Van Jones on "so-called Libertarians": "They say they love America but they hate the people, the brown folk, the gays, the lesbians, the people with piercings"

|

Obama's former Green Jobs czar Van Jones lit into "so-called libertarians" at an Occupy rally in Los Angeles last weekend:

Jones began his speech by citing his six months of work in the White House before launching into a tirade against the "so-called Libertarians."

In citing the Libertarian principle of economic liberty, Jones stated "They've taken their despicable ideology and used it a wrecking ball, that they have painted red, white and blue, to smash down every good thing in America."

Jones continued, "They say they're Patriots but they hate everybody in America who looks like us. They say they love America but they hate the people, the brown folk, the gays, the lesbians, the people with piercings, ya know ya'll."

"They love going to New York City! [sarcastically] I just had to take my child to see America's beauty." Jones then referenced the Statue of Liberty and fumed "You can't be an anti-immigrant bigot and a Patriot at the same time."

I'm going to have to mic check you there, Mr. Jones. You're not talking about so-called libertarians, but your former boss and current president. See, it's Barack Obama who supports "traditional marriage"; Barack Obama who supports a drug war that sends an alarming number of black men to prison and destroys their employment prospects; Barack Obama who supports a foreign policy that kills children; Barack Obama who supports regulatory barriers that require the poorest of the poor to borrow their way into the workforce; Barack Obama who supports an immigration strategy that rips apart families and sees the children of undocumented workers put up for adoption.

Whether Obama's support for those policies means he hates gays or brown folk is not for me to say. As the scriptures tell us, "For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?"

Libertarians, on the other hand, love brown folk, the gays, the lesbians, the people with piercings, and immigrants. Many of us, after all, fit rather neatly into those categories, and we show our affection for ourselves and our neighbors by supporting the right of all peoples to live free of state-sponsored violence, discrimination, undue imprisonment, and theft; as well as the entirely predictable consequences of both left-wing and right-wing social engineering.

But—and really this should go without saying—libertarians are not the only non-liberals who don't hate (to cite just one example) immigrants. Last year

[a] coalition of Tea Partiers and conservatives, including Take Back Washington's Kathryn Serkes, Downsize DC's Jim Babka, Tea Party Nation's Judson Phillips, and Washington D.C. Tea Party founder Thomas Whitmore, sent a letter to congressional Republicans warning them not to pass the Legal Workforce Act, which would mandate that all U.S. employers use E-Verify.

I don't know where Van Jones stands on E-Verify—it would not surprise me if a man who knows next to nothing about a political philosophy that has existed since the creation of the Icelandic Free State in 930 AD does not know that mandatory E-Verify would hurt small businesses and hard-working immigrants alike—but his former boss supports it.

To Jones's credit, he was not the most clueless speaker at "All In for the 99%." That honor goes to Edward Norton, host of National Geographic's Strange Days on Planet Earth. "When I was on a panel once with [Jones] and the Dali Lama," Norton said, "it was a toss up as to who was wiser, Van or the Lama."

More Reason coverage of Jones, including his "nuttiest belief," his economic fabulism, and his green jobs snake oil salesmanship

Advertisement

NEXT: Defense Industry Does Not Support Cuts to Defense Budget

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.

  1. Cheese it, boys, he’s onto us!

  2. WTF? I thought libertarians were all licentious, overly tolerant, drug-using whore-renters? Has there been a meme-shift?

    1. That is what conservatives call Libertarians. To liberals you are rich pouting white men who wear monocles and hate women, minorities and poor people.

      You have to keep your teams straight.

      1. I didn’t known that liberals could tell conservatives and libertarians apart. Kind of like racism, but for the politically obsessed.

        1. We really should combine our massive powers one day and really teach these throwbacks a lesson.

          We *do* have massive powers, right? That’s why they fear us so, RIGHT?

          1. We’re a crack cadre of libertine manipulators. At any given moment, we speak, and the country obeys. We just don’t speak a lot.

            1. Fuck, we need to start speaking more.

                1. Well, if you had more gay black slave children, YOU would have the time PL.

            2. So, you’re saying that our name is a killing word?

              1. You know my response to that.

            3. If we had ten divisions of those men, then our troubles here would be over very quickly.

        2. Most of them can’t tell the difference. It all just spills out as some strange amalgam but boils down to “you are not of the body”. The only thing missing is the Body Snatchers scream.

          1. Now that is funny. +1 to you JI.

      2. I don’t see why we can’t be rich pouting white men in monocles and top hats who hate minorities and poor people, and who also regularly engage in drug use and prostitution. FALSE DICHOTOMY

        1. There are only so many hours in a day, Alack.

          1. so you multitask.

            hire a minority prostitute, and make racial remarks while you fuck her. steal your drugs from poor people. etc.

            Innovate, Don’t Playa Hate.

