Libertarianism

Pitiful Neocon Hit Piece Exposes a Rand Paul Blogger for Not Loving War

Is this really the best you've got, warmongers?

|

The neoconservative Washington Free Beacon has discovered some amazing inside information relating to Sen. Rand Paul's likely presidential run: some of Sen. Paul's supporters—get this—oppose endless military intervention.

That's not news to anyone here; it's not news to anyone, anywhere, in fact. And yet The Free Beacon has dedicated 700 words to the cause of chronicling one Paul campaign blogger's very ordinary libertarian views. Here's how the The WFB headlines its piece on Marianne Copenhaver (a.k.a. "Libertarian Girl"), who was hired part-time to do social media work for Paul:

Gotta love that update. As if Copenhaver's support for Edward Snowden wasn't damning enough, she also hates the Pledge of Allegiance. Whose side is she on, anyway—ours or the terrorists'?

As far as outrage-peddling goes, the Copenhaver story is an embarrassment—for The Free Beacon. Is this really the best you've got, warmongers?

Alana Goodman is getting lazy if she couldn't find anyone crazier to be her token libertarian surrender monkey. Copenhaver's support for Snowden's activities, mild criticism of Israeli policy, and opposition to forced displays of nationalism might be objectionable to the hard right, but they are extremely common among libertarian-leaning young people who see Paul as the Republican who best typifies their views. What's more, Copenahaver didn't articulate these views in a remotely treasonous way. Beloved Rep. Justin Amash's criticisms of John McCain are bolder than hers, for goodness sake.

Pretty much every politician has some kooky supporters lurking in the shadows, waiting to be exposed by opposition researchers. Copenhaver isn't even one of them. The only thing newsworthy about this hit piece is its mundanity.

NEXT: President Leaks Policy Proposals Ahead of State of the Union, Pope Francis Goes Full Joe Biden, Pizza Named as Obesity Villain: P.M. Links

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. Hell, I oppose the pledge of allegiance.

    If the right-wing fellow travelers want to do a hit piece on me, I’d consider it a badge of honor.

    Also:

    “Beloved Rep. Justin Amash’s criticisms of John McCain are bolder than hers, for goodness sake.”

    Robby, this is H&R. Around these parts we don’t say ‘for goodness sake’ unless it is immediately followed by some incredibly vicious attack on our opponent’s sexual potency.

    1. Hell, I oppose the pledge of allegiance.

      If the right-wing fellow travelers want to do a hit piece on me, I’d consider it a badge of honor.

      The irony, of course, being that the pledge was composed by Francis Bellamy.

      1. The Sacred Pledge should be replaced by THIS:
        Scienfoology Song? GAWD = Government Almighty’s Wrath Delivers

        Government loves me, This I know,
        For the Government tells me so,
        Little ones to GAWD belong,
        We are weak, but GAWD is strong!
        Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
        Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
        Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
        My Nannies tell me so!

        GAWD does love me, yes indeed,
        Keeps me safe, and gives me feed,
        Shelters me from bad drugs and weed,
        And gives me all that I might need!
        Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
        Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
        Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
        My Nannies tell me so!

        DEA, CIA, KGB,
        Our protectors, they will be,
        FBI, TSA, and FDA,
        With us, astride us, in every way!
        Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
        Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
        Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
        My Nannies tell me so!

    2. This really is the best they can do.

      Unfortunately, it is effective. The Pledge is God and Country to old people, and they will tune any argument to the contrary.

      I don’t know, however, what the Millennials think about it. Somebody should take a poll.

      1. This Millennial is distrustful of jingoism in any form.

      2. It’s longer than 140 characters (even without under God) so they don’t even know it exists.

  2. Whatever you think about Bellamy, he *was* a socialist – maybe he’d mellowed by the time he was doing his pledge, I don’t recall.

    1. But not *all* the Pledge was written by Bellamy. The “under God” part was added by Congress at the prompting of the Knights of Columbus.

    2. Whatever he believed at the time, pledging allegiance to a flag is pretty fucking stupid.

      1. how about ..and the Republic for which it stands ?

        1. that, too

    3. Plus the pledge was apparently supposed to be recited with one’s right arm raised up in salute.

      They ditched that when someone noted who ?else? did that kind of salute.

      1. Sorry didn’t read your comment. Everytime I see your username I have war flashbacks of Diff. Eq.

        1. Diff Eq was super awesome. That class ruled. I’m just glad that anyone actually gets the handle.

          Now go fix diff Eq a sammich!

          1. You’re still a jerk (or impulsive).

            Diff Eq sucked because the text sucked and college Math profs can’t teach. Taught properly ODE’s are mostly just algebra.

