The Kavanaugh Nomination Shows Why You Don't Want Any Libertarians On Your Side

An Iraqi soldier holds up the Koran (the Muslim bible) and a white flag as he surrenders to Saudi and American forces inside Kuwait on Monday, Feb. 25, 1991. Large numbers of prisoners were taken from fortified Iraqi positions by the allied forces in this operation along the coast highway north of the Kuwait-Saudi Arabia border. (AP Photo/Laurent Rebours)

An Iraqi soldier holds up the Koran (the Muslim bible) and a white flag as he surrenders to Saudi and American forces inside Kuwait on Monday, Feb. 25, 1991. Large numbers of prisoners were taken from fortified Iraqi positions by the allied forces in this operation along the coast highway north of the Kuwait-Saudi Arabia border. (AP Photo/Laurent Rebours)


Right now Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh has been hit with a flurry of non-credible, and today one incredible, allegations from his high school and college years. The charges are superficial, they are uncorroborated, they are scurrilous, and they have one objective which is keeping Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court.

Earlier today, Ramesh Ponnuru had an article in Bloomberg titled Five Reasons the Republicans Should Stick With Kavanaugh. It is a good read and here they are:

The first is to avoid an injustice…
The second reason is to discourage future spurious campaigns against nominees…
Third, a lot of conservative voters might see the demise of Kavanaugh’s nomination as a Republican betrayal, or at least a sign of weakness, and sit out the midterms in disgust.
Fourth, Republicans might not get another nominee confirmed if they abandon Kavanaugh…
Fifth, the claim that suspicion of Kavanaugh will taint any rulings he makes is overstated…

https://twitter.com/EWErickson/status/1044980828105781250

Ultimately, if they can stop Kavanaugh, we will never find a SCOTUS nominee they can’t stop.

Those are some great reasons to support Kavanaugh, but what, ou’re asking by now, does any of this have to do with libertarians? Glad you asked that.

Robbie Soave is an editor at Reason. This is his hot take one the situation:

https://twitter.com/robbysoave/status/1044981688881872896

https://twitter.com/robbysoave/status/1044982752687403008

https://twitter.com/robbysoave/status/1044983867164282880

As with most libertarians, you aren’t really sure if Soave is a dolt (this would be the Any Rand wing), a political naif, or just a liberal Democrat who happens to believe in civil liberties. And, as with most libertarians, you find they are much more interested in being reasonable and finding consensus and reaching across the aisle than they are in actually doing anything. Here is a prime example. We have two completely outlandish allegations and one that an best be described as “sketchy.” One of the allegations, the sketchy one, has been disproven by information given to us by the complainant. This leaves two allegations that are totally without foundation. And yet, Soave wants to “take the L.” There is a word for people who don’t mind losing. They are called losers.

Ronald Reagan, Ronaldus Magnus, was right about a lot of things. What he was wrong about was libertarians having any place at the table in a conservative movement. When he said, “I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism,” one has to conclude that he didn’t know what he was talking about. During the Obama and, now the Trump, administrations it became clear that libertarians saw playing remora to the GOP was a way of getting power and influence.

I’m more than happy to accept their votes and take their donations (except that they don’t seem to give a whole lot of money) but the more you listen to them the stupider you get.

=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========