Libertarianism

Watch Matt Welch on Melissa Harris-Perry's First Broadcast Since the Unpleasantness

|

|||

Beginning at 10 am ET, I will be appearing on the MSNBC show of Melissa Harris-Perry, whose promotional video about "break[ing] through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recogniz[ing] that kids belong to whole communities" touched off a firestorm of criticism earlier this week. In response to the controversy, Harris-Perry has organized the discussion around the differences between negative and positive rights.

Bring some popcorn, and heckle me in the comments!

NEXT: New Zealand PM Promises To Rein-In Domestic Spying

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. Bring some popcorn, and heckle me in the comments!

    Matt, we are all more than willing to heckle you but really, how could we bother with you when we have Melissa Harris-Perry to heckle?

    1. I’d heckle him for the fact that he used this post to push some book he’s written.

      (At least he’s not the one who wrote the homosexual bodice-ripper about Ron Paul.)

      1. Is that what High Desert BBQ is about?

        1. Wait! Someone at Reason wrote a book?

  2. Sounds liek a pretty solid plan to me dude.

    http://www.Net-Privacy.us

    1. Don’t worry, Matt, there’s no way you could do a shittier job than Gillespie on Colbert. Oh God, that was so awful.

      Tell Melissa Harris-Perry that spending money != loving children. There are plenty of schools run by, say, the Catholic Church that do a better job of educating students than schools in Barack Obama’s South Side of Chicago?.

      Inner city schools are often no better than prison camps.

      Melissa Harris-Perry: why do you want to imprison poor minorities?

      You should also tell her that you’re taking her son to Hooters since he was unsatisfied with his nursing experience. (Later on, hit up the Blue Flame for a more hands-on experience.)

      1. Inner city schools are often no better than prison camps.

        Worse! At the end of every day they turn these inmates loose on a semi-unsuspecting citizenry.

  3. Dear Mr. Welch

    I will pay you up to 100,000 US dollars, or its equivalent in the currency of your choice, if you punch Dr. Harris-Perry in the face as many times as you can before security intervenes.

    I shall double the offer if you manage to shout “This is for Heroic Mulatto!” and/or “What’s the frequency, Kenneth?”

    Thank you.

    Sincerely,

    Heroic Mulatto

    1. Can I get in on this?

      1. Absolutely. If we pool our resources together, we can make the offer even more attractive to Welch.

        1. Maybe a bonus if he yells, “Sic semper tyrannis!” as he’s beating the shit out of her. After all, it’s for the children.

          1. This would for the most part be politically correct, for even though this would be conducted through intermediaries, it is essentially mulatto-on-mulatto action.

          2. I’ll throw in at least $100 for a sic semper tyrannis if it goes over the air.

          3. He should actually yell “thick themper thyrannith!” so her braindead viewers understand him.

        2. Hey this is “collective action” someone might want to let T o n y know. I’m sure he’ll want it!!

        3. What if she gets the best of him?

          1. What if you were actually a libertarian?

    2. This is awesome. Surely, reason could use the funds.

    3. Note that “Up to USD 100,000” includes no money at all.

      1. Shhhhhh! Be quiet. Maybe Matt won’t notice.

    4. He won’t even hit her with some alt-text, so don’t hold your breath on any physical violence.

    5. Is this on Kickstarter yet?

    6. How about something less violent?

      I’ll pay up to 500 US dollars if Matt appears on the show with cornrows.

      1. This was actually discussed during the commercials.

        1. Cornrows in general, or cornrows for you specifically? The public wants to know!

    7. Where’s Jim Bell when we need him?

      Seriously though, beating her stupid face in would be counter-productive.

      -jcr

  4. Any bets if the “Government is the only thing we all belong to” line comes out?

    1. Someone needs to come up with a list of words/phrases for a drinking game. Stat! We only have one hour!

      1. Why don’t you do it?

        1. Because any limited creativity of mine begins with martini hour, and THAT doesn’t start until 10:00am, which is too late.

      2. Drink every time there’s a reference to the Borg, or social insect colonies.

      3. That could make for a lost weekend. This got pretty brutal fast.

        Take a drink if:
        Reference to Maddow’s China Dam commercial
        “Won’t somebody please think of the children”
        Conflates a positive right with negative rights
        “You can’t really be free if you have to pay for your own—-”
        Welch lets a particularly egregious attack on individualism slide by unchallenged
        Othering
        Talk of death threats over the commercial with no other evidence/reports

        Take two drinks for:
        Newtown kids

        1. Welch lets a particularly egregious attack on individualism slide by unchallenged

          Sounds like a job for Tuccille.