        2. I still get so confused getting dressed in the morning sometimes. I know the monocle goes on first, but is my Klan hood supposed to go over the top hat or vice versa? Lil’ help?

          1. but is my Klan hood supposed to go over the top hat or vice versa?

            the hood is affixed inside the tophat, so that with a flourish, you can remove the tophat and the hood falls into place effortlessly.

      3. Don’t forget children – we hate them too. Unless they are using their fingers to weave us beautiful Persian rugs, then they are tolerable.

        1. Also, once they reach the age of 9 their bones make for good monocles.

          1. I oppose the bone-monocle policy = children should be allowed to mature so we can harvest their organs to eternally perpetuate our oligarchy

            1. If you only sever one limb, that should provide plenty of monocle material while leaving the child in tact for further harvesting.

      4. Just finished Dreadnought, by the way. Very good. Very frustrating seeing how inevitable the war became, all for no good reason.

        I’m planning to read Castles of Steel and the new book on Catherine the Great, too.

        1. I am reading the Catherine book right now. I love it. My father not so much. The first half of the book is a pretty detailed description of her early life. I think it is interesting. But if you are expecting to immediately jump in to hearing about Potemkin villages and such, you might be disappointed in the first couple of hundred pages.

          She had a seriously tough childhood and early adulthood. But one that eerily prepared her for her life as Empress. If you didn’t know better, you would almost swear that there was a guiding hand of fate dealing her various misfortunes to prepare her for later life.

          1. You’ve read his Peter the Great, right? That’s his best one that I’ve read. Then again, Peter was a fascinating figure.

            1. Oh yes. And that is a great book. Wait until you read about his daughter Elizabeth in this book.

        2. If that is the book I’m thinking of it includes the bit about the Brits commandeering the battleship they were building for the Turks. The diplomats were trying to bring the Turks in on the Allied side and the Admiralty pissed the Turks off sufficiently that they joined their historic foes (Austro-Hungarians). From a diplomatic perspective WWI really was a slow-motion train wreck.

          1. Castles of Steel tells the whole story of the Ottoman entry into the war. They kept ships and didn’t return the money, which had been raised by public donations.

          2. Another good analysis of WWI is A Peace to End All Peace….it’s really about the end of the war and the total ineptitude of the Allies in divvying up the Ottoman territories. We’re still feeling the effects today with Iraq and Syria, among others.

          3. I recently watched the WWI documentary (10 hours?).

            Absolutely fascinating. The utter obtuseness and idiocy of the ruling class (including, with almost no exceptions, the generals) was appalling.

            If ever a war was a war of choice, it was that one. A number of countries basically put themselves on the auction block to see which side would bid the most for their support.

            Worse, perhaps, than Versailles, was the policy both sides adopted of trying to foment revolution in their adversary’s countries and possessions. After sowing that field, we reaped the Soviet Union, Sinn Fein (which would have been nothing without German support), the Saudi royals, etc.

            1. The war was an avoidable disaster that we still are reeling from.

              What was the documentary called? Was it good?

              1. The First World War. It is made by a guy named Hugh Strackin.

                http://www.amazon.com/The-Firs…..=1-1-fkmr0

            2. All true, except that I would cut the generals some slack. The nature of the technology and the tactical situation, especially on the Western front, made anything but whole sale slaughter impossible. No general could have done much better than even the dreaded Hague.

              1. I just reserved it at the library.

            3. I’m getting a similarly contrarian take on WWII from the book “No Simple Victory” by Norman Davies.

        3. I started reading Dreadnought a few years ago and didn’t get through it. Maybe I should try again.

      5. “You have to keep your teams straight.”

        Heteronormativist!!!!!!11!11!1

      6. To liberals you are rich pouting white men who wear monocles and hate women, minorities and poor people.

        Weird that is exactly what Rather and Tony call us.

    2. Libertarians are the ‘bad guys’ – so they obviously are the opposite of whatever the speaker considers ‘good’.

    3. In a sense, yes. The left used to think of libertarians as dividing the right, which hurt Republicans. Now they realize that libertarians are uniting the middle, which threatens their cozy position.

  3. Why didn’t Jones save his breath and just call Libertarians “Goldstein”?

    1. Because he needs more than two minutes to fit all the hate in.

      1. No, the two minute limit is so that you’re always left wanting to hate more.

  4. I always figured if both “sides” are hatin’ on my ideology I must be doing something right.

    1. On a related note – WTF are these people so afraid of that libertarians are suddenly some scary-ass boogeyman? We used to be politically impotent non-entities. What has changed? Why are the powerful so damn scared of us all of a sudden?

      1. because a growing number of folks are catching on that govt incompetence is a bipartisan activity.

      2. Speculation here: the Dems, esp. with Obama see the “youth vote” as belonging to them. Then think of the support for Ron Paul on college campuses. It could be people like Jones think they’re losing one of “their” groups to libertarian policies. That could be scary to them.

