The Libertarian Response to Ryancare
Judge Napolitano, John Stossel, Matt Welch, and more bring out the long knives on Kennedy

Libertarian much?
#Kennedy Not sure this lineup is Libertarian enough…@Judgenap @JohnStossel @MattWelch @KennedyNation pic.twitter.com/XJ0GdUTco1
— By the numbers (@TheRealFixNow) March 7, 2017
Do you know who's been crushing it in the cable news ratings of late? Our very own special friend Kennedy, whose eponymous program on Fox Business Network (8 p.m. ET, with replays at midnight) has been breaking records each month, helping the network overtake CNBC, and generally rocking it like this.
It's almost as if having a smart, irreverent, not-as-hysterical-as-your-Facebook-feed libertarian take on the news is an attractive proposition…
Anyway, tonight's program is a full-frontal assault on the lousy and probably D.O.A. Obamacare reboot, starting with the host, moving to Judge Andrew Napolitano, and then on to the Party Panel, with me, Townhall's Katie Pavlich, and comedy's Joe DeVito. Other guests on the show include John Stossel, Buck Sexton, and more. The Panel also engages in some discussion on Trump's travel ban 2.0, and also Gary Johnson's brief political peep from the slopes.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I think she's rockin' it like this:
Judge Nap, John Stossel, and Matt Welch walk into a bar. The bartender serves them tainted alcohol because there are no regulations. They die.
That's what would happen if libertarians had their way, people!
You lie! The invisible hand would save them.
Then the invisible hand would have killed them after his endless lust and heartless greed caused them to die of pollution.
You lie! The invisible hand feels no lust. The invisible hand has no desires and goes where the Market compels it.
/Note: The Market also feels no lust or desire. It just is, kind of like God, or Spock.
Without top regulators - those who are not geeks off the street, and are also handy with the steel if you know what I mean, so they know how to earn their keep - the Invisible Hand and The Market's lack of official rules and structure would lead to our demise.
Just thinking about it makes me want to jump out of a building.
As a libertarian, I recognize your personal autonomy, including suicide.
You'd let me die, you heartless monster? I should be forced into a mental health examination, and then probably locked up for my own good!
You can't just let people go around killing themselves; it's illegal for reason.
The Force is strong with this one.
The Force farce is strong with this one.
Or maybe the government deliberately poisoned it, like back during prohibition
But it was the lack of regulation that allowed the bartender to not have any obligation to do his due diligence and make sure the stuff was safe for consumption.
He bought it off some shady (they're all shady, absent regulation) dealer and served as-is.
And that's why we need the ATF.
Well, thats an NAP violation. You'd be authorized to obliterate the bar with your Recreational? Tactical? Nuke?
Oh, I think she's pretty funny.
OT: In order to help make the press again, Hollywood elites are making a film about media elites (who were also two just plain old fashioned elite elites) who did their job.
There are two problems with this film.
The first, and more obvious, is that Daniel Ellsberg is the hero of this story, not the press.
The second, and less obvious, is that the Supreme Court case that will show up at the end of this movie was captioned New York Times v. United States, but this movie is called The Post and features Ben Bradlee and Katharine Graham as characters.
Judge Nappy is more authoritarian than libertarian (anyone who wants abortion punished as murder is no libertarian).
I see you remembered one of your old handles.
Can you prove abortion isn't murder?
Can you prove that it is? Beyond a reasonable doubt?
Maybe. Probably easier than proving it isn't.
Well, make your case. You've charged an abortion doctor and a woman with murder for performing an abortion. Now prove to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that a murder occurred.
The baby is a human. Abortion is a murder. Now vote, goddamit.
Fuck off, slaver.
It's killing a human being. How is that not murder?
There are many instances where killing a human being isn't murder.
But murdering a human being is always murder.
/Dr. Tautology
Define human being, smartass. Is getting a brain tumor removed murder?
No, but an unborn child is not anything like a tumor. A tumor is not a complete entity unto itself.
Can you give a definition of human that excludes the unborn but does not exclude anyone else and has logical consistancy? If not, does that mean all laws against murder and manslaughter are invalid?
... inconvenience to the proggie mother being one of them
Let's see...
It's not a suicide, as the unborn wasn't killing itself.
It's not a legal execution, as there was no trial, nor conviction, nor sentence.