      4. Also drink if there is any discussion of the child-rearing practices of the ancient Spartans, or use of the phrase “left to perish on a windswept crag” or any variation thereof.

    2. “Any bets if the “Government is the only thing we all belong to” line comes out?”

      LOL…some still believe that the government “belongs” to us….chumps…

  5. I support Harris’s right to a freakishly large forehead.

    1. I support Harris’s right to a freakishly large forehead

      Permanent Traction Alopecia: the scourge of black hairstyling!

  6. I don’t know. What’s going on right now on MSNBC is pretty embarrassing.

    1. I wonder if Organizing for America considers MSNBC its media arm?

      1. They must have protocols to make sure they never say so out loud.

  7. Ask her about the Hakkens, Matt.

    And then ask her if, in the presence of a libertarian majority, she would be okay with having her children snatched in order to “protect” them from her dangerous notions of social dependency.

  8. I wonder if Organizing for America considers MSNBC its media arm?

    Fellow travellers.

  9. I give her a lot of credit for having Welch on.

    …however much credit you can give somebody whose views on our rights are so far gone that she thinks getting people to paw their children off on the government is somehow in their best interest.

  10. When I say, “Leave me the fuck alone” am I claiming a positive or negative right?

  11. Is she going to strawman herself?

  12. Nice intro-

    “Everybody who disagrees with me is a stupid poopoohead.”

    1. She seems to think they’re a stupid poopoohead–because they disagree with her.

      Oh, and now she’s calling them “haters”.

  13. Ugh. She’s getting off on the outrage.

    1. No such thing as bad publicity for pundit like that.

      Unless you say something racist that gets you fired.

  14. Harris-Perry gives you permission to have your children.

  15. As dumb as Dr. Perry, Medicine Woman is, she is far from the dumbest pundit on MSNBC. For example, she never angrily accused Herman Cain of being a lazy Uncle Tom because he didn’t go to Civil Rights protests.

    1. That just makes her more dangerous.

      She’s using this to make an argument for what looks like communism to me.

    2. My “dumbest pundit on MSNBC” vote goes to Sharpton. I like to watch his show and imagine he’s actually a conservative being deeply satirical.

      My favorite segment was when he ranted about how conservatives only expose themselves to opinions they agree with, and then brought on two liberal guests to ask if they agreed. Believe it or not, they did!

      1. Al Sharpton can’t be satirized. Kenan Thompson on SNL comes out looking like the sane one when he’s impersonating Al.

      2. “… I like to watch his show and imagine he’s actually a conservative being deeply satirical…”

        His ridiculously circuitous plan is one-quarter complete!”…

  16. “independent individual beings”

    who must be assimilated

  17. She didn’t say children aren’t property. She said that children aren’t your property, but the collective’s.

    1. Unless you don’t want them before they’re born, then it’s ok to kill the collective’s children.

      1. Unless you don’t want them before they’re born, then it’s ok to kill the collective’s children.

        Well they’re really more like a loose collection of messy biological components at this stage. I think the eggs/omelettes analogy will stretch to cover this.

    2. I don’t see why what she said is such a big deal – if my belly, my lungs, my reproductive organs, the sweat of my brow are all already the property of the State, why should my children be any different?

      Oh, forgive me, they aren’t actually the property of the State – that would be Communism. They are only subject to be used exclusively for the benefit of the State. Is there a name for a system under which everything may be privately owned but totally controlled by the State?

      1. Yeah – fascism

  18. MARKET FAILURE

    DRINK!

  19. No conservative on the panel, eh?

  20. This just in: Leftist can’t believe everyone doesn’t share collectivist views.

    1. “..Leftist can’t believe everyone doesn’t share collectivist views.”

      Just the bitter clingers, and their stone-aged dogma. The quest to create “The New Man? Person” waits for no one…knuckle dragging conservatives cave trolls, take notice…all your kids are belong to us!

  21. Is there some sort of live interwebby video feed for MSNBC?

  22. She can’t tell the difference between Matt saying that most people have already pawed their children off on the government–and Matt saying that’s a good thing.

  23. Racism in 6…5…4…

  24. Damn, Welch shut down the abortion debate.

  25. She can’t tell the difference between the idea that children have rights of their own–and that parents have the right to make choices about their children.

    1. “She can’t tell the difference between the idea that children have rights of their own–and that parents have the right to make choices about their children.”

      Try explaining to her the subtle nuances of how a trust/trustee relationship works…

  26. Yeah, you’re not going to win over conservatives bringing Colin Powell.

  27. This may be her big issue for a long time to come.

    Sort of like how Maury Povich did a paternity test show, once, and it garnered so much attention that, eventually, every Maury Povich show was a paternity test show.

