low 45% approval. Other polls from last week including Rasmussen, Gallup, and NBC/WSJ found him in the range of 47% to 51%.
The entire libertarian movement is now up in arms over Obama's proposed health care legislation, coming on the heels of the much despised Cap & Trade.
Notably, the "Libertarians" for Obama have gone silent. Both sites went defunct many months ago. But the listed supporters are still around.
Welch is apparently hoping other libertarians will forget about his past attacks on McCain/Palin by his Magazine, and his own tacit support for Obama in '08.
As for the others, perhaps they're also hoping nobody will remember, that there was a time when they were diehard Obama backers. Libertarians who backed McCain/Palin, (and even those for Bob Barr), should now step forth, and ask these Obama-ites, where's that "Hope & Change," for Liberty?
24 Bloviations:
Openly hoping for the GOP's demise (in order to force it to learn a hard lesson) is different from actually voting for Obama. Bandow was still at CPAC this year. I personally voted for Barr, and while I can see other libertarians launching such a protest vote, I am stunned that both Bruce Bartlett and Ryan Sager voted for Obama. I mean didn't Bartlett write that "Imposter" book about GWB because he despised how Bush's fiscal policies were bankrupting America? Well that's nothing compared to Obama. Elections are all about timing, and I honestly think that we would have been better off having Kerry elected in 2004 when there was still a Republican Congress. Because then you would have had divided government like we did during the Clinton years and Obama would not be President today because he wouldn't have run in 2008. Instead Bush gets re-elected (I voted for Badnarik, I don't know why) and the pendulumn eventually swings harshly in the other direction with the Democrats controlling the government. Which is the worst possible scenario.
Great article Eric.
I can see how a librtarian could have voted for Obama, or rather against McCain. McCain is a war-mongering old fool.
Yeah, calling a man who spent 6 years in a North Vietnamese POW camp a "fool," is really nice, there Sam.
Didn't I tell you to hit the highway there Sammy boy?
Thanks Dan for the compliment. Though, you should note, only about half those listed, not even half actually, said they were voting Obama to teach the GOP a lesson. The others, like Weigel actively supported Obama.
How in God's name could one consider himself a libertarian and vote for a sociailist? Also, big-government libertarianims is an oxymoron.
"Also, big-government libertarians is an oxymoron."
Please see the folllowing:
http://www.ericdondero.com/
I was thinking the same thing before I even read this, but only saw the tag line. It is an oxymoron.
Dan:
You can blame Karl Rove for 2004. If it wasn't for him, W would not have won. I really don't like the guy at all and with Bush needing his help shows what a dilettante Bush is.
Sam:
McCain is hardly a war monger. Just because he hasn't stricken the idea of war from his mind completely, does not make him a war monger. Like any job, a president needs a diverse tool box. The justified use of force is but one. Those that echew it completely are really cacasotti.
Eris: You did tell me to hit the highway, but I decided to ignore you. As for McCain, while I can appreciate his service to his country--just like I can appreciate John Kerry's service--in the end that and that alone does not obligate me to vote for him.
This talk of "libertarians" as though they stand for liberty, is actually anything but.
Independents have a stronger understanding of freedom.
Either you are for Freedom or Control - which side are you on.
All these parties inherently want their personal view of life imposed on others, instead of upholding the greatest amount of freedom by which your personal view of life is lived & chosen freely at no cost to another without his consent.
Immediately, this precept is met with, "oh,people can't be trusted" or "too much freedom creates anarchy" - to quote Penn: bullsh*t!
Laws create consequences to protect society from those who make a choice to infringe on individual freedom without consent.
An implicit message of "you're too stupid or not to be trusted" to make decisions, is arrogance of the individual who has the testicular fortitude to impose his vision on another.
The ONLY answer to all this: FREEDOM - in all ways; in all instances; upholding freedom over your personal taste for another's choices, views, words, etc.
Society lacks nothing but the development of personal responsibility: own your choices, be able to respond to your choices, make those choices at no cost to another without consent - voluntary contract!
They thought they had read the tea leaves correctly and were trying to keep their Washington cred. They bought into the hype that America was turning hard to port.
Now that they have witnessed honest backlash from real people - the outside the beltway proletariat - they've decided to re-'calibrate' their position on the big government leftist in chief.
Either that or they're just pissed they still have to purchase bong fillings on the streetcorner.
Either way their opinion remains suspect. Principles are wonderful, but epic failure when putting them into practice hardly breeds confidence.