        1. Likewise Team Red WRT fiscal conservatives.

      3. Libertarians == Independents in the world of TEAM politics, and Indies are growing, therefore Libertarians are eating their traditional power-base. While the premises are correct, sadly the conclusion is not yet true.

        1. Somebody should write a book about the power independents could have at the voting booth if they were to mobilize- or, say, DECLARE – themselves. Ah, anyway, what should I have for dinner..?

      4. They’re scared of the Tea Party, and really any significant political movement that threatens to decentralize power in D.C. But they can’t go out and tell the Tea Party to go fuck itself, that they’re going to spend whatever they want, on whichever favored groups they want.

        So, they attack libertarians, a group who has fiscal responsibility and usually, Federalism and/or decentralization in common with the Tea Party. And, bless our sweet hearts, unlike the Tea Party, we really don’t matter politically. If we did, then Paul would’ve won more than one or two states by now, right?

        That’s how I see it, anyways. It’s just another “Goldstein”, as John noted above.

  5. What’s wrong with hate?

    1. You tell us Mary. You seem to be the expert.

      1. Oh John, I’m not “Mary.” Use your head, man! How can so many people be “Mary” all at the same time under the new Registration Regime. ‘Tain’t naturul!

        1. That is why you are so angry about being called out. Still angry at Heller? Notice lots of fake names were called out as Mary Stack before registration. Only the ones who actually were her protested.

          You think registration is a new beginning. No it is not. Everyone knows who you are. And it is going to be pointed out again and again. Sorry honey, you fucked up.

        2. Hi Mary!

        3. Re: Mary/rather/Whit Imbecile,

          How can so many people be “Mary” all at the same time under the new Registration Regime.

          Any asshole can create multiple e-mail accounts to cheat on Facebook’s Cityville.

          1. Sorry, cheat “in”, not cheat “on”.

        4. I hereby formally request access to teh banhammer.

          1. Vote JW for Moderator!

            1. Down with JW! Up with NutraSweet! This time, why not the worst?

              1. So, he got to you too? Added you to his cabal of the undead?

              2. Wait, so this is a VFTW situation?

                1. I am the best and the worst. I am all those things and more. JW is a disaster in the making. Only I, the co-joining of opposites, can save us.

                  1. I’m the chewy center of rich, delicious caramel and/or peanut butter, which every knows is the best part.

                    SugarFree is the jagged coconut coating of the Zagnut bar. Have you had a Zagnut lately?

        5. I thought only gay people called everyone “Mary”

          [ducks to avoid thrown objects]

          1. Look, Nancy, nobody needs your sarcasm, OK?

          2. No, it’s only gay people that want to marry.

  6. Well, the good thing for Van Jones is that when he dies, on his deathbed, he’ll receive total consciousness.

    1. So he’s got that going for him.

      1. Which is nice.

    2. I have to think that that would be incredibly depressing for him.

  7. To Jones credit, he was not the most clueless speaker at “All In for the 99%.” That honor goes to Edward Norton, host of National Geographic’s Strange Days on Planet Earth. “When I was on a panel once with [Jones] and the Dali Lama,” Norton said, “it was a toss up as to who was wiser, Van or the Lama.”

    Since I can’t spoof Barfman anymore, I’ll just have to Barf on my own.

    *barf*

    1. That’s like 10 thousand thousand years of bad karma. He’ll now be coming back as a slug.

      1. No totally consciousness for him on his death bed.

        1. I don’t think Van Jones can caddy, anyway.

      2. I’d suspect if he were to come back as anything it would be vaginal yeast.

      3. The Dali Lama is a fucking idiot hypocrite ‘neo-primitivism for everyone but me and my jet set celebrity friends’. If you really pay attention to events concerning Tibet, the nationalist and Dali Lama supporters actually make the Chicoms and their attempts to modernize the Republic of Goatherders appear sympathetic in comparison.

        1. I am oddly down with the pithiness of that statement. Too bad Hitchens ain’t around to eventually do a “hit-obit” on him per Jerry Falwell or Mother Theresa when the Dali kicks it someday…

    2. I wasn’t aware that Norton was such a far left twat, and particularly stupid one at that.

      Add one more actor to the “Do not see movies” list.

      1. But he was banging Salma Hayek for a while, so there’s that.

      2. I wasn’t either. I do recall on the commentary track to Fight Club he said something rather pretentiously silly, or naive at least, about how something was like Milos Forman making fun of the communists in The Fireman’s Ball. It’s actually not a political movie despite what the Czech censors thought or what they teach in film school, and Forman has always maintained this.

      3. If I never went to mivies starring leftwing twats, I’d probably never go to a movie. Best to just forget about their stupid politics and try to sit back and enjoy the show. Unless they’re a really shitty actor, like Matt Damon, who can’t actually draw you into the movie.