    1. How many children did Maury turn out to be the father of, anyway?

        1. whoooosh!

  28. What I can’t believe is that she’s so clueless she doesn’t appear to realize that her rhetorical escape is to claim that she meant to say that children belong to their parents (naturally) but that everyone else owes those parents whatever support they feel like they need at any particular moment in time.

  29. The private market Section 8 program is being destroyed by the sequester!

  30. Somebody should have mentioned at some point that persuading parents that the government is responsible for their children isn’t in the child’s best interest–because it encourages them to shirk their own parental responsibilities.

    I mean, holy shit, parents taking too much responsibility for their own children is the very least of our problems.

    1. I mean, holy shit, parents taking too much responsibility for their own children is the very least of our problems.

      Helicopter parents are a big problem.

      1. How so?

        They’re an aesthetic problem for parents who care less about their children?

        They’re a nuisance to teachers and little league coaches?

        They’re more of a problem than people who don’t take enough responsibility for their children and paw them off on the government to raise?

        If parents who take too much responsibility for their children are a problem–it’s such a small problem compared to parents who don’t take enough responsibility that the “problem” pretty much disappears in the comparison.

        1. They are a problem in that their overprotective instinct tends to be a useful tool in the statist box.

  31. Ethical/moral argument for stealing money at gunpoint from one group of people, to give to another group of people?

    1. You have to think of yourself, primarily, as a member of a group (be it a race and/or an economic class) that has been wronged in some way.

      Then you have to imagine that you’re stealing it–not from individuals–but from a group, just like you said.

      Incidentally, that’s the way to trip up such people is to ask them about their personal achievements. Ask them what they’re doing individually to better their own lives…

      Melissa-Harris, whatever, is right in that the key to getting people to change their behavior is to get them to think about themselves differently. And when we meet people who think of themselves primarily as a member of a group, if we could get them to thoroughly think of themselves as individuals instead, we’d go a long way toward making them more libertarian.

        1. Yeah, I don’t think they teach that stuff anymore.

      1. “You have to think of yourself, primarily, as a member of a group (be it a race and/or an economic class) that has been wronged in some way.”

        It seems that when someone thinks of himself primarily as a member of a group that they ALWAYS feel it’s been wronged some way.

  32. FAIR SHARE

    DRINK!

  33. …I mean, when parents take WAY too much responsibility for their own children, what’s the worst case scenario, Tiger Mom?

    The Tiger Mom’s kid is in Harvard!

    How’s it turn out when parents think the government is responsible for their children?

    That’s the problem area.

    1. If you leave your kid’s education in the sole hands of the “community” they will be poorly educated. That’s one of the biggest differences between economic classes. The lower classes see education as “the government’s job,” and their kids get a shitty education in return, regardless of how much money is thrown at the school system.

      1. I’ve lived in some truly shitty “communities”, too.

        I’ve lived in “communities” where joining the gang on that block was mandatory.

        Why the hell would I want that village to raise my child?

        That Melissa Harris-Whatever’s problem: she imagines that engendering a sense of community in the middle class will make them less reluctant to pay taxes–without any consideration of what the consequences of people abandoning personal responsibility are.

        That may be another good definition of a progressive: someone who only sees the upside of a trade off and willfully ignores the downside.

        1. Why the hell would I want that village to raise my child?

          It takes some other, richer village to care for your children!

      2. I left my education to the Winter Hill Gang and they turned out alright.

  34. Does she have a lisp?

    How do you hire a host with a speech impediment? That drives me nuts!

    1. The Handicapper General required them to hire a host with a lisp.

      And then there’s Rachel Maddow.

      1. Stuart Smalley

    2. Ever hear Diane Rehm? True, she was on the radio before her voice problems, but now she’s about one step above Stephen Hawking in vocal ability.

  35. Never mind the speech impediment; I’m getting whiplash from the random thrashing around from one topic to another.

    Can’t this dumb ADHD bitch keep one idea in her head for more than 90 seconds?

  36. Well, I missed some of this, but I think I heard the word “sequestration” but I didn’t see her spit right after she said it.

    1. She probably swallows.

  37. I haven’t seen too much from Welch in the “housing policy” portion of the discussion. Has he been sedated?

  38. Evul Bankers are evul.

    Also, Idaho is a hotbed of racism and oppression.

  39. SHUT YER HOLE, WELCH!

  40. Host is not hearing anything that Welch is saying. Jesus Christ, Welch just told her how you make affordable housing is by not trying to make affordable housing and she just complained that not making housing affordable through government incentives makes housing unaffordable. And she even said the phrase “market distortions” but apparently don’t know what it meant.

