I found this from the report fascinating:
He has recruited libertarian-leaning financiers and money managers from across the country, including ....Donald G. Smith, an investor and board member of the Cato Institute, a libertarian research organization based in Washington.Cato is, of course, a Koch-funded beltarian operation.
And then you have this in the article:
“I’m impressed with him,” said David Boaz, executive vice president of the Cato Institute. “I wish he was better on the gay marriage issue, and I’m a little concerned with his position on immigration. But I think when you combine his positions on economic issues with his views on foreign interventionism, and the surveillance state, you have a much better libertarian profile than I see in any other leading politician.”Let me tell you, this kind of statement does not come out of the mouth of Boaz unless it is sanctioned by the Kochtopus. Further, it should be remembered that Boaz is a hater of organizations that are consistent free market advocates. See this: David Boaz Elevator Talk.
Boaz and Rand in bed together, can you imagine?
Then we have this:
Like other Republican contenders, Mr. Paul is seeking support among the 200 or so donors — many of them outsiders to the traditional Republican money establishment — who belong to Freedom Partners, the donor club overseen by Charles and David H. Koch, perhaps the nation’s most influential libertarians. He has spoken at the Kochs’ annual seminars for conservative donors, and, last fall, Mr. Paul met with David Koch in New York.And this:
Frayda Levin, a New Jersey libertarian activist and former small-business owner, is a woman of many passions...But Ms. Levin has added another cause as well. At gala benefits for free-market research institutes and at fund-raisers for antitax groups, she has urged like-minded donors to help send Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, to the White House...Mr. Paul has supporters among the Kochs’ network of donors, including Ms. Levin, who sits on the board of Americans for Prosperity, a group founded by David Koch.None of this is a good sign.
This is all you need to know about the Koch brothers. During the last presidential campaign, this is how much they gave to Ron Paul: $0.00.
This is what they did for Mitt Romney:
In July 2012, David H. Koch hosted a $50,000-a-person ($75,000 a couple) fundraising dinner for 2012 Republican Party Presidential candidate Mitt Romney.
How can the Koch support for Romney over Ron Paul be explained? Carter Eskew of WaPo nailed it:
The dirty little secret of the Republicans is not just that they are “addicted” to the Koch brothers’ money, to borrow Harry Reid’s phrase, but that they are fooling around with people who are only situationally for freedom — freedom when it’s good for their business.
To paraphrase a Tom Woods analogy: There is a libertarian train. On the train, many people have different ideas and end goals. Anyone can get off at any time. The train is moving in the direction of liberty.
ReplyDeleteIMO Rand Paul is on the train. He is not AnCap and not Ron Paul. He is more classical liberal like F.A. Hayek. However, he is moving in the direction of liberty.
Lastly, a principled man like Murray Rothbard supported Pat Buchannan enthusiastically. Rand Paul is much better than Pat Buchannan.
The train is moving south. Liberty? Not if you are female or black.
DeleteRead the 1977 Rothbard essay posted at LRC earlier this week. Rand Paul's essential deficiency is that he does not hate the state. When he ran, Buchanan came much closer to possesing this core attribute than Rand ever has.
DeleteOne who lacks this quality is at best a passenger on the liberty train. The concern with Rand, however, is that he may well turn out to be a robber, working in cahoots with the thugs chasing us on horseback.
Chris,
DeleteIn addition to Buchanan, Rothbard also supported George H.W. Bush over Clinton. You have to admit, Rothbard had a pragmatic streak.
Do you remember '92? Buchanan was not and is not near the anti-state positions of Rand.
Anonymous,
DeleteI remember '92 (and '96 and '00) well. Buchanan approached his first race as the opponent of crony establishment insiders. On the trail he demonstrated a deep and abiding mistrust for anything reeking of establishment politics. That was the crux of his campaign. In contrast, Rand is courting the cronies.
While Rothbard had an undeniably pragmatic streak, and was unquestionably opposed to the liberal pietism Clinton represented, he had no problem excoriating the positions of his endorsees with which he disagreed, such as Buchanan's economic nationalism. There is not a doubt in my mind that, even if he were able to endorse Rand, he would have no hesitation in pointing out the latter's many policy shortcomings.
It's troubling that Rand's anti-state positions are becoming increasingly diluted, if not evaporating altogether. He has learned from watching others, such as Buchanan and his father, that peasants with pitchforks are not the path to power in modern America.
I like that alliteration at the end, Chris. Nice Buchananesque touch.
DeleteThere is no way of knowing who the Koch Bros give money to. Ron Paul worked for the Koch Bros in the past. Don't see any policy position that means less money for the Koch Bros. The Koch Bros are holocaust deniers and conservative on social issues. If they did not support Ron Paul, it was because Ron Paul was not a serious candidate and he made the GOP primary more of a clown show than it had to be.
ReplyDeleteYes, perhaps they're giving money to a certain troll so it can attempt to turn an independent libertarian forum into a clown show. And no one is more clownish than said troll.
DeleteJW: Troll.
DeleteNotice how important it is for NYT to reinforce the notion that Libertarianism = Koch: ". . .perhaps the nation’s most influential libertarians."
ReplyDeleteThe Beltway/Ivy intelligentsia understand that Koch-liberty is easy to expose and refute. It also allows them to maintain the elaborate charade of left vs right.
The real ideas of liberty, which spread from multiple points and which are based on simple, unyielding principles, are not so easily contained. And as Chris Rossini astutely observed yesterday, technology now allows them to spread like wildfire--no media intermediaries required.
"Notice how important it is for NYT to reinforce the notion that Libertarianism = Koch: ". . .perhaps the nation’s most influential libertarians.""
DeleteYeah I see that bullshit all the time. The Left-shit turd yellow journalists can't refute The Mises Institute which is why they almost NEVER deal with them.
You're absolutely right, Mike. And it's why Lew's refusal to be interviewed by NYT is an example not only of his courage, but his genius. We don't need them!
Delete