        In Damon’s case it might help if he could say anyhting other than his name.

        1. If I never went to mivies starring leftwing twats, I’d probably never go to a movie.

          And what a horrible eventuality that would be!

          I haven’t been to a movie since Atlas Shrugged 1. And I hated that. Movies are passe.

        2. If I never went to mivies starring leftwing twats, I’d probably never go to a movie.

          I hear you and I get that, but you eventually get to a point that you don’t want to do your part to enrich them.

          My list is a relatively short list, centered on the ones who can’t keep their big fucking gob shut for 2 minutes without opining on something political, or being so repugnant that I can’t stomach the sight of them.

      4. Here I always thought he was a regular guy who worked in the sewers. Thought he was pretty funny when he addressed the ball..”hello, ball..”

  8. Well, that’s a rather broad brush stroke there:

    “They say they love America but they hate the people, the brown folk, the gays, the lesbians, the people with piercings”

    Even if it was true, so? This is a country where one can be a racist, homophobic, gun-totin’ redneck without any repercussions beyond a shrinking circle of friends. (oh, and some companies won’t be happy if you espouse said views).

    I consider myself a libertarian – and know *gasp* blacks, queers, and even more people with piercings. I enjoy their company more than the boring middle-class yutzes at my job.

    1. It’s Van Jones, dude, whose biggest contribution is confirming that liberalism can only survive amid a massively uninformed populace. It requires the non-thinking.

    2. Not only do I know blacks, queers and pierced persons, I also know and enjoy the company of moonshiners, homebrewers, farmers, former military personnel and car enthusiasts — some of whom happen to not be white, male, or straight.

      1. and that’s why Van hates you…because you refuse to conform to the stereotype of you that he must convince people exists. If they figure out that folks like you are more the norm than the exception, they stop listening to him. And Mr I-Hate-Capitalism can’t pocket speaking fees or sell books that way.

      2. Brett L|4.3.12 @ 1:34PM|#
        Not only do I know blacks, queers and pierced persons…

        …forget not the Weasel Farmers and Bazooka-Owners clubs!

        Really, nothing is more irritating than Progressive Liberals claiming they got all the *weird people* on their side! Utter nonsense. We OWN the weird-vote.
        ….

        Oh, shit – I guess not. Even VERMIN SUPREME hates us:

        He asserted that libertarians “are just about abolishing the government and letting shit fall where it may,”[citation needed] which he called a mistake

        1. He asserted that libertarians “are just about abolishing the government and letting shit fall where it may,”[citation needed] which he called a mistake

          And yet that man claims the mantle of anarchism. Fuck his lying ass.

        2. I don’t know any weasel farmers. Now I feel inadequately diverse. Pretty sure my friends have more and cooler weapons than most more orthodox circles.

          1. is there an Angora variety of weasel? if so, count me as a prospective weasel farmer.

          2. (mostly off-topic: looked into snail farming…..WAY too many regulations.)

  9. He said Van Jone’s near.

  10. I really really need to get a monocle and a top hat. If I’m going to be characterized, I want to look the part.

  11. Cut him some slack. I doubt he can even wrap his head around libertarianism. Anything outside full-tilt identity politics is probably completely foreign to a guy like Jones.

    1. No, they know what it is, and it scares the heller out of them. Which is why they consistently and deliberately misrepresent…

      1. Yeah. I think that a lot of people deep down inside know that libertarians are onto something, but will never allow themselves to admit it.

  12. Geez, I tried so hard and I’ve never ever been invited to any of the super-doubleplus-secret meetings of the Libertarian Cabal that rules Amerika.

    What have I done wrong? Is my monocle insufficiently polished or something?

    1. They’re BYOB, preferably the blood of children in a canteen made of their skin. That should get you in the front door anyway.

    2. Is my monocle insufficiently polished or something?

      Try using tears of underpaid child laborers from third-world nations. I find they give my monocle the gleam it needs to properly convey the supreme political authority I wield as a Libertarian Oppressor (TM).

    3. You left two K’s out of Amerikkka, that’s what.

      1. I knew i had something wrong.

    4. Don’t feel bad guy. The Cabal only has 666 seats. You just have to patiently wait till someone dies and I’m sure you’ll get called up.

    5. You need the decoder ring. I just can’t tell you where to get it.

  13. Looks like Van has a little Captain in him from the photo above.

  14. Van Jones on “so-called Libertarians”: “They say they love America but they hate the people, the brown folk, the gays, the lesbians, the people with piercings”

    I do?

    Wow, I didn’t know that. Thanks for telling me Mr. Jones!

    1. Yeah, I know. I hate when I do shit like that and end up being the last one to find out about it.

      1. It’s really the hilarity of this statement. I’m probably friends with more people that fit these parameters than he’s met in his entire life; also, I think he might be projecting his own fears on to libertarianism.

