Gillespie-Goldberg: And You Were There!

|

They came, they saw, they philosophised. Reason's Nick Gillespie faced off against National Review's Jonah Goldberg last night in an event sponsored by America's Future Foundation and held at the Heritage Foundation. Moderator Matthew Yglesias held the combatants apart at heated moments, as when Gillespie discoursed on the English-speaking skills of Queen Victoria or when Goldberg repeatedly denounced slavery. If you were there and blogged it, post a link in the comments. Until then, you can recreate the debate and aftermath with these photos—the latter ones from the after party at Lounge 201.

Reason Editor-in-Chief makes a point by handing out free copies of the magazine (and T-shirts!)

The audience laughs at another one of Gillespie's (Goldberg's? Yglesias's?) bon mots.

The Cato Institute's Ben Wyche V asks a pointed question.

Ronald Bailey fields questions on stem cell research (we're guessing).

Matthew Yglesias discusses conservatives' and libertarians' utter lack of ideas with Reason intern Macy Hanson.

Nick Gillespie gets Wonkette-worthy tips from Chris Lehmann and Alex Pareene.

Kerry Howley beats a hasty retreat from the clutches of paleocon blogger Michael Brendan Dougherty.

Julian Sanchez argues the finer points of "Battlestar Galactica" with Jonah Goldberg.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

54 responses to “Gillespie-Goldberg: And You Were There!

  1. Shave, Matthew. And you’re too old for emo glasses.

  2. It was a fun debate but it was hard for them to top their first exchange. It was made while they were still being introduced.

    Gillespie announced that he was using several performance-enhancing drugs for the event. This prompted Goldberg to pass him an empty water bottle.

    “Here, piss into this,” Goldberg said.

    “No, I’ll save it for the debate,” Gillespie replied.

    Okay, you had to be there.

  3. Interestingly, I suddenly find myself to be a big Kerry Howley fan.

  4. Oh, and Gillespie is like the Glenn Danzig of pundits.

  5. OK, which one is Goldberg and which one is Sanchez in that last picture?

    I’m guessing Goldberg is the one who is speaking and has both hands up (sans ciggy) since “Sanchez” doesn’t evoke the picture of pasty white guy in my mind

  6. I’ve never noticed before, but from that angle Gillespie is totally the libertarian George Clooney.

  7. “Sanchez” doesn’t evoke the picture of pasty white guy in my mind

    Tom, your mind’s eye is wrong. Goldberg is the fat guy on the right, and Julian is the pasty fellow.

  8. Hey, I thought Battlestar Galactica was coming back this month. I checked and it’s not restarting until October. Did I miss something, or am I just confused? Was it delayed by Julian vs. Jonah?

    Or have I been replaced by a Cylon?

  9. “Interestingly, I suddenly find myself to be a big Kerry Howley fan.”

    Me too, Jaybird.

  10. Hey, I thought Battlestar Galactica was coming back this month. I checked and it’s not restarting until October. Did I miss something, or am I just confused? Was it delayed by Julian vs. Jonah?

    Or have I been replaced by a Cylon?

  11. The only thing that sucked was…no jacket.
    Doesn’t Gillespie have a leather vest for the warm months?

  12. Apparently I have! How else do I explain these identical postings?

  13. Interestingly, I suddenly find myself to be a big Kerry Howley fan.

    Suddenly? Obviously you’ve never checked out her Reason Bio page. I’ve been a Howley hound for over a year now.

    BTW I will be devastated if no audio, or at least a transcript, of this event is made available. Not as devastated as I am with each unanswered email, professing my undying love and eternal devotion with detailed descriptions of the ministrations I would joyously bestow upon her every toe, I send to Kerry, but still pretty devastated.

  14. Damn, I wish I’d been there. I know that if I had five minutes face-to-face with Ron Bailey I’d win him over to the pro-life side.

  15. You guys are right, Kerry Howley is a doll.

    A leather vest would be too queer for words. Please Nick, don’t listen!

    And by the way, I’m a subscriber. Where’s my free t-shirt? Just ’cause I don’t live near DC, I get nothing.

  16. You know, everybody is in this thread drooling over Kerry Howley, and we wonder why Reason staffers rarely attend events organized by the commenters.

    Gee, ya think it might have something to do with the fact that we can be downright creepy?

  17. Damn! Ron Bailey is HOT in that picture. *leers at*

  18. Boy, I wish I’d seen thoreau’s comment before I posted that.

  19. *Damn!* that Noam Chomsky Blow Up doll sure is hot

    looks up… WHAT? oh.

    Nick – kudos to you. I know you did great 🙂

    respectfully,
    VM

  20. Boy, I wish I’d seen thoreau’s comment before I posted that.

    Don’t worry your pretty little head, honey. We don’t expect much from you girls. Just show up at our events and look cute and it’s all good.