There's only one question EVERY AMERICAN need ask to self:
Am I for Freedom or Control?
The answer reveals everything about self-interest.
Iconic:
it's a little more complex than freedom versus control. Boiled down, yes, BUT...What their argument will be is to redefine what a natural right is. They will use our own argument against us by changing the nature of our premise.
matt welch has always been a preening self-righteous twerp. he masquerades as a libertarian to get jobs. if you read enough of his works or commentary on other sites, he eventually lets his mask slip.
TheRightGuy - actually, I disagree, it's not any more difficult than that question of freedom or control.
Why?
Because in a free society with free markets whereupon each individual in personal self-interest decides his pursuits - the more freedom, the less control.
People espouse the "need for some controls" because they slowly want to infiltrate their version of the world because they feel like it's for the "greater good".
The simplicity of freedom or control is calling out anyone, regardless of party, who is seeking in some way to attempt to control others and not uphold individual freedom of choice.
And I agree about the "right" issue. In one of my interviews here locally, it was the very thing I said: health care is not a right; a right is something from within that a person holds, cannot be taken and requires no one outside of self to exercise.
I m not sure what you disagree about...
All I am saying is that they will say that everything that Obama wants to do is a natural right and they are for freedom too...We will become the road block to the "common good" and we will be demonized as such. We already are. So what. Stand fast, do accept their premises, and keep the discourse going. Yes, it's Freedom vs. Control.
It's not possible to be "Big Government" and "Libertarian" at the same time.
What?? Is everyone a Libertarian just because they say so??
No. If a person is Libertarian they are for individual power in liberty which means they must be against big government (which takes away individual liberty by function of the growth of it's own power taking that power from the people).
情趣按摩棒,自慰套,角色扮演,按摩棒,跳蛋,跳蛋,
情趣,性感丁字褲,情趣,角色扮演服,吊帶襪,丁字褲,情趣用品,跳蛋,男女,
潤滑液,SM,內衣,性感內衣,自慰器,充氣娃娃,AV,
按摩棒,電動按摩棒,飛機杯,視訊,自慰套,自慰套,情趣用品,情趣內衣,
.,
"I can see how a librtarian could have voted for Obama, or rather against McCain. McCain is a war-mongering old fool."
Really, I can see the doubts people had about McCain- I had them myself, but how does that explain a vote for Obama? You could have voted for Barr or written someone in or even not vote.
A vote for Obama was a powerful message asking for more statism, more violence, less freedom- it's the platform of the Democratic party.
It's true that cans labeled Republican might contain statist crap but why whould you pick up the can labeled, statism?
John Morris: I voted for Andre Marou in 1992 and Harry Browne in 1996 and 2000 and I didn't want to waste my vote on yet another 3rd party candidate. I suspect that many other libertarians felt the same way.
Who Took My Name in Vain?? Just because I might have said something optimistic about Obama's possible policies (all of which have proven to be FALSE optimism, except one little speech in Cairo which he's already back stabbed on), doesn't mean I have ever been an Obama supporter. Where are their nuts - I mean web site - so I can kick, I mean write them??
OK, I found this site. http://libertarianobama.blogspot.com/ which lists people who have said "nice things" about Obama. Feel free to search http://carolmoorereport.blogspot.com for all the nice things I've said. (Hmmm, like he's younger and more organized and intelligent than McCain. That remains true in some respects, even despite all the dumb things he's done.) As usual, Eric is busy misrepresenting others. But I'm not the only one who has his number on misrepresentations.
Add me the Lists above of "libertarian" names who openly hopeg for the demise of the GOP at some point sooner rather than later. It will never go libertarian, with all the pro-govt socialism big business types and pro-govt control religious types in control. It just steals libertarian rhetoric to sucker in libertarian-oriented independents and back stabs them over and over again. With all the support for Ron Paul if there were any real libertarians they would have come out of the woodwork by now. Just because some good people like Adam Kokesh of Iraq Veterans for Peace are running as Republicans doesn't mean there's hope for the party as a whole.
costa rica tours, shopping online, costa rica fishing, jaco fishing charters, costa rica whale watching, costa rica dolphin watching, costa rica party boat, panama fishing, fishing costa rica los suenos, los suenos fishing charters, costa rica fishing los suenos, los suenos costa rica fishing, costa rica los suenos fishing, fishing costa rica los suenos, los suenos fishing charters, costa rica fishing los suenos, los suenos costa rica fishing charters, costa rica los suenos fishing,
http://www.kingtours.com/.
Post a Comment