  15. Er, Riggs, you can be a racist xenophobic homophobe and still be a libertarian. Libertarianism is about coercion or lack thereof, not about one’s personal beliefs.

    Who knew that so-called cosmotarians would be the ones advocating tent shrinkage.

    1. I think hanging out with racist xenophobic homophobes would naturally shrink the tent more than saying we don’t want to be associated with such.

      1. I don’t know about you but I always pitch a big tent.

  16. Jones is the epitomy of the leftist in america; obama distilled and undiluted. Everything that comes out of his mouth is diametrically opposed to the truth.
    If he was out on the street, some bus driver missed an excellent opportunity.

  17. Libertarians have as much diversity as Democrats do but at 1/50 the size (until the purity tests go out).

    Jones is just whoring for the OWS crowd.

    1. Shrike’s back!

      1. Yeah, NOT something to celebrate…(or were you sounding the alarm?)

  18. Libertarians, on the other hand, love brown folk, the gays, the lesbians, the people with piercings, and immigrants.

    Wait, you’re now being a defamer: I may love brown folkettes, but I don’t love gays, lesbians or people with piercings – I may be a functional misanthrope for what the world may care.

    The difference is that I respect their humanity and their rights, something Mr. Jones would not have the courtesy or common decency to emulate.

    1. ^This. Thanks, OM.

    2. Libertarians, on the other hand, love brown folk, the gays, the lesbians, the people with piercings, and immigrants.

      Some libertarians might, as a matter of personal preference.

      As a more doctrinal matter, though, I think libertarians just don’t care what you melanin content is, or what your hobbies are.

      1. I think libertarians just don’t care what you melanin content is, or what your hobbies are

        NO MICHAEL BAY FANS!!!!

        1. Hey, Bad Boys was awesome.

    1. Hi Mary. Tell us about your illness.

  19. To his credit, he DID say “so-called”. Maybe that’s different from actual libertarians?

    1. Perhaps he meant “so called…by Van Jones”. In which case it’s hard to disagree with him.

    2. Yes, he did say ‘so-called’. ‘So-called’ = ‘falsely identified as’. Since he is the one doing the so-calling, everything he says is true. It’s just not true of libertarians.

      I could say ‘so-called’ Eskimos are 93% of the population of Nigeria and as long as I am the one defining ‘Eskimo’, how can you argue with me?

      Sort of like the NYT using the trademark “some analysts/observers/experts/critics argue that….” without adding that these particular analysts/observers/experts/critics are the NYT itself.

  20. Whither alt text, dear Riggsy?

    There is too much stupid here to really know where to begin, but “All In for the 99%” is exactly the right mix of smarmy, grammatically incorrect and maybe-sounded-trendy-10-years-ago for these retards to eat it up.

    1. Argh, beaten to the punch. And by a Canadian.

      I wonder if, with Registration here, I can have some auto-post set up that complains about any picture without alt-text.

    2. What’s worst is that he’s distracting the young people from the true menace, Canadians. Canadia was founded in 1943 by Nazis, you know. They pretend to love maple syrup and hockey, but really, it’s pure hatred that they’re draining out of their maple trees.

      1. Worse, a lot of ’em speak French.

        1. French Nazis, dude. They’re the worst kind of Jews.

          1. Well, you now have my vote, FWIW.

      2. That’s why you must support just pure, clean Vermont maple sryup.

        Vermont Maple Syrup: The only Syrup which guarantees that it is 100% Hate-Free. It is also the only one which guarantees 0% kitten blood added.

        1. DOn’t you have to hate trees to stick pipes in them and siphon off their lifeblood?

          1. We’re just protecting their figures.

        2. Fuck Vermont. I require the special blend of dioxins and Indian souls that you can only find in pure Ohio maple syrup.

          1. *Don’t ask him what he eats for fiber…

        3. ZOMGZ! It’s VTGO!

          1. Uh… Yes?

            1. Haven’t seen you in ages.

              1. I got a shiny new handle like a year ago. I pretty much just use this one for posts about Vermont or guns (and only some of those).

        4. Screw that commie Vermont shit. NH maple syrup is the only way to go. And the Canadian shit has antifreeze in it.

          1. Don’t we need that anti-freeze to keep the blue-blood from coagulating at the tips of our fingers as we polish our pre-pubescent-child-bone monocles?

        5. 0% kitten blood added.

          emphasis on “added”.

  21. I’m sure Van Jones would tell you that all the anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-brown-people stuff Obama has done doesn’t count, because he was forced to do that stuff by evil libertarians who would have called him a liberal if he had done anything differently.

    Obama truly loves gays and immigrants and Muslims and everyone else, you see. It’s people like us that force him to support bad things, because he has to “move to the center” to get elected.