            1. My diff eq professor was awesome. And I liked that there were so few ODEs with symbolic/analytic solutions. Made the tests very predictable.

              1. Well they’re all just exponentials or trivial solutions, so there’s that.

                Number one thing they should teach you if you’re going into engineering/hard sciences is Euler’s Identity. Number two is field theory, because that describes oh so many things. But they don’t. Instead they take you through all the tedious time domain stuff and abstract Green’s functions, because that’s how real men learn(tm).

  3. Oh, and her picture looks like a Taboola model.

    1. She’s actually quite hot. But yeah, the picture is goddamned awful!

      1. They probably looked for the worst picture they could find. Personally I think the one they chose looks more like a creepy Real Doll than an actual person.

        1. Oh, and here’s her google image search results.

          Careful though, she probably won’t be a libertarian for long, expecially if we all start subjecting her to TEH MALE GAZE!

          1. Not bad.

          2. Clearly unpossible.

            I have it on good authority that there are NO female libertarians.

  4. Which part is supposed to reflect badly on Paul?

    I’m amazed at the way some people defend the pledge of allegiance. I guess it’s good to have it as a reminder that conservatives, although many are fellow travelers to libertarians in a lot of ways, are still for the most part statists and nationalists to the core.

    1. Re: Zeb,

      Which part is supposed to reflect badly on Paul?

      The part where one speaks for them all always and never met a composition fallacy I didn’t like and guilt by association and because I said so that’s why.

      That part. Can’t believe you missed it.

    2. I guess it’s good to have it as a reminder that conservatives, although many are fellow travelers to libertarians in a lot of ways, are still for the most part statists and nationalists to the core.

      Except, Libertarian Girl herself has noted the sympathy between libertarians and constitutional conservatives.

      1. I find many libertarians are barely distinguishable from constitutional conservatives and vice versa. That speaks volumes about the founders, thier intentions and the lawless nature of those who seek to circumvent the constitution.

        I don’t subscribe to labels myself but if someone wants to hang one on me I would not object to either.

        Also, trying to read and comment here from an iPhone in a restaurant while Mrs Surhenboy enjoys ladies night really blows.

        1. Yeah, I kind of agree. That’s why I can’t really buy into what Zeb is saying here. Trying to conflate the neo-cons – a group that had its origins with a gang of Trotskyites – with all conservatives doesn’t make much sense.

          1. Ironically, that sentiment seems to come from the same tribalism that he has disdain for when found in “other” groups.

    3. amazed at the way some people defend the pledge of allegiance.

      Yeah, they look like deer in the headlights when I suggest that making kids recite a litany of obedience in unison is the kind of creepy shit I would expect from the Soviets.

      -jcr

    4. I’m a nationalist but not a statist.

      The two aren’t synonymous, and I believe that a strenuously protected national identity is the only way to maintain a libertarian nation. I think it was John Derbyshire that said he was a proponent of libertarianism *within* a nation and I hold to that.

      If you create propositional libertarian nation without a strong national identity and run it according to the open-borders globalist libertarian crowd, you will, in short order, no longer have a libertarian nation. You’ll have whatever sort of nation your new immigrant overlords decide they want.

  5. Libertarian Girl? Extremist? That’s really, really, really, grasping at straws. Even if she’s a little bleeding-heart for my tastes, I’ve never found her arguments anything other than civil and reasonable. If the neo-cons are this desperate to knock Paul out, perhaps they know something about Dr. Paul’s chances the rest of us don’t.

  6. UPDATE: COPENHAVER ALSO YOUNG, NOT MALE, AND RUMORED THAT IS NOT HER NATURAL HAIR COLOR

    1. If anything it is her colorist that should outrage us all.

      #GirlWhatYouDoneToYourHair

  7. The Phone Company made this advertisement ON PURPOSE!

  8. And as to the Pledge of Allegiance, the only flag worth pledging loyalty to is one that represents a country that doesn’t demand its citizens recite loyalty oaths.

    1. +1 I’ll never join a club that would have me as a member

  9. I must really be far down the libertarian wormhole. Nothing she said seems even remotely offensive. I guess she swore, which isn’t professional. I am not even really that enthused about Snowden, but the manufactured controversies are laughable.

    The most amusing part is the update with the pledge. She says she doesn’t care for the pledge because it was started by a socialist propagandist, which is factually true.

    1. I guess I never have to worry about working for a presidential campaign.

      I’m good with that.

  10. Free Beacon folks are trashing y’all on my Twitter feed. Just saying…

    1. Like Free Beacon writers or Free Beacon readers?

      Because let’s be honest: The only reason you write for the Free Beacon is because you tried to get a job at the Weekly Standard but couldn’t spell well enough.

