Glenn Greenwald v. Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds

[BurtWorm]

Greenwald demolishes Reynolds :applause: , and all Bush toadies with "libertarian" roots:


http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/07/libertarians-and-republican-party.html

What is going on here is transparently clear. Reynolds long ago used to emphasize the libertarian aspects of his belief system, by, for instance, writing for Reason Magazine. But this weekend, he attacked Reason's Dave Weigel for criticizing publication of the home address of the NYT photographer so that Reynolds could justify and defend the actions of Michelle Malkin, David Horowitz and Rocco DiPippo with regard to the Travel Section murder plot. That is a clear reflection of what Reynolds is -- he has long ago dispensed with his libertarianism beyond the most cursory and decorative uses, and he has no meaningful differences with the most extreme elements of the Republican Malkin/Coulter right wing.

Reynolds' transformation is illustrative of a broader and much more significant dynamic. There are no more vibrant libertarian components left of the Bush movement. Libertarians (in the small "l" sense of that word) have either abandoned the Bush-led Republicans based on the recognition -- catalyzed by the Schiavo travesty -- that there are no movements more antithetical to a restrained government than an unchecked Republican Party in its current composition. Or, like Reynolds, they have relinquished their libertarian impulses and beliefs completely as the price for being embraced as a full-fledged, unfailingly loyal member of the Bush-led Republican Party.

Despite the bespectacled professorial costumes of respectability and moderation, Reynolds ceased being different than the Michelle Malkins and David Horowitzs of the world some time ago. That is the camp he has chosen, and any residual doubts about that ought to be resolved by the fact that he will always find ways to defend them even when it comes to blatant garbage like the treason accusations against the NYT and the subsequent, home-address-publishing right-wing lynch mobs which they foreseeably inspired.

The current Republican Party has become the party of the Michelle Malkins, Ann Coulters, James Dobsons, and David Horowitzs -- people who scorn libertarian principles and could not be any more hostile to them. Arguably, there are few conflicts more critical to national electoral battles than this one. As Cato Institute's Brink Lindsey recently observed: "libertarians are in the center of the American political debate as it is currently framed." But nothing has undermined libertarian principles more than Republican rule of the last five years.

For this reason, intellectually honest believers in liberty and restrained government have chosen to abandon the Republican Party because it is devoted to an endlessly intrusive, unrestrained and even lawless government, precepts which could not be any more antithetical to core libertarian principles. But there is a sizeable group of individuals, empitomized by Reynolds, who claimed adherence to libertarianism but who have now fully embraced the most extremist elements of the Bush movement and the Republican Party. In doing so, they have rendered their claimed libertarianism nothing but a hollow symbol, to be trotted out -- when at all -- purely as a manipulative instrument to maintain an image of rationality and moderation ("Extremist? Me? I'm for gay marriage").

That is the choice which national political figures with some degree of libertarian impulses, such as John McCain and Rudy Guiliani, are confronting. With Reynolds -- again and again -- invoking the most frivolous rationale imaginable in order to side with the most crazed schemes of Malkin, StopTheACLU and Horowitz (what's the difference, he bewilderingly asks, between publishing someone's e-mail address and their home address?), it's long past time to stop pretending that he is anything other than one of them.

[BurtWorm]

1. Greewald v. Horowitz on Alan Holmes Show tonight

UPDATE: I <Gleen Greenwald, not BW> will be on the Alan Colmes Show tonight at 10:15 p.m. EST (possibly along with David Horowitz or Rocco DiPippo, if they're willing -- with David Horowitz, who is now confirmed) to discuss issues of privacy versus media freedom, with a focus on the publication of the home addresses of the NYT photographer and the plaintiff-family in Delaware.

Before that, I will be on Air America's Majority Report at 9:30 p.m. EST to discuss How Would a Patriot Act? and recent issues relating to executive power abuses.

[Gabi Hayes]

3. good for YOU! and if you get to confront Horowitz, check this

site for some great examples of what a HUGH, GIGANTOID liar he's proven himself to be:

http://www.mediatransparency.org/personprofile.php?personID=15

this link is hilarious, because it shows him to contradict himself:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200604180011

then this, which should be a real crowd pleaser:

"Ann Coulter is a national treasure"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200606090003

with video link

hope you can use some of this

good luck

[Gabi Hayes]

4. you should start a thread about your appearance, btw

make sure it gets around

[BurtWorm]

6. I wish it were me, but actually it's probably all for the best that

it's Greenwald doing the debating. He'll moidalize the sumbitch.

[Gabi Hayes]

11. thanks...I may have to listen to that

people don't realize what an actual DANGER this creature is

he's been VERY successful at planting the seeds of the destruction of academic freedom in higher education.....

ALONG with that skunk Joe Lieberman and his other pals, like Lynne Cheney, who formed the American Council of Trustees and Alumni

[BurtWorm]

5. Sorry, I won't be debating Horowitz.

Greenwald will. Better edit the post. :blush:

[Gabi Hayes]

8. are you going to be on Colmes?

he used to be on Sirius Talk Left

is he on their Fox station?

I never, ever listen to them.....

[BurtWorm]

9. I won't be.

Sometimes I'll have combs on me. Very rarely though.

[rusty charly]

2. doesn't bill maher consider himself a libertarian?

"a libertarian is a republican who smokes pot."

[BurtWorm]

7. He does. So do Penn and Teller.

I think P&T are further right than Maher.

[nam78_two]

10. John Stossel, CATO, AEI......

The libertarians in the public eye have never impressed me much. Their positions on environmental/animal welfare issues are particularly scary.

There is:

John Stossel: My personal favorite. How many things does this guy have to lie about before they pull him off air. The most famous lies have been about organic food. Google Stossel+organic food and you come up with a bunch of stuff.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200407270003

Then there are the Ayn Rand nuts aka "Objectivists".

CATO:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Cato_Institute

Joel Achenbach who writes for the WaPo had written an excellent summary about the global warming "skeptics" and surprise many of them are from libertarian think tanks.

I am not attacking Libertarianism as an ideology necessarily, but all the libertarians I see out in the public eye scare me.

I will give them this, they are generally not homophobic (but then again they are also not the types to go out there and fight for the rights of gay people is straigh themselves).

I believe RW hawkish shills like Christopher Hitchens or Andrew Sullivan etc. also consider themselves libertarians.