    See how awful I just was? Here’s a person who has had a lot of interesting things to say, and all I did was talk about how she should look good and that’s all that matters.

    Now, we’ve got Kerry Howley, who has written some good articles for Reason and posted interesting things on this blog, and what does everybody talk about? Her appearance.

    And we wonder why Reason staffers don’t attend events organized by commenters….

  21. >We don’t expect much from you girls.

    As has been noted before, Julian and Nick aren’t hard to look at either.

    >and we wonder why Reason staffers rarely attend events organized by the commenters.

    Some of us aren’t interested in events organized by commenters, whether they are attended by staffers or not.

  22. Hee hee hee hee hee.

  23. Ron, I promise that while I like that hairstyle you have going, I really appreciated Global Warming and Other Eco-Myths even more.

    Fangirlishness aside, wish I could have been there; looks like a blast.

  24. Some of us aren’t interested in events organized by commenters, whether they are attended by staffers or not.

    That’s fine. You’re always welcome if you change your mind.

  25. thoreau,

    What, you can’t respect a woman’s intelligence and appreciate her looks at the same time?

    In any case, I’d guess that Kerry’s used to people fawning over her looks. Still, after this thread she may want to wear a burqa to future events…

  26. >That’s fine. You’re always welcome if you change your mind.

    Well thank you. I appreciate that. What I don’t appreciate is being chided for basically benign behavior.

  27. Nick needs to go shopping – I think I saw him wearing that same shirt two years ago on some C-Span round table…

  28. thoreau,
    Like Melvin Udall, I can control how creepy I allow myself to become. And I strictly limit myself to ‘not enough to get arrested’. I expect that Kerry, who’s credentials certify that she is as brilliant as she is gorgeous, has become accomplished at fending off the admirers/stalkers that must surely swarm about her every time she leaves the house. I myself am stuck in Bufu Indiana, so there’s no fear of me turning up at a DC event. However, it would be understandable if Miss Howley were to pass on coming out to avoid the hassle.

    OTOH, the same can not be said about the rest of the Reason staff. For all his hip stylings, I’ve never seen Nick sporting groupies. The rest of the gang has even less to worry about. A guy like Ron? oh wait. Ellie, you must live in one of those rectangular states.

  29. thoreau, please stop trying to flirt with Kerry. She’s still young and innocent and may not see through your treacherous wiles.

    I, on the other hand, as one recently abducted to the mothership of and subdued by a Femalien, have no opinion about the physical merits of any other member of that august race. No opinion whatsoever.

  30. A woman or man who is both intelligent and attractive is a force to be reckoned with on two levels. The latter does not diminish the former.

    BTW, I’m a woman, if it makes a difference regarding any interpretation of my comments.

  31. Oh, I’m sure that Kerry is quite able to take care of herself And there’s certainly nothing wrong with having both beauty and brains, or admiring those who have both.

    I’m just saying that when the comment gallery is drooling, we shouldn’t be shocked if the writers decide not to hang out with us.

    That’s all.

  32. Ellie, you must live in one of those rectangular states.

    Nope! Just a girl with a good eye.

  33. For all his hip stylings, I’ve never seen Nick sporting groupies.

    That’s because any woman libertarian enough to consider becoming a Gillespie-groupie already has adoring male groupies of her own.

  34. That’s because any woman libertarian enough to consider becoming a Gillespie-groupie already has adoring male groupies of her own.

    All six of them?

  35. Yes, David, all six of us. Nick Gillespie may not have any groupies, but Nicole Gillespie would be swamped.

    And if the lovely Ms. Howley ever finds herself on the market, all she has to do is announce this on Hit and Run, make herself some popcorn, and then sit back and watch the men genuflecting before her.

    Now go peel me a grape, boy.

  36. Gentlemen, we need to ease up on Kerry Howley lest we trespass. She’s Julian Sanchez’s girlfriend. I read this on his blog.

    In other news, I recently found that Brian Doherty has married another leading female libertarian, Angela Keaton. I am really pissed off about that. (Although I still wish them all the best.)

  37. Jennifer is right. It’s like a woman studying at the Engineering Library. Or a guy studying at the Education Library (which I did once or twice at UF).

    Fortunately, I found a local solution some time ago with an apolitical version of the fairer sex. It would be nice to have a libertarian, but I figure “apolitical” is the next best thing 🙂 And she’s pretty great otherwise, so I’ll just get my (platonic) female libertarian fix here and get the rest of my relationship needs addressed by the future Mrs. Pro Libertate 🙂

  38. That’s because any woman libertarian enough to consider becoming a Gillespie-groupie already has adoring male groupies of her own.

    Do the Bailey-groupies get groupies? I won’t even make them peel grapes. Just throw out your Mountain Dew bottles when you’re done playing GTA, boys, and let me have the TV when Project Runway is on.