    1. But at the same time it is just an evil Republican lie that Obama will shift totally left in a second administration.

      1. Hi Mary!

        1. You’re so impotent. It’s fucking hilarious. Thanks for playing, Mary!

          HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA

    2. Even more dastardly, we complained about the stuff he did after he did it!

  22. Edward Norton, host of National Geographic’s Strange Days on Planet Earth[:] “When I was on a panel once with [Jones] and the Dali [sic] Lama,” Norton said, “it was a toss up as to who was wiser, Van or the Lama.”

    Well, considering the Dalai Lama’s flirtations with socialism and social justice theory, it is hard not to see that maybe Norton had a point.

    1. ^This

  23. I remember the first time I saw Van Jones, many years ago when I was part of a focus group for a Weather Channel program on efforts to combat global warming/extract tax dollars for dubious purposes. He was filmed twice opening his shirt to reveal a Superman t-shirt beneath. I then formed NeonCat’s Superman law: if an adult repeatedly compares himself to Superman (and isn’t someone talented like Shaquille O’Neal), that person is most likely a total jackass. Van has never proven me wrong.

    1. I think this law could be expanded to include any adult who repeatedly compares himself to any superhero. Shaquille O’Neal is certainly a total jackass himself.

  24. Speaking of stupid…

    http://www.detroitnews.com/art…..6/1478/rss

  25. Van Jones on “so-called Libertarians”: “They say they love America but they hate the people, the brown folk, the gays, the lesbians, the people with piercings”

    Well, I mean I hate all those people, and all of us here hate all of those people, but it’s not required, per se, to be a libertarian. Just strongly encouraged, I think.

    “There is no racial bigotry in my Corps! I do not look down on niggers, kikes, wops, or greasers! You are all equally worthless!”

    1. A libertarian who hates you is no danger.

      A non-libertarian who loves you, however…

    2. I try to reserve most of my hate for people who say things like “ya know y’all” in such a faux-folksy manner as Mr. Jones, but believe me it is not easy.

      What really matters is I managed to carve out a special nook of hate in my heart for you.

      1. Like you even have a heart. I’ve dissected enough of your species to know you’re lying.

        1. “Dissection” implies a careful deconstruction of a specimen. What you do is not careful, and not deconstruction. More like destruction.

          1. I devour my specimens very carefully, thank you very much. At least the ones that aren’t useful for breeding, but that is neither here nor there.

            1. Hermaphrodites are sterile. You can’t breed.

              1. Who says I’m breeding? Moron.

                1. I didn’t think of that. Now I’m freaked out.

              2. Wait, what’s wrong with her Maphrodites?

      2. You’re here, there’s nothing I fear
        And I know that my heart will go on
        We’ll stay forever this way
        You are safe in my heart
        And my heart will go on and on

      3. “I try to reserve most of my hate for people who say things like “ya know y’all” in such a faux-folksy manner…”

        Hey!

        Oh, sorry. Faux….I am the real thing. Whew.

        Santorum was just here in my hometown and pulled the same crap. Romney nearly made me puke with the grits routine.

        1. You can spot a true suth’ner by his appropriate use of “all y’all” when addressing a group in its entirity. “All y’all get out of my goddam field before I come back here with my shotgun!”

          1. A better test of a true Southerner:

            What is this?
            and
            What is this?

            (hint: they’re both the same answer)

            1. That trend falls off with the square of the radial distance from Atlanta. But yeah, “you want a Coke? What flavor?” is true southern.

              1. My Texas college roommate refers to all sodas as “Coke”

                1. For some reason I always read Suthenboy as Southendboy. I imagine him saying “I reckon I’m fixin’ to mash the off button here so’s my wife can tote me on over to mommerenems for vittles” in Michael Caine’s voice.

                  (And it’s Co’Cola.)

                2. In Ohio we would call them both “pop”. I just recently learned that that is unique to the midwest.

            2. They’re not the same answer! Those are two completely different kinds of coke!

  26. Even a rich white libertarian is right twice a day.

    1. Hi Mary!

      1. Mary haz a sad 🙁

  27. OT, but the last 24 hours have been incredible for me. First, I got a 15% raise. Second, my Kentucky Wildcats won the national championship. Third, and most importantly, registration. Thank Zod for no more WI bullshit.

    1. It’s amazing how much better the board is, isn’t it?

      1. He’s referring to the Wisconsin primary being over.

      2. Light years better.

      3. Although part of me will miss some of the “Tony” sock puppetry. Some of those were really hilarious… except for the times that you realize half way through a thread that it’s not a sock puppet.

    2. The smell of burnt couches lingers still. Wonderful night.

    3. Kentucky? I thought you were stuck in IL.

      1. I am, but I’ve been a Kentucky fan my whole life. My dad is from there, and most of his family still lives there.

        1. Ah, Well in that case I have a message for you.

          “Dear Arcaster,
          Congratulations on your raise. Please send this in to the Illinois department of revenue.

