As Common As Hen's Teeth

You must understand my surprise when I noticed on RightWingNews that the infamous Markos Moulitsas, the founder of Daily Kos and a legend in his own mind, wrote an editorial on The Case for the Libertarian Democrat. Now I know many of you are thinking "Libertarian + Democrat?" and wondering how oil and water are supposed to mix. I wondered that myself as I read Markos' editorial at cato-unbound.

Like many such editorials or blog posts, it is an extremely lengthy and heavily-reasoned editorial that rests on many a shaky principle. Of course, you can derive all sorts of conclusions if you're willing to accept pliant or fraudulent facts as your base.

Kos makes the first generalization by assuming there are major "swaths" of America that are just Democrats who want a little individual freedom. His definition of those individual freedoms compared to most, though, reads like a traditional Democrat.

Like me, these were people who didn’t instinctively reject the ability of government to protect our personal liberties, who saw government as a good, not an evil, but didn’t necessarily see the government as the source of first resort when seeking solutions to problems facing our country. They also saw the markets as a good, not an evil, but didn’t necessarily see an unregulated market run amok as a positive thing. Some of these were reluctant Republicans, seeking an excuse to abandon a party that has failed them. Others were reluctant Democrats, looking for a reason to fully embrace their party. And still others were stuck in the middle, despairing at their options—despondent at a two-party system in which both parties were committed to Big Government principles.

That's a liberal, not a libertarian, but Kos has that answered also. Although he does have a good write-up of where Libertarians stand, especially next to conservatives, he veers wildly, but with assuredness that he's 100% on target.

The fundamental reason that "libertarian" has become "libertarian democrat" is that corporations are becoming more powerful than governments. This fundamental fact has created a union between those with libertarian tendencies and those with those who believed all along that government can be a force for good.

And this is where he completely jumps the tracks. The standard take by most on the Left is that corporations are untamed and evil behemoths and only a benevolent and (Left-leaning) socialist-style government can tame them. That is nowhere near a libertarian philosophy. Until Kos' editorial, this was called being a "progressive". Changing the name time and again doesn't change the fact that it's still a Leftist philosophy. Libertarians, real ones, abhor the idea of government intervening to control the economy (and make no mistake, when they say corporations, small businesses have historically found themselves lumped in with the evil greedy corporations every time. Just check out the mostly Democratic-generated tax code.

He can't stop there, though. He needs some more bent and warped cards for the increasingly unstable house of a premise he is building. Consider:

As hekebolos further noted, defense contractors now have greater say in what weapons systems get built (via their lobbyists, blackmailing elected officials by claiming that jobs will be lost in their states and districts if weapons system X gets axed). The energy industry dominates the executive branch and has reaped record windfall profits. Our public debt is now held increasingly by private hedge funds. Corporations foul our air and water. They plunder our treasury.

Defense contractors have profited ever since our war machine geared up before World War II. They have continued to profit despite brief lulls in the late 40's, early 60's and early 90's. Given current United States military philosophy, defense contractors are going to make money. There's no way around it. Now, the obvious answer by the Kossacks is that these contractors are manipulating the government to keep their profits high through their lobbies. The lobbies didn't send us to war, didn't cause the rise of the Soviet war machine and didn't spark Islamofascists no matter which ancient Marxist is spouting off at the podium. Should they be watched carefully because of all the cash involved? Absolutely. Should they be shut out of figuring which avenues of weapon research are the best to choose over a Congressman who knows ZERO about most defense systems? That's just naive and a bit unrealistic. Money for defense (or offense) is a necessary evil, but one that fills a basic need of government, to protect its citizenry.

Then there's the energy industry. The petroleum industry is another one of those 800 pound gorillas. Kos' "progressives" are as much to thank for them as any. By decrying attempts to escape some of the dependence by at least generating electricity with something other than oil and natural gas fired plants like nuclear energy, were and much of the world are more dependent than ever. These same energy companies, knowing they don't have a limitless supply of oil, funnel those very profits back into energy research development. But no, obviously the "libertarian Democrat", read progressive answer is to tax them. That's the only language they really understand. Nothing new and exciting about that, but you won't get Markos to admit it.

Public debt is because of runaway spending by both Republicans and Democrats who have no fiscal control, acting like hormone-OD'ed teenagers, their self control is equal to that of the average dog in heat. The Republicans and Democrats who have spent us out of house and home, created social program after social program, failed in reforming education, welfare, Medicare/Medicaid and "social security" by funding and expanding them are not conseravtive or libertarian in their leaning. They're liberals. Perhaps they are well-meaning liberals, but they are liberals all the same.

The "foul our air and water" line is quite telling itself. Radical environmentalists like to see any corporation suffer, and the eleventh and a half hour Clinton regs were designed to do just that, punish corporations and cost them a bundle by going beyond already draconian restrictions on certain toxins in the air and water. The regs often, of course, ignore that natural concentrations of such toxins are in the air and water, but let's not cloud such an impassioned debate with trivial facts.

Quoting the above "hekebolos" blogger, Kos mentions

and government is the only thing that can stop them from recklessly exploiting the people and destroying their freedom.

to make the point

That, in essence, is why I am a Democrat

Could it be any more clear? Yes, you are a regular Democrat Markos, one of the new and cooky Left in the country who think they can coopt others who don't share their beliefs by throwing a few false facts, incorrect assumptions and the occasional flat-out lie into a pretty speech. Clinton used to use the same tactic, and well, he still does today.

The only thing that can stop anything, governments, corporations, NGO's, from exploiting the people and destroying our freedom, is the people. THAT's what it means to be a libertarian and even to be a conservative and I'll guarantee you that Markos not only knows that, he knows he can't sell his own "progressive" line on its own merit, so he's come over to coopt names and some basic slogans of the other side to redress his pig and try to whore her out again.

Suffice it to say, although he notes some parts of the free market work, they're only in his priceless bastion of Leftists, silicon valley, to him the only true bastion of "equality" left. What he fails again to realize is that his own example demolishes his whole theory. The free market works whether its in Silicon Valley or Los Angeles or Cleveland. It just works and we have more proof than you could ever hope to discount in 1000 editorials.

Lastly, to make his case for the "libertarian Democrat" (it really turns my stomach to write that), he cites all the vast local victories and some threatening Congressional races that Democrats have made as examples of his "new New Democrats". Or is that newer...anyway. Totally discounting that there are many other and obvious reasons Democrats and Republicans are fighting it out over a variety of seats in "swing" states, even states with fairly conservative populations, local elections are never a telling factor for national elections.

I offer this basic example. Indiana, arguably one of the most conservative of the conservative states, just spent the last 16 years with Democrat governors and often had a Democrat-controlled legislature. Yet, its Congressional caucus has been overwhelmingly Republican and the Democrat Senator it does have owes much of his career to lip service to conservatism and the fact that his daddy was a Senator as well. Who is in the governor's mansion or in the legislature or even in the Senate rarely is a predictor of how a people will vote for Congress or how a state will vote for President. It's just not a truism.

To sum up, Markos is certainly the darling of the far Left because he continually comes up with great, if ridiculous, theories to explain how the Democrats will rise again. Everyone loves a fairy tale, and the best fairy tales are often told by the truly unhinged.