Civil Liberties Jacob G. Hornberger on Obama, Foreign Policy, and Civil Liberties


At FreedomFest in July, Reason's Matt Welch talked with Jacob G. Hornberger, founder of The Future of Freedom Foundation. Hornberger explains why he thinks that Obama is no better than Bush when it comes to foreign policy and civil liberties. He explains why libertarians should help shape the debate and why there has never been a better time to make that argument.

Shot by Zach Weissmueller and Jim Epstein. Edited by Sharif Matar. About 2.30 minutes.

Held each July in Las Vegas, FreedomFest is attended by around 2,000 limited-government enthusiasts and libertarians a year. spoke with over two dozen speakers and attendees and will be releasing interviews over the coming weeks.

Visit for downloadable versions and subscribe to's YouTube Channel to receive automatic notifications when new material goes live.

NEXT: Is the Variety of Food Crops "Dwindling"?

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. So when Gary Johnson or Ron Paul get in the White House, I better not see Hornberger suddenly keeping his mouth shut when nothing changes.

    1. So when Gary Johnson or Ron Paul get in the White House

      Ha! Good one!

  2. If Michelle Bachmann is relying on sound economics, I fear for any respectibility that Mises, Hayek, Friedman and company still have left among the “independents” and “moderates.”

  3. Makes a lot of sense to me dude.

  4. Has there ever been a time when Americans were this disgusted with BOTH parties, and ready to do something about it? Will the Libertarian Party be able to capitalize? Since Gary and Ron don’t stand a chance in the Republican primaries, should they join forces on a third party ticket?

  5. I think the best route for a Libertarian party to take root is starting at a local level. Even if you get a Libertarian in office as President, both parties will block any attempts at real Libertarian legislation (or preferably elimination of current legislation). And then when nothing changes they’ll just say we told you Libertarianism doesn’t work. I think the Tea Party had the right idea in focusing on getting their preferred candidates into congress. They may not yet be getting what they want, but politicians are now paying attention to them and they do have a voice in congress albeit a small one for now. I also think candidates running as Libertarians need to be realistic about the environment they’re running in. They can’t go out and say they’re going to cut the budget in half the first day they’re in office. As much as all of us here love that idea, no ones going to get elected making those sorts of declarations. I saw some people running as Libertarians here in Ohio the last election that were woefully ignorant when it came to politics. It can’t be radical change or the sheep are going to get scared and go back to the devil they know. It has to be incremental.

  6. …I see terrorists everywhere. I ask Michelle and the girls to check under the bed every night for hidden terrorists that would harm the American citizens I have sworn to protect. I demand increased funding and taxes on the rich to keep funding my worldwide defensive struggle against evil-doers — even those hiding in primitive villages in distant lands — and increase domestic surveillance, enforcement and control of dangerous speech….

  7. Will a Libertarian president be blamed wrongly for the inevitable depression?

  8. “Obama is no better than Bush”

    Libertarians are no better than Democrat and Republican government-lovers.

    Libertarians love the primary function of government, that is, to dePRIVE people.

    That’s what PRIVate land property is all about: dePRIVation. Ask the Indians on the Trail of Tears. Some were even dePRIVed of life itself to make PRIVate property.

    Land TITLE that deprives whole peoples of land so a few can own PRIVate property is the primary government enTITLEment program.

    Oh, how “libertarians” love that enTITLEment program.

    1. Umm, I’m pretty sure the US gov’t forcefully removed the Indians, not private property. Gov’t should have no say in private property and never should’ve had the “right” to expel Indians from their own lands. If you understood libertarianism, you’d understand that libertarians would be the first to oppose such actions, but exactly because Indians own their own property.

  9. Man I never thought about it like that before.

  10. Celesta uczono materia?u przed by?a poznawczo gotowy do nauczenia si?. Tak wi?c mo?e ona twarz abstrakcyjne idee w 5 klasy, gdy jej m?zg jest nadal funkcjonuje w konkretnym poziomie. Pushing wy?szych “standardy” jest po prostu przet?umaczone na j?zyk nauczania wi?cej tre?ci (nie wi?cej rozumowania) przed student?w s? na to gotowi. Wynikiem tego jest (a) nauczycieli g?upi pracy w d??, aby go zaledwie w zarz?dzaniu, (b) uczniowie rozwijaj? nieporozumie?, kt?re nie odchodz? p??niej

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.