Judge Nap resigns from (St)CATO board

[Anti Federalist]

Judge Napolitano Resigns From the Cato Board

Posted by Lew Rockwell on September 20, 2012 06:55 AM

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/121370.html

Could it be because of the neocon-like warmongering and Republican establishment politics? Or that all board members and top execs are personally liable under DC law if the shenanigans, on which the kibosh has definitely not been put, continue?

[NewRightLibertarian]

Good for the Judge. Get away from those scumbags.

[specsaregood]

..liable under DC law if the shenanigans, on which the kibosh has definitely not been put, continue?

?Any idea what he is talkinga bout?

[NewRightLibertarian]

?Any idea what he is talkinga bout?

Probably this: http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/04/drugged-lady-sings-koch-cato-power.html

[realtonygoodwin]

So, I don't really understand what so many here have against Cato (and Reason)... they seem like a pretty solid, effective, think-tank.

Explanation?

[low preference guy]

So, I don't really understand what so many here have against Cato (and Reason)... they seem like a pretty solid, effective, think-tank.

Explanation?

statist monetary policy and support for the fed over decades.

so they were libertarians on many issues, but not the most important one.

[realtonygoodwin]

"Most important" seems to be a matter of opinion, not fact.

[low preference guy]

"Most important" seems to be a matter of opinion, not fact.

at the very least it's one of the most important ones. and they not only opposed the free market in monetary policy, but also attacked those who favored the free market.

[specsaregood]

"Most important" seems to be a matter of opinion, not fact.

Not a matter of opinion if you diagnose that as the root cause of most of the other problems they claim to be against.

[NewRightLibertarian]

So, I don't really understand what so many here have against Cato (and Reason)... they seem like a pretty solid, effective, think-tank.

Explanation?

Please explain how they have been effective at promoting liberty in the United States.

Also- http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/93269.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo129.html
http://antiwar.com/blog/2007/12/07/cato-institute-vp-sneers-at-ron-paul-hes-not-our-kind-of-person/

[erowe1]

So, I don't really understand what so many here have against Cato (and Reason)... they seem like a pretty solid, effective, think-tank.

Explanation?

Ever seen a fundamentalist church that saves its sharpest criticism for other fundamentalist churches? It's like, "We're not worried about losing members of our flock to the Catholics, but it's that church down the street with a similar name to ours we have to worry about." It's basically a form of partisanship.

There were these rifts between Rothbard and Ayn Rand and Milton Friedman and the Kochs. And people feel like they have to pick sides on them.

[emazur]

So, I don't really understand what so many here have against Cato (and Reason)... they seem like a pretty solid, effective, think-tank.

Explanation?

Mostly paranoia, though there are some legitimate gripes (the CATO board endorsing Fred Thompson in 2008 was a BIG no-no). Most want to cherry pick positions\statements from select members, put a frame around that, and call them STATO. One could just as easily put a frame around other statements and call them rapid Ron Paul supporters. Neither position is accurate. Generally speaking, their specialists are very good at the field they specialize in. Their healthcare people are great at healthcare, their foreign policy people are great on non-interventionism and cutting military spending, the civil liberties people are great on civil liberties, etc. And yes, there are some End the Fed people too. Paul's book The Case for Gold was on the CATO front page for almost 2-months, and here's an article by Dan Mitchell that mimics Paul's currency competition idea: http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/danieljmitchell/2012/04/09/if_we_cant_end_the_fed_can_we_at_least_subject_it_ to_competition/page/full/

[NewRightLibertarian]

Generally speaking, their specialists are very good at the field they specialize in. Their healthcare people are great at healthcare, their foreign policy people are great on non-interventionism and cutting military spending, the civil liberties people are great on civil liberties, etc. And yes, there are some End the Fed people too. Paul's book The Case for Gold was on the CATO front page for almost 2-months, and here's an article by Dan Mitchell that mimics Paul's currency competition idea: http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/danieljmitchell/2012/04/09/if_we_cant_end_the_fed_can_we_at_least_subject_it_ to_competition/page/full/

How have their policy recommendations worked at achieving liberty in this country?

[erowe1]

How have their policy recommendations worked at achieving liberty in this country?

Their recommendations haven't been followed. So, much like all of Ron Paul's lone "no" votes, they have not worked at achieving liberty.

[seyferjm]

While certainly not as purist as Lew Rockwell and Anti-War.com, CATO uis far removed from being enemy #1. David Boaz spoke at the SFL conference I went to last year and hung out at the bar with us afterwards.

[NewRightLibertarian]

Their recommendations haven't been followed. So, much like all of Ron Paul's lone "no" votes, they have not worked at achieving liberty.

Oh, so they've been a pathetic failure. This is very much obvious.

[erowe1]

Oh, so they've been a pathetic failure. This is very much obvious.

Hasn't everyone who has tried to make us more free in our lifetime been a pathetic failure, including Ron Paul?

[NewRightLibertarian]

Hasn't everyone who has tried to make us more free in our lifetime been a pathetic failure, including Ron Paul?

At least Ron Paul has awakened more people to the ideas of freedom than anyone prior to him, changed the dialogue in this country and mobilized people for political action to restore freedom. CATO has done jack shit, other than do everything they could to stop Ron Paul from spreading liberty.

[erowe1]

At least Ron Paul has awakened more people to the ideas of freedom than anyone prior to him, changed the dialogue in this country and mobilized people for political action to restore freedom. CATO has done jack shit, other than do everything they could to stop Ron Paul from spreading liberty.

I don't buy that. I think most of what they've published over the years has been really good.