A womb is not a war zone, so it wasn't a killing as part of a war.
Unless the unborn presents some verifiable threat to the woman's life, it's not self defense.
But its only murder if the fetus is a *person*.
And there's no stance on that topic (is or is not) that is derivable from libertarianism.
"the unborn"
Damn sperm cell!
Define when a cell becomes human or fuck off. I'm tired of bleevers hoping others might bleeve.
Conception is the point where the two gametes merge to becone a separate individual.
But I presume you think that, for the most part, humans are rights bearing creatures. How is your thinkingg that you have rights legitimate and not "bleeve"?
Using your logic, a miscarriage is involuntary manslaughter.
No, that's dumb. A spontaneous miscarriage would be death by natural causes.
Now if you were to accidentally strike a pregnant woman causing a miscarriage, that would be manslaughter. Or maybe riding a rollercoaster that warned against riding while pregnant.
These logical lines are not that hard to follow, even if you don't agree with the position.
I'm not sure why this keeps coming up. The abortion argument is simple - either we are talking about a human life or we are talking about something else. If it is a human life, the argument is over. If it is something else, then there are shades along a spectrum.
But there is no scientific basis for any position of "life begins" that is unassailable. Therefore this is an unarguable argument. It is purely personal opinion and as such not terribly interesting. And it certainly doesn't have libertarian implications one way or the other, turning as it does on the definition of human life.
So get back to us when you've got an unassailable definition of the beginning of human life that everyone will accept and agree to be bound by. Then we can have the argument about the libertarian position on abortion.
The fetus had a knife! He was coming for me, I swear!
-jcr
He's a pro-life libertarian. They exist. I personally disagree with him there, but he's pretty damn sharp on everything else.
Yeah, I wrote that for the TEAM RED! posters here who bash Weld and Johnson but support Nappy because he voted their way and appears on their TV network.
Turd, nobody cares what an Obo ass-licker 'thinks'.
Fuck off.
Johnson deserves a little bashing. Weld fully deserves all bashing he receives.
And so does Nappy. If I were a woman I would tell him to go fuck his authoritarian self - he has no right to tell me what to do with my body.
It is kind of important - like free speech.
I think his interest is 99.9% with the child.
Meh. Abortion is such a tar baby because of the intersection of actual rights. Bake-me-a-cake, gun control, and the other non-libertarian positions of Johnson and Weld are much more cut and dried.
Bake-me-a-cake, gun control are they as cut and dried.
No way. The former crosses into civil rights and discrimination. The damn bakers should bake the gay wedding cake -although I would prefer the state stay out of it.
And Weld/Johnson support the RKBA. I have no idea what you are talking about unless they support the 1930s automatic weapon ban and you are being a purist about it.
A cake is not a fucking right and a baker is not the government.
Some socon jesus freak weirdo doesn't want to bake a cake for you and your bottoms big day? Go to fucking costco, they'll gladly oblige you. And let the retard of a small business owner turn down money and subject themselves to bad word of mouth.
Free market win-win.
So, you're not a libertarian then. You're just a bog-standard progressive who is fine with enslaving others to serve whoever your favored constituency is today.
Because no matter how much you think the bakers *should* do something (which is a perfectly libertarian stance to take) you are happy for the state to interfere - no matter how much you say you would prefer the state stay out of it.
Every progressive would prefer the state stay out of enforcing their preferred worldviews - except that there are so many damned kulaks and wreckers.
And that's a weird stance to take for someone who's also pro-choice.
Do whatever you want with your body. But your baby is not your body.
Oh? Then perhaps it can damn well gestate itself.
He didn't say the baby isn't dependent on the mother. He said the baby is a separate human entity inside the Mother.
A purely metaphysical claim that when consistently enforced has the practical effect of either the state forcing women by the millions to give birth against their will or making millions of women into first-degree murderers by law. The good thing about metaphysical claims is that they can be revised when they have such stupid outcomes.
Maybe kids should fucking pay their own way and stop enslaving their parents, but sadly we live in a world where the practical realities of human existence trump elegant, simple ideologies.
I invite you onto my boat and say, "Let's go on a trip." You come along.
After I sail 100 miles out to the sea, I tell you that I realized that I don't have enough snacks or water for both of us on this trip. I'm going to kick you off the boat (it's my property). You tell me you can't swim 100 miles and you'll surely die. I kick you off my boat.