  39. And here I am stuck in Wyoming when all the fun is going on on the other side of the lower 48.

    Harrumph!!
    🙁

  40. Yo Stevo:

    Yo, a boyfriend need not be an obstacle for the built man. I see a woman I want, I show her what I want, don’t matter none if her boyfriend sees it. He gots a problem with it, he can try to stop me. He ain’t gonna, cause I ain’t no droopy armed stick man, I been humpin the carpet for years now and it shows.

  41. Did I say Kerry Howley would have to “make herself some popcorn”? What was I thinking? Kerry, I apologize for saying such a horrible thing about you. You don’t have to make popcorn; you can get some guy to make it for you.

    Ellie, I’ve been thinking long and hard (no pun) about how we women should divide the libertarian male groupies among us. Kerry’s being off the market is a good thing, because that means the groupies only have to be divided five ways, not six. (And don’t give me any free-market economic-theory crap here, either. Groupies are a zero-sum game; more for you means less for me. That’s why we need strict regulation to ensure equitable distribution of supply.)

    I want the dark and brooding guys, because they mesh best with my personality. You can have the ones that can tolerate kittens. Smacky gets the ones who wouldn’t be intimidated by a woman who calls herself “Smacky.” For guys who don’t fit neatly into any of these categories, we can cast lots, or play poker, or something.

  42. Jennifer,

    Are groupies fungible?

  43. Wait, I thought Julian was gay (not that there’s anything wrong with that).

  44. Pro Libertate–

    Not if they bathe regularly.

  45. Yuck, yuck.

  46. If they were I bet they’d be a bunch of fun guys.

  47. Oh, hell on a biscuit. I just remembered I can’t partake of any groupies, on account of being in one of those committed-relationship things. Damn, damn, damn.

    Good news for the other libertarian women, though; y’all only need to divide the groupies up four ways. But please set a couple aside for me; I may need them if my boyfriend reads this thread.

  48. Does anybody know if and when the duscussion is going to be broadcasted on C-SPAN?

  49. If you were there and blogged it, post a link in the comments.

    …blogged.

  50. Ahhhhhhhhh
    Thank you Stephen Gordon

  51. For all his hip stylings, I’ve never seen Nick sporting groupies.

    I can’t think of anything clever to say so I’ll just say this:

    I have. Not in rock star quantities, but they’re around.

  52. I confess to becoming a Nick groupie after I saw his first Bill O’Reilly appearance. But he’s really got to dump that leather jacket once the temp goes over 70 degrees. (Maybe replace it with a Black Flag t-shirt?)

  53. Is the disagreement over ‘traditions’ one of content or emphasis? It seems like conservatives emphasize tradition almost for tradition’s sake, whereas libertarians (of the Hayek camp) emphasize that traditions were born out of trial and error, social experimentation, but the emphasis is on the experimentation part (though experimentation within the context of the traditions themselves, i.e. gay marriage). But both groups agree that certain traditions (the common law, markets, the family, marriage, religion) evolved and lasted over time because they worked well for the groups involved and led to social cohesion. More importantly these were not mandated from the top down but were all bottom up experimentations (at least originally). The fact they did last so long and created social stability and prosperity makes both groups wary of overturning traditions by government fiat or skeptical of social experiments that try to outright reject traditions altogether, not just innovate from them to get new spinoff forms – small communes in the middle of the 19th century and in the 1960s didn’t last long when they tried to create new societies based on free love, rejecting marriage and family traditions altogether.

    Okay, enough of a rant. Driving home I imagined this scenario where Goldberg, Gillespie, Peikoff, and an assortment of friends go out for a meal:

    Waiter: May I take your order?

    Goldberg: Don’t even need to see the menu. Just bring me the bangers and mash, just the way you’ve always fixed it.

    Waiter: Always?…okaaay, would that be the way it was fixed before the fall of the Roman Empire or sometime around the Crimean War?

    Goldberg: Whatever. You know what I’m talking about

    Waiter: And you sir?

    Gillespie: Sure, that sounds good, the bangers and mash for me, too. But can you make mine with russet potatoes? And, um, I don’t know, how about
    throwing the sausage in the tandoori for a change?

    Waiter: (rolls eyes) I’ll see what I can do. Ma’am?

    Peikoff: “Sir” (purses lips). The poached eggs please. Cooked to perfection. Btw, did you know Rand invented poached eggs?

    Al Gore: No, I did

    Waiter: How about you, sir?

    Jeremy Rifkin: What, no warning signs about GMO’s? I’ll be back with my lawyers.

    Rand’s Ghost: You’re all a bunch of mystics. I’m leaving. Leonard (snaps fingers).

  54. genufraction, that was brilliant.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.