[emazur]

How have their policy recommendations worked at achieving liberty in this country?

If you're gonna complain about that, you might as well say the Mises Institute and the Ron Paul delegates haven't accomplished "jack shit" either

[NewRightLibertarian]

If you're gonna complain about that, you might as well say the Mises Institute and the Ron Paul delegates haven't accomplished "jack shit" either

Terrible comparison. The Mises Institute is meant to provide people with education in Austrian Economics at a low price. Paul people in the Republican Party are getting elected within the Republican Party all throughout the country. So liberty is spreading and CATO did all they could to stop it either out of jealousy or because they don't really stand for liberty in actuality.

[realtonygoodwin]

Mostly paranoia, though there are some legitimate gripes (the CATO board endorsing Fred Thompson in 2008 was a BIG no-no). Most want to cherry pick positions\statements from select members, put a frame around that, and call them STATO. One could just as easily put a frame around other statements and call them rapid Ron Paul supporters. Neither position is accurate. Generally speaking, their specialists are very good at the field they specialize in. Their healthcare people are great at healthcare, their foreign policy people are great on non-interventionism and cutting military spending, the civil liberties people are great on civil liberties, etc. And yes, there are some End the Fed people too. Paul's book The Case for Gold was on the CATO front page for almost 2-months, and here's an article by Dan Mitchell that mimics Paul's currency competition idea: http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/danieljmitchell/2012/04/09/if_we_cant_end_the_fed_can_we_at_least_subject_it_ to_competition/page/full/

Gotcha

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

I'd like to hear what Judge Nap says.



Terrible comparison. The Mises Institute is meant to provide people with education in Austrian Economics at a low price. Paul people in the Republican Party are getting elected within the Republican Party all throughout the country. So liberty is spreading and CATO did all they could to stop it either out of jealousy or because they don't really stand for liberty in actuality.


I would not say they've been completely useless, but I'd say the same thing about Glenn Beck or Lou Dobbs. Talk shit when it doesn't matter, don't follow through when it does.

[GeorgiaAvenger]

statist monetary policy and support for the fed over decades.

so they were libertarians on many issues, but not the most important one.

I don't notice statist monetary policy in their articles.

[realtonygoodwin]

I hadn't either. And they seem very pro-Paul, just from what I have seen.

[erowe1]

I hadn't either. And they seem very pro-Paul, just from what I have seen.

I think that's a pretty recent development.

[coastie]

An article at Reason introduced me to ron paul in 2007. Before that, I had never heard of him. Just
sayin..

[erowe1]

An article at Reason introduced me to ron paul in 2007. Before that, I had never heard of him. Just
sayin..

Before that, most of us had never heard of him. But 2007 is the year you probably would have first encountered him anyway, with or without that Reason article.

[July]

I think that's a pretty recent development.

It is.

I also see they are warming up to Rand.

I think some at CATO and Reason have just simply felt threatened by Ron Paul and Mises, for various reasons, in a partisan sort of way. I don't mean just because of issues with board members or the stance on the fed, but they also have promoted a somewhat different brand of libertarianism. For example, Ron's social conservatism, his stance on abortion, etc...these have been thorny issues. CATO had a different strategy and vision for promoting and branding libertariansim, and Ron Paul has kind of challenged that, IMO.

[TheTexan]

"Most important" seems to be a matter of opinion, not fact.

No, it's basically fact. If you see it as a matter of opinion, you should look into the matter further, because monetary policy and how it's been implemented especially over the past 30-40 years has had a tremendous impact on every other freedom in existence.

Sound money is at the heart and soul of freedom.

[pochy1776]

It is.

I also see they are warming up to Rand.

I think some at CATO and Reason have just simply felt threatened by Ron Paul and Mises, for various reasons, in a partisan sort of way. I don't mean just because of issues with board members or the stance on the fed, but they also have promoted a somewhat different brand of libertarianism. For example, Ron's social conservatism, his stance on abortion, etc...these have been thorny issues. CATO had a different strategy and vision for promoting and branding libertariansim, and Ron Paul has kind of challenged that, IMO.

Ron has principles. Most other people don't.

[GeorgiaAvenger]

http://www.facebook.com/CatoInstitute/posts/433342943383953

So much for statist monetary policy.

[coastie]

Before that, most of us had never heard of him. But 2007 is the year you probably would have first encountered him anyway, with or without that Reason article.

Touche

[thequietkid10]

Please explain how they have been effective at promoting liberty in the United States.

Also- http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/93269.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo129.html
http://antiwar.com/blog/2007/12/07/cato-institute-vp-sneers-at-ron-paul-hes-not-our-kind-of-person/

Bit of advice, when criticizing the ability of widely known libertarian organizations to influence the debate, avoid using links to libertarian groups that the vast majority of the population knows nothing about. At least the average news junkie has heard of CATO and Reason.

[The Free Hornet]

Bit of advice, when criticizing the ability of widely known libertarian organizations to influence the debate, avoid using links to libertarian groups that the vast majority of the population knows nothing about.

Why? The "vast majority of the population knows nothing about" "libertarian organizations".


At least the average news junkie has heard of CATO and Reason.

Lee Rockwell is sufficiently known to be a source. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lew_Rockwell) As is DiLorenzo. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_DiLorenzo) Unbelievable.

[Henry Rogue]

As a government expands, freedom erodes. Just look at the mountain of laws, rules and regulations John Stossel demonstrates on his show every week. Nothing has allowed for the explosive growth of government like the ability to borrow itself into expansion. Monetary policy indeed affects liberty.