      1. And the only people who read The Free Beacon are people who find the Weekly Standard a little too high brow, what with their multi-syllabic words and all that.

        1. My favorite are the people working for the Free Beacon who are actually related to major players at the Weekly Standard, but are too provably incompetent to even get a job through nepotism.

        2. “multi-syllabic”?????

          Sounds like a mooslim word to me

          *Glares*

          1. Ah salmon a Laker!

        3. Along with people who thought they were getting free bacon.

      2. Free Beacon? I thought they said Free Bacon and I was excited for a minute there.

    2. Mmmm…free bacon…*drool*

    3. Are they writing mean tweets?

      OH THE HUMANITY!!!!!!!

      Sidenote, the dumbest word currently used as a verb in the English Language is “tweet”.

      I hate it with the fiery passion of a thousand suns.

      1. Why do you hate birders, Tman? They’re not hurting anyone.

    4. Free Beacon folks are trashing y’all on my Twitter feed. Just saying…

      Listen here, Robby. You tell them their moms are fat.

      Let’s just see how high and mighty they are after that…

      *harrumph*

    5. Trashing who? Specific commenters or the commentariat in general? Because if it’s Sugarfree, then, well, meh.

    6. I’m not fan of the Free Beacon, but how is the article linked a “Hit Piece”.

      Pretty much the entire article is just quotes from Marianne Copenhaver and factually correct information.

      Sure your average Free Beacon reader isn’t going to necessarily like her opinions, but just stating what she obviously believes doesn’t seem to fit the definition of a hit piece.

  11. Come on- it’s kill or be killed, eat or be eaten out here.

    Surrender is not an option.

  12. trashing y’all on my Twitter feed.

    What’s a twitter feed? Some kind of cuckoo clock bird house?

  13. I haven’t read what she said, and I am sure it’s all much ado about nothing, but the only criticism of Israel a libertarian should be dishing out are for its softness on its enemies and its subsidization of religious studies.

  14. Setting aside this young and inconsequential young lady….

    Why is Senator Paul languishing in the polls?

    At the start of 2014 one might think of him as the GOP frontrunner and over the course of the year this became somewhat the trendy received wisdom, no where moreso than perhaps here at Reason.

    Yet now he is in definitely the second tier of GOP candidates.

    I think that he even is 4th or 5th in the eyes of Iowans.

    Now Iowa voters are not necessarily the same as Iowa caucus goers but isn’t this cause for concern?

    Will the Senator even run in 2016?

    1. I’m waiting for Paul’s Sister Soulja moment — when he tells the Iowa farmers that farm subsidies are horrible, generally, and that the ethanol program is horrible, specifically.

      1. IDK if that will be a big enough moment, even the Dems are on the “Repeal Ethanol Mandate” bandwagon these days.

    2. He’s still the front runner. The problem will be getting more than the 35 percent who already like him.

  15. You’re all missing the real story:

    There is a libertarian woman! Woot!

    There may even be more than one!

    http://libertyviral.com/20-of-…..z3PPHqHza0

  16. Because if it’s Sugarfree, then, well, meh.

    When they came for Sugarfree, I did nothing but laugh.

  17. Roll it up man lets roll with it.
    http://www.BestAnon.tk

  18. I actually read the piece, and she sounds every bit like a kooky Ron Paul type that libertarians should distance themselves from.

    We know by now that Snowden is not quite the saint that he claimed to be. Putin (a bloody commie who spies on his people all the time) has a vested interest in protecting the likes of Snowden. America is a “bully” for collecting metadata from phones, but Putin and his KGB are heroes for shielding a whistleblower from a rival nation?

    Her criticism of Israel is not MILD. I have no major objection to sending military aid to a peaceful nation targeted deranged terrorists. This woman is one of those loons who shout “warmonger” to anyone who supports intervention of ANY kind. Should we send drones to take out a chemical plant known to produce weapons? Doubt Iran’s words that their nuclear plans are peaceful? No stop, that means we might go to war.

    I honestly can’t believe libertarians still have some sort of feelings left over for Ron Paul and his brand of rigid ideology. No one cares about the pledge of allegiance outside of some religious groups. And no one thought that the Pizza delivery man was a worthy candidate because he worked in the “private sector” LOL! Cranks who are more anti-establishment anarchists won’t help advocates for limited government.

    1. Whistleblowers should be celebrated, not shielded by supposedly even more authoritarian nations.

    2. 1) When did Snowden claim to be a saint? How is his personal character even relevant to the importance and meaning of the revelations?

      2) Aside from a handful of kooks, who called Putin a hero? Did she? The fact that Snowden has to hide in Russia says more about the US government than it says about Snowden.

