Wednesday, January 29, 2014

On The Idiot's Narrative Concerning Me And Libertarianism

There is no longer any such thing as fiction or nonfiction; there's only narrative ~ Edgar Lawrence Doctorow (dob 1/6/1931) is an American author known internationally for his unique works of historical fiction. Doctorow spent nine years as a book editor, first at the mass-market paperback publisher "New American Library" working with Ian Fleming and Ayn Rand among others; and from 1964, as editor-in-chief at The Dial Press.

The following from the blog of an idiot named Willis V. Hart... note that in this post he refers to me as an idiot while revealing that the real idiot is himself.

Willis Hart: What the idiot fails to comprehend... is that libertarianism, just like with a lot of other things, is a) a continuum (from the moderate policy oriented libertarianism of the Cato Institute to the harder, more doctrinaire, orientation of the Mises and Ayn Rand Institutes) and b) a construct that has a great many permutations to it... [blah, blah, blah] I mean, I know that the simpler that person is, the more that this type of individual requires a clear-cut dichotomy, ideal types, etc., just to get frigging by in their life but enough. Enough. (1/28/2014 at 7:51pm).

This from an idiot who spends a lot of his time mischaracterizing Keynesian economics. I used to have SOME respect left for the guy, thinking he was intelligent and well read, but had simply reached the wrong conclusions. That was until he started lying about Keynesian economics by creating obvious strawmen descriptions of what Keynesians "invariably" say when they don't invariably say it.

I mean, it would be LOL-able if it wasn't so frigging pathetic. I'd say "enough", but I'm sure there is a lot more to come from the strawman-loving Hart. More of his insisting Democrats walk in lock step and we're all of a like mind in supporting anything that comes out of the Obama administration... which is completely false, but something he and his like-minded cohorts sit on their high horses feeling superior about (they are men of reason who think for themselves while criticizing both sides equally... in their minds); and more of his ridiculous characterizing of Democrats and Democratic politics/economic policies.

It's pretty easy to knock down theories you disagree with when you misrepresent them to the extreme extent that Mr. Hart does on his blog. And this idiot has the nerve to accuse me of misunderstanding Libertarianism, labeling me "simple" and requiring a clear-cut dichotomy to "get frigging by" in my life? Obviously constructing and knocking down strawmen is the only way this Hart fellow can get by. I, on the other hand, do recognize that, as with any political ideology, there are many different flavors and that only the most die hard (a small minority) walk in lockstep.

But, that Democrats who "support" Obama are simple, while "freethinkers" such as himself are far superior to the rest of us (Dems and Repubs) is a narrative that clearly gives the dude comfort. Without his arrogance I think Mr. Hart would be nothing but a shell of a man who, no doubt, couldn't go on living if the idea that he's got it all figured out was taken away from him.

"Support" is in quotes above, BTW, because, while I consider myself an Obama supporter, I do have my problems with the fellow, some of which Mr. Hart points to a comment on the (ironically titled) "rAtional nAtion" blog.

Willis Hart: This is what Jeremy Scahill of "The Nation" has to say about President Obama. He makes some pretty solid points... "And then, in Western societies, you have, on the one hand, President Obama saying that his administration is going to be the most transparent in history and that they want to be friends with the press; and on the other hand, they are monitoring the metadata of journalists, they are seizing phone records, they're trying to compel journalists to testify against their sources, they're trying to figure out who journalists are talking to within government so that they can go and indict those people... [end quote] Finally, a progressive with some guts, integrity, and consistency. (1/28/2014 AT 11:49pm).

OK, so it was AFTER I said I agreed (with Mr. Hart's agreement with Jeremy Scahill) that the Hartster authored his post about me requiring a clear-cut dichotomy and "ideal types"... so I guess absolutely nothing is going to derail the Hartster when he's spinning his narrative. There are SOME reasonable Dems, but REALLY, Willis Hart (as a "small L" Libertarian) is among a select few that REALLY gets it... (which is why he says "finally" in regards to Mr. Scahill. Scahill is a Progressive that doesn't represent the norm).

Video Description: Jeremy Scahill says Obama White House Doesn't Want Journalists, It Wants "State Media". (posted to "Real Clear Politics" 12/5/2013).

SWTD #229, wDel #49.


  1. Get. A life.

    1. Learn how to construct a sentence properly. The period in the middle of yours shows you don't know how.

  2. It would be interesting to read what Will Hart thought about Scahill when Jeremy was lambasting George W. Bush and Blackwater and the war crimes of Iraq.

