Cato "scholar" promoting Fred?

[LastoftheMohicans]

http://www.cato.org/view_ddispatch.php?viewdate=20070907#1

Cato Daily Dispatch for September 7, 2007
Subscribe to the Daily Dispatch via email
Subscribe to the Daily Dispatch via PDA (AvantGo)


Thompson Dons Reagan Mantle

"Fred D. Thompson had one central strategic goal as he formally began his presidential campaign on Thursday: to win over conservatives who are disheartened at their current choice of Republican candidates by positioning himself as the ideological and stylistic heir of Ronald Reagan," reports The New York Times. "Mr. Thompson is certainly conservative, and has been throughout his public life -- particularly on the question of federalism, the size of government, tax cuts and his unwavering support for the war in Iraq."

In a statement released today, Chris Edwards, Cato's director of tax policy studies, says: "The New York Times is right that Fred Thompson's strong support of federalism makes him an intellectual heir of Ronald Reagan. Central to Reagan's campaign for president was his belief that the federal government was too big and that there should be an 'orderly transfer' of federal activities back to the states and the people.

"Kudos to Thompson for injecting federalism back into public discussion. Thompson is right that federalism 'is a tool to promote freedom.' All the Republican candidates should do less griping about 'pork' spending, and put their efforts into plans for abolishing major agencies and reviving the federalist structure of American government."

Not only is FT not strong on Federalism (and neither was Reagan) but Mr. Edwards seems to be implying that nobody else had injected federalism into the debate up until now.

[constituent]

cato and these other shill 'institutes' are the problem and
have been. these criminals (and their cohort) are a blight
on society...

these are the real criminals, not the kid w/ the joint, nor
the guy turning over cocaine to keep his kids in pampers
(not always the case, but more often than you'd think)..
these people are a total drain on society and an
enemy of the people.

[MicroBalrog]

Cato has been pretty pro-Paul so far.

[R_Harris]

I stopped supporting Cato almost 20 years ago.

Ed Crane use to write some great articles during the Reagan era showing that the "revolution" was more of a whimper than a bang. All of the good gains that Reagan had achieved economically during his first two years were pretty much gone by the end of his presidency.

However, I think the Cato Institute caught "potomac fever" by the end of the 80s and started compromising on many of its principles. Heck, there was even an article in 1986 in Newsweek where Crane and Boaz both said they had left the LP "having failed to drag it into the real world." How is that not sellout? In fact, a big LP official told me in 1988 that the REAL reason Crane left the LP is because he could not become "Czar" of it - he wanted total control. When he could not get it, he picked up his marbles and left.

I think the Cato Institute valued more money and donors over principles. So, it is where it is today.

[MicroBalrog]

Harris, Cato goes so far as to publish research and books advocating abolishing legal tender altogether and switching to the use of a free market in private currencies. THey're more free-market then Ron Paul is.

[R_Harris]

Harris, Cato goes so far as to publish research and books advocating abolishing legal tender altogether and switching to the use of a free market in private currencies. THey're more free-market then Ron Paul is.

Depends on what topic you are talking about. Regarding foreign policy, they have put out some things that almost echo the neocons.

But it is a fact that a lot of the old guard libertarian policy analysts (such as Bandow) left Cato years ago.

[axiomata]

CATO can't support any candidate, but as individuals, I'd wager Paul would be the most popular among its members.

[Triton]

OK, so Thompsons handlers have morphed him into a neo-con Federalist. I won't vote for a neo-con anything.

[MicroBalrog]

Depends on what topic you are talking about. Regarding foreign policy, they have put out some things that almost echo the neocons.



Please provide proof.

Also, to be a neoconservative, it is insufficient to follow invasive foreign policy abroad. One must also agree with preserving the status-quo re: the regulatory rule of government in economics and expanding it's role in private affairs at home - as Irving Kristol describes so eloquently.


Neolibertarianism is a segment of libertarianism that actually agrees with neoconservatives on foreign policy.