    3. We know by now that Snowden is not quite the saint that he claimed to be.

      Because he took asylum in the only nation that would accept him? Please. That speaks badly about the U.S. government, not about Snowden.

      1. I swear I had not read Calidissident’s comment before posting.

        1. LIAR! OFF WITH HIS HEAD!

  19. Putin and his KGB are heroes for shielding a whistleblower from a rival nation?

    Snowden should not need to seek the protection of a foreign “strongman” for fear of being disappeared by his own government. That’s the point.

    1. Not many free nations offered him asylum. I think either Switzerland or China offered him short term refuge in exchange for some conditions. They know they can’t set many precedents on hiding people who exposed their secrets, because the table could easily turn on them.

      Russia is America’s emerging foe, so they can hide American fugitives for all sorts of reasons.

      Snowden was a low level employee who revealed how the government illegally spied on people. The state giving him refuge is a totalitarian regime that’s killing people in Ukraine and elsewhere, which is a bit more harsh than collecting data from phones. It’s incredibly tone deaf to celebrate Putin to slight America.

      1. XM is entitled to his state-fellating, neo-con opinions.

        Libertarian Girl is entitled to her bona fide libertarian opinions.

      2. The state that wants him back is funding the killing of people in Ukraine. And the killing in many other countries. And conducting the killing in a few more.

        You can peel my phone records from my cold, dead hands.

      3. The state giving him refuge is a totalitarian regime that’s killing people in Ukraine and elsewhere, which is a bit more harsh than collecting data from phone.

        Which is beside the point. Snowden isn’t responsible for Putin’s behavior. And there’s no evidence he’s done anything to actively support or encourage it. The fact that the government is unjustly trying to prosecute him defines his decision space. Your alternative would be that he face unjust prosecution?

        1. I don’t really care about Snowden. My point is that the libertarian girl is another unhinged Ron Paul knockoff.

          She “defends” Russia’s refusal to extradite him to us, and calls us a “bully”. Really? Think how out of touch of a remark that is for someone employed by a serious presidential contender. Russia silences its own critics in deadly fashion. Putin’s not sending him to us because he makes a statement about privacy. The fact that we send money to regimes that might kill people isn’t relevant.

          If you think we’re going to “assassinate” Snowden once he gets here, then you’re really a part of Ron Paul’s conspiracy club and there’s no reason to continue this discussion. Snowden has rebuffed attempts to reach out to him and we don’t know what he told anyone.

          It’s as childish and intellectually dishonest to call someone a “warmonger” just because he’s open to intervention of some kind. It’s as stupid as feminists calling Soave a “rape enabler”. Mccain is a hawk, but he was merely outraged that Russia’s cronies shot down a civilian plane and suggests a stern response? What war?

          Stop acting like little kids already. No one cares if libertarians call someone a “neocon”. No one cared about Gary Johnson and his pizzas delivery friend. Rand is a good candidate and he should dismiss his dad’s kooky, racist friends immediately.

          1. Wasn’t Snowden saying that he would like to return to the US some day?

            And I’m not worried Snowden would be assassinated, that’s not in the govs interest. What is in their interest is railroading him and lying about all the details in his case to the public while keeping him locked away where he cannot defend against lies.

          2. Here’s the thing, though, one doesn’t have to think well of Mr. Putin or the Russian government more generally to think our behavior is bad. If anything, it’s that kind of mindset that’s acting like kids. The fact that Mr. Putin is a dick doesn’t change the substance of his justification for not extraditing Snowden. Is Snowden a whistleblower who exposed malfeasance on the part of our government? You seem to think so. I don’t see where or how the fact that the Russian government behaves badly has any bearing on that.

            And no, I doubt the government has any plans to assassinate Snowden. But, the fact of the matter is that, regardless of whether he’d be assassinated, he’d have the totality of the federal bureaucracy, with all it’s resources, dedicated to making sure that he’d spend the rest of his life in jail while any defense he attempted to mount would be disallowed on “national security concerns”. Think that’s conspiracy thinking? Try reading up on national security letters.

            And McCain’s “stern response” to the downing of the airliner was to send arms and troops to the region. You do realize, that those are, in fact, act of war.

            1. I think some of the problem with Snowden is that everything he blew the whistle about is SOP in the country he’s ‘hiding’ in.

            2. I think some of the problem with Snowden is that everything he blew the whistle about is SOP in the country he’s ‘hiding’ in.

  20. Can I vote for libertarian girl instead

  21. “Mundanity” I first read that as “Mundacity” is that a word? It should be.

  22. Who doesn’t love endless war? / sarcasm

  23. I disagree with her support of Edward Snowden. He should have surrendered to the FBI and fought it in court. Otherwise, I see no problems with her stances.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.