    Of course, nowadays one can't find a single on-line conservative who actually supported W.

    Scahill was a keynote speaker at the Chicago Socialist Convention in 2013. Hart should have attended because he would have loved the hising and anger they have for President Obama.

    1. I'm guessing he'd say Scahill put forward some decent criticisms, but he'd object to the use of the term "war crimes", as Will does not think bush committed any. He just thinks the war was a bad idea.

    2. Will Hart relies on the Absence of Evidence equals Evidence of Absence to justify W's war crimes. Hmmm...

  3. This is in response to comments made in reply to the post "On the Idiot and Libertarianism" that Will Hart wrote about me (I'm the one he thinks is an idiot). In reply to that post (which this post is MY response to) blogger Dennis Marks makes the argument that people opposing the plutocrats ability to exploit poor workers (here & abroad) is racist.... and YES, you read that right!

    One might have thought it inconceivable that anyone would make an argument that exploiting poor workers for the benefit of the plutocrats somehow shows you aren't a racist, but here you go... (note: when Dennis refers to "paleo-libertarians", it's a callback to an earlier comment from Will Hart in which he says, "...there's a huge war between the classical liberals and the paleos when it comes to immigration... the latter group almost being xenophobic at times").

    Dennis Marks [1/29/2014 at 6:47pm & 1/29/2014 at 7:36pm] And those paleos, I am guessing, have a lot in common with the non-libertarian Nader and Buchanan and Perot etc when it comes to their fear and hatred of foreigners. ...I think it is fine that every one of these gentlemen refuse to buy goods from Mexico, Japan, etc based on whatever degree and variation of hatred they have for "the other".

    What a load of crap, Dennis. Every government has a duty to protect the jobs of it's citizens. Here the racist Dennis argues that in order to NOT be racist a person should support the ability of the plutocrats to EXPLOIT poor workers. I think Dennis' hatred encompasses anyone who suggests that the plutocrats shouldn't have unrestricted access to slave labor. Oh, and "the other" too. His hatred extends to them as well. These lies of his are only to mask his own racism. On this he deludes even himself, but his arguments give him away. To be so eagerly in favor of the exploitation of poor workers (given that the skin color of the workers were're talking about is not White) IS RACIST. Dennis, IMO, is a huge racist, as well as a huge classist (as his hatred also extends to poor White workers in the United States, who he desperately wants to see made poorer).

    Personally I find Dennis' spin that not allowing the plutocrats to make Americans poorer by exploiting poor workers in other countries (or here, in the case of allowing more immigration)... as "racism" to be sickening. This is truly disgusting stuff, folks.

  4. I didn't think you had the balls to publish my post or answer the questions.. I think Will and dmarks are are a pussy boy

    1. Rusty Schumckelford: I didn't think you had the balls to publish my post or answer the questions.. I think Will and dmarks are correct... you are a pussy boy.

      Why should I publish your troll comments, Rusty? As for me being the type of "boy" you assert... yes, I admit that is my preference. I admit I'm not gay, despite the homophobic Dennis' assertions to the contrary. And, even though he adds a "not that there's anything wrong with that" once in a while, clearly he believes there IS something wrong with that. Or he'd stop lying about it. What is wrong, I believe, is that Dennis is in the closet (he is a self-hating gay conservative like former senator Larry "wide stance" Craig). Just recently Dennis linked to a video starring some idiot who calls himself "lotion man" (he identifies himself using the alias in the video). In my response I refer to "lotion man" and, although Dennis SAYS "I don't want to think about it", clearly he is thinking I'm suggesting he lotion up his *censored* so we can have gay sex. His mind IMMEDIATELY goes there, despite me only referring to some moron in a video HE LINKED TO! I think Dennis needs to come out of the closet for his own good. Denying who you are isn't healthy.

    2. Rusty, I've submitted many comments to Will's blog that he refuses to publish. Why don't you go challenge Will regarding his lack of balls?

      BTW, the comments I submit to Will's blog are (generally) not trollish in nature... unlike Rusty's comments to this blog, which are ALWAYS trollish.

    3. Rusty, I can't answer your question regarding why I do something Dennis says I do... because Dennis is lying. I don't do that. This is the last response on this topic you will get from me. Further submissions from Rusty on this topic will be ignored and sent to the spam folder.


Comment moderation has temporarily been suspended. Although I may be forced to reinstate it if the trolls take advantage.