  41. Dear Rand Paul,

    You’re a racist.

  42. HOW DARE RAND PAUL GO TO MELISSA’S PRECIOUS UNIVERSITY AND THEN TALK ABOUT THE BACKLASH YOU HEARD. And, quite frankly, are hearing right now from Melissa’s “letter”.

  43. What a smarmy little bitch.

    I can’t take any more of this.

  44. I hope being a set decoration is worth it, Matt.

  45. “I’ll have those ni**ers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”

    -Lyndon B. Johnson

    1. The man who spent the fifties blocking civil rights leglisation to end Jim Crow (but not undermine freedom of association) gets all the claim of beinga champion of civil rights. That is the world we live in.

      1. thank u publik edumacatin

  46. Come on, dude. Get to the collectivism!

  47. “If you can play, you can play.”

    If not, you better not be gay either!

  48. I can’t tell, is she trying to get some heat off of Reagan and Thatcher successes?

  49. She’s going to focus on the time frame that backs her claim.

  50. DID SHE JUST SAY THE WORD RECESSION???

  51. “On the one hand, I want people to have choice…” BUT

  52. I bid one pile of shit for the sweater.

  53. Sorry I missed it. Did she say anything about school choice?

  54. Why do you hate the chilrenz?

    Disgraceful.

    So it’s okay to use a child to make an adult point, just don’t speak to the child as an adult.

  55. Killed in Chicago?

    Unpossible. Gunz are unallowed in Chicago.

  56. This is my brother Darryl, and this is my other brother Darryl.

  57. Uncle! Too much stupid!

  58. Damn, I’m glad I went to the gym instead of getting hammered before 11 AM.

    1. I’ve enjoyed the gym while hammered! I don’t recommend squats though!

  59. Welch got the kudos for bringing up criminal justice system effect on children, only to have it pivoted to gun control.

    1. Someone on twitter basically called Matt a racist for something he never even said.

      1. PROVE THAT HE ISN’T RACIST.

  60. As much as we are accused of selfishness, we have nothing on proglodytes. The word ‘community’ to them means ‘my ambitions upon you, my will to power’. Actual community groups that take it upon themselves to serve others proglodytes have a long history of disdaining and undermining to the extent that private community support mechanisms in Europe bareley exist given the prevelance of socialist policies.

  61. OMG you guys are hilarious!! Thanks for the running commentary AND and excuse to drink this early in the morning… 9am on the West Coast 😉

    1. You need an excuse to drink at 9AM?

    2. MHP calling for the collective ownership of children with a straight face didn’t make you drink earlier this week?

  62. Ms. Wright, in discussing gun control, talks about how important incremental changes to gun control is. That’s a large reason why people get worked up about, that background checks isn’t the end game but in fact another move toward confiscation.

  63. All forehead, no brain.

    We’ve got welfare for the food desert, Sandra Fluke for the condom desert, Kermit Gosnell for the abortion desert.

    Yes, her argument is not really defensible.

    Am I missing something?

  64. Has she ever made a serious attempt to support her assertions with logic or facts, or does she invariably present her views as self-evident?

    She’s a college professor, so the lecture format is obviously her native habitat.

  65. Has she ever made a serious attempt to support her assertions with logic or facts, or does she invariably present her views as self-evident?

    I lol’ed

    1. Progs think their views are self-evident to any good, honest, NICE person. That’s why anyone who disagrees is either unbelievably stupid or unbelievably dishonest.

      1. Or EVIL, don’t forget EVIL.

        1. Thank you, but it’s ‘stupid, crazy, or evil’. The only reason anyone could possibly argue against self-evidently good proposals is if they are stupid, crazy, or evil. Since there’s no point arguing with a stupid, crazy, and/or evil person, there’s no need to address or respond to their ‘arguments’. Everybody is agreed on this, or at least everybody whose opinion matters. And if you don’t agree, well, obviously your opinion doesn’t matter. See how nicely that works out?

          1. In my experience, whether you are stupid, crazy or evil when disagreeing with said prog is based on what mood you happened to catch them in that day

            “Stupid” = I’m feeling slightly annoyed/smug/or constipated

            “Crazy” = I’m feeling confused/jovial/ or surprised

            “Evil” = Here I was thinking about diversity and tolerance and you had to go ruin it with the supposed facts. Now I feel sad or vengeful.

            1. STRAWMAN University

  66. “Harris-Perry has organized the discussion around the differences between negative and positive rights.”

    The difference is that negative rights exist and there is no such thing as positive rights.

  67. To Ms. Harris-Perry,

    With reference to my children,

    Molon Labe (come and take them)

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.