          Sincerely,
          Gov. Quinn”

  28. Preach on Riggs.

  29. Van Jones, one of Obama’s OG’s, one of the tippy top men, in one of the most corrupt, poorly managed administrations in modern memory, was so inept that he got publicly humiliated and fired.

    So, why would anyone care what he thinks?

    1. Hi Mary!

      1. why would anyone care what he thinks?

        Episiarch cares. That’s enough for me, Mary.

        1. Mary doesn’t like being impotent. Too bad, Mary!

          1. “Mary doesn’t like being impotent”

            Yours is an interesting definition of impotent, you’ve been compelled to reply to everything “she” posts.

            And she doesn’t stop. Makes you pretty impotent yourself, is that why you’re crying so much?

      2. She took Heller’s handle? That bitch!

  30. Wow, apparently Mr. Jones thinks Obama leans libertarian. Why else would Obama have a penchant for bombing the brown folk.

  31. Van Jones – formerly one of the Top Men of the Obama administration. Is Van the rebellious son of Indiana?

    1. Sally Hemmings.

    2. Sally Hemmings.

      1. Squirrels.

    3. Salty Herrings.

  32. You can’t possibly love brown folk, the gays, the lesbians, the people with piercings, etc. if you don’t take things away from non-brown folk, the non-gays, the non-lesbians, the people with non-piercings, etc. and give them to brown folk, the gays, the lesbians, the people with piercings, etc.

  33. “They say they love America but they hate the people, the brown folk, the gays, the lesbians, the people with piercings”

    Are people with piercings now a protected group? Do I have to add them to my non-discrimination policy?

    1. I hope the TSA gets the word. I hear it’s tough getting through the scanners, in Obama’s America, if you’re a Person of Piercing.

      1. “Pierson”, you racist.

  34. So let’s be clear =

    Conservatives decry us all as ‘libertine’, ‘do what you like’, pro-drug, immigrant loving, “undermining ‘family values'” through our support of gay marriage, and Unpatriotic and Unrealistic for failing to want to bomb iran or perpetuate endless wars of choice.

    Conversely! Liberals decry us as evil ‘corporatist’ Econo-terrorists, who pay lip-service to ‘liberty’ but in reality have an agenda to undermine all women, gays, and minorities through failure to support Universal Healthcare, Public Schools, and Hate Crime legislation. Also, our opposition to Unions means we are a monolithic class of wealthy robber-barons who seek to destroy nature, NPR, PBS, the DMV, and take away people’s “rights”, like the right to a job, to medical care, to housing, to a chicken in every pot….

    I tried to do a Venn diagram of these two characterizations… and weird! It just exploded, left behind a strange sulpher-smell.

    I’d be almost offended at the gross mischaracterizations until I realized.. = Why do you care about what complete partisan assholes think?

    I mean, if asked to provide substance for their criticisms… you’d get, “mumble mumble mumble Koch brothers mumble mumble Ron Paul Racist mumble mumble Financial Deregulation mumble mumble Corporashuns mumble”

    1. Kaptious Kristen|4.3.12 @ 12:48PM|#
      I always figured if both “sides” are hatin’ on my ideology I must be doing something right.

  35. “mumble mumble mumble Koch brothers mumble mumble Ron Paul Racist mumble mumble Financial Deregulation mumble mumble Corporashuns mumble”

    SHHHH! If you say that 2 more times, Ron Brown appears and you can’t get rid of him!

  36. No matter what you think about Van Jones’ politics and his utter ignorance regarding libertarianism, you have to admire the modesty and humility in the conclusion to his talk:
    “Give me, AND MY BOOK, another round of applause.”

    Jones is truly one of the towering intellects of the 21st Century Left, a veritable fount of leftist wisdom, and a role model for young activists in the Democratic Party.

  37. They say they’re Patriots but they hate everybody in America who looks thinks like us.

    He almost made a true(ish) statement. Just missed it by one word.

  38. What Van Jones is really sore about here is that so-called libertarians hate paying higher taxes so that he and the Dems can give it to “the people, the brown folk, the gays, the lesbians, the people with piercings” who vote for them. Oh, and who might buy his book.

    1. I’ll buy his book. I could use some more toilet paper.

      1. I am pretty sure you don’t have to buy the book – if he sold the book he would be supporting Kapitalism so I am assuming he gives the book away.

        The hard part would be reading his handwriting on that pile of paper since I am sure he did not have a Korporation print and bind the book, either.

        (BTW – ‘people with piercings’ I think means ‘Jesus’, AKA ‘Obama’.)

        1. I thought he was supposed to be green. Books are killing the forest!

  39. What is disconcerting is that Mr. Rigg’s editorial is frought with at least two logical fallacies that by definition render his point null: red herrings and straw man.

    1. Way to be specific.

    2. Huh?

      He is quoting van Jones…

      Excluding red hearings and strawmen from a van jones quote would render only a blank page.

