What sort of bizarre "Guest Editorial" is this on Informed Comment today? Billed by Cole as "Guest Editorial: Smith on Libertarians and Iraq" (apparently this Jan Smith), this odd piece reads like an email from the middle of a series, as it makes statements and associations which aren’t explained at all, most of which would make any libertarian’s mind reel. Like this:
For the libertarians themselves, or more precisely, the private elites
they represent, has had far more influence than Israel on the
administration’s foreign policy.
We represent private elites? Who knew? I always thought it obvious that we were the bag ladies of American politics. Or this:
Justin Raimundo can tell you what it takes to satisfy the private elites.
No sh%^&@#*t?! Justin, you old dog, you’ve been holding out on us!
And just to confirm that this guy has absolutely no idea what a libertarian is or what they stand for, he adds:
But what about the libertarians? They are angry that the government is spending “their money” in Iraq. And they are powerful…
POWERFUL? *Boggle*
Smith:
Want many Iraqs, one after another until this century’s empire crumbles into dust? Become a libertarian.
What is this guy talking about? I’m one of those powerful libertarians, typing my opinion powerfully onto the internets. In February of 2003, I, along with other libertarians, powerfully marched in a quarter-million strong protest against invading Iraq. Oddly, the Bush administration ignored our powerful demand.
I’m OK with the Empire crumbling into dust, but what sort of insane logic would lead a person to blame libertarians for "many Iraqs?" Plausibly, Smith could be talking about the war-supporting “neolibertarian” Liberventionists, but the only libertarian he names is the editorial director of AntiWar.com, for pete’s sake. Hello, Jan? AntiWar.com? Get it?