  40. I believe Mr. Rigg’s point is that Van Jones is an idiot that doesn’t even know what a libertarian is and that his description of libertarians would better fit Van Jones and the people he supports.

    Since we have already pointed out that Van Jones was not criticizing libertarians but was criticizing ‘so-called libertarians’ which could define anything at all and therefore defines nothing, the editorial has no point.

  41. To be fair, the Lama is a one trite fucking mystic.

  42. I hate so-called libertarians, too. They annoy the shit out of me.

    Real libertarians are fine.

  43. Van Jones must have been looking at some of the articles at Rockwell’s blog. Seems to be a lot of “culture complaining” from supposed libertarians there.

    1. So, Libertarians all don’t think alike. Who’d a thunk it?

      That said, there are socially conservative libertarians and socially liberal libertarians. People like Van Jones might like the latter bunch, provided they consent to be taxed. If not, then screw ’em.

      1. I don’t think I ever said all libertarians think alike, and the best part about libertarianism is even if you are a racist, you ideology would compel you to let others live in freedom as you live freely.

    2. Re: David_TheMan,

      Van Jones must have been looking at some of the articles at Rockwell’s blog.

      “Looking” may be the operative word there, because I doubt he read any.

      Seems to be a lot of “culture complaining” from supposed libertarians there.

      You mean complaints about Team Blue/Team Red people who want to murder Muslims or bomb Iranians? Those complaints?

      1. That and the occasional Pat Buchanan link about how white culture that built the world is dying out because of the evils of multiculturalism and etc.

        He I like LRC blog and Mises, but there is a lot of subtext that I pick up on that someone who is just looking to attack will see as outright racism and bigotism, and sometimes they are right, it is just that.

    3. I’m not sure you can connect what someone like Van Jones says to what he actually thinks. The left is very aware of how useful identity politics is in shaping perceptions, especially among the young. Basically, anyone who does not following the “progressive” path will be accused of being racist, homophobic, misogynistic, etc, etc. It has a very cultlike appeal. People don’t see the obvious inherent over simplicity of the arguments for the same reason member of a cult can’t see what’s right in front of their face. They can always find people in a particular group (as mentioned below)that fit the accusation and those are the people they point to to “prove” their arguments. Van Jones and his ilk don’t have to believe what they say to say it. No different than a tent revival preacher really.

      1. Actually a beeter example than tent revival preacher would be a white power recruiter. It’s pretty much the exact same tactics.

  44. Black Power

  45. According to Van Jones, I’m supposed to hate gays and non-whites because I’m a libertarian. But all the straight white nightclubs in Dallas suck. Where am I supposed to go on a Saturday night?

    1. austin?

  46. I promise you, Van Jones is a total libertarian — for Van Jones. But not for you. Most everybody is that way, if they’re honest.

  47. I just want to take the opportunity to thank reason for creating a a registration, so that if and when the FBI wants to subpoena the e-mail records of all us damn dirty libertarians, I know they can link us to any mocked up sedition they allege.

  48. I don’t hate immigrants, I am one! The process of emigrating to the United States (a life long dream) was a long, costly, bureaucratic, illogical, and soul destroying process. I support free immigration, as America once had. If the welfare state can’t be completely abolished, then at least keep the current immigration system for people who still want welfare, but let those of us who do not want welfare ‘opt out’ for ten years or whatever in exchange for an open door policy. And that goes for everyone, regardless of color!

    I support legalizing gay marriage (government shouldn’t be in the marriage business).

    But why my taste for or against piercings should be politically important I have no idea!

  49. I’ve voted Libertairan for years. I have become painfully aware this year of the public perception that many Americans have of Libertarians. To me, the Libertarian party is the party of fiscal responsibility and social tolerance. To others, we are the party of freemen, militias and religious fundamentalists. Unfortunately, when I first started voting Libertarian, these groups made up a lot of the party. I do believe many have moved on to the Constitutionalist Party now (thank god). The fact remains that we have to show people that the majority of us are not extremists if we are to gain the momentum we need to become competitive in US politics.

  50. Remember: if the dirty libertarian says you can be happier without the state, don’t believe his lies.

  51. Wow, I had no idea that the Libertarians have so much power. Or maybe he has us confused with The Stonecutters?

    Who controls the British crown?
    Who keeps the metric system down?
    We do, we do.
    Who keeps Atlantis off the maps?
    Who keeps the Martians under wraps?
    We do, we do.

    Who holds back the electric car?
    Who makes Steve Guttenberg a star?
    We do, we do.

    Who robs kingfish of their sight?
    Who rigs every Oscar night?
    We do, WE DO!

  52. There is a problem in communicating libertarian ideas when the media makes no distinction between libertarians and teabaggers. Jones also seems unable to make the distinction. Of course, having social conservatives proclaiming their “libertarianism” while espousing policies which are anything but doesn’t help either.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.