Did I murder you?
Why not?
I mean, I can see libertarians being completely agreed on an acceptable range of punishment/re-numeration for murder.
I can also see them having very disparate views of whether a particular act is murder or not - as libertarianism has nothing to say on the status of an unborn fetus' personhood status.
You can't get there from here.
Why does the artificially defined meaning of the word "person" matter?
In the Dred Scott decision, the Court artificially defined the meaning of the word "citizen" to mean "only white people". They then said that "non-citizens" had no rights, so slavery is totally fine.
That's the problem with accepting an artificially defined word as the basis for rights, you get nonsense like slavery.
When in doubt, use an objective (or the most objective) term.
"Not sure if this lineup is libertarian enough"
Well, the Trumpatarians in the comments probably dislike everyone.
The "Topical Storm" is retarded. Why the fuck would anyone tune into a political talking heads show to see the latest cat videos? You can get that shit everywhere else. Knock it off Kennedy, it's just stupid.
If I watch that segment I don't have to watch Tosh.0 so it's got that going for it.
True, but it's also funny because she hates cats.
Dead Grandma has company:
"Khizr Khan's claim that the US is restricting his travel may be unraveling"
[...]
"As questions about his motivations for making the claim swirl, Khan has refused to elaborate on his initial statement to The Washington Post and other publications.
[...]
The Canadian foreign ministry also denied issuing any review of Khan's ability to travel there.
"We are unaware of any restrictions regarding this traveler," said Camielle Edwards, spokeswoman for Canada's Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen."
http://www.sfgate.com/politics.....983885.php
I'd put on my shocked face, but it's busy right now regarding the GOP wimping out on the "repeal Obama care now!" bruhaha.
Ugh. What a trouble making family that bunch are. Always managing to get into some kind of controversy. Idiots.
"Ugh. What a trouble making family that bunch are. Always managing to get into some kind of controversy. Idiots."
And the left is thrilled when he wraps himself in the flag. Cause TRUMP!
I saw Robby Soave last night on Kennedy. His coiffure *IS* amazing!
Would you call it "suave"?
**narrows gaze**
Hey, someone's gotta do it.
Matt's secret pronstar alias?
Nah, different guy. You're thinking of Cuck Sexton.
Is this the Libertarian Year yet? I can't live forever dammit, make it happen!
AH! Lou Dobbs.
Prediction: Hoops?
Prediction: Hoops?
One prediction for each ear.
Cop Land. Love it.
Cop land is an anagram of GOP plan! Genius.
I don't care for the Judge's tie. Very 90's colors.
THE JUDGE WILL NOT BE INTERRUPTED.
Wrong show, bud.
Close enough, pal.
Eh, while the government doesn't provide college, it does provide education from K-12. So I'm not sure that's a good point of his.
But it's not a right.
Those are children. College is for adults. Your an adult? Fuck you, pay me.
The other thing is that the government, by making drugs illegal, requiring prescriptions, and licensing doctors and nurses are essentially taking away rights from people.
If I'm sick with an infection, I should be able to get anti-biotics. Or whatever. I shouldn't have to go to a doctor to get a permit to buy those drugs.
OTOH, you could argue because the misuse of said drugs causing problems for everyone (over use of anti-biotics causing resistant strains), then the government is responsible for health care.
Nappy just wasted 8 minutes explaining how health care is not a "right".
No shit, Mr Obvious. Now lets talk about Trumpcare.
That may be obvious to you, but there's a whole generation who doesn't understand that.
But it can be a right. Why do we have to run the world according to the rights-minimalist preferences of you goobers?
Otherwise slavery.
So only the US and a bunch of third-world shitholes are free of total population slavery?
And how!
So, since the rest of the world is enslaved - and poor and hating it - we should do the same?
Is Welch's tie Trump-length? The idea of a necktie is to cover vulgar shirt buttons, not precious slacks zippers.
"Precious Slacks Zippers" opening for "The Leisure Suits" Friday night!
Why don't people understand they have the perfect band name staring them in the face? Fist of Etiquette literally rolls of the tongue.
Free shit for everybody!
If cans of green beans had minimum wages . . . . . .
So, the governments that they're escaping will hold the keys to the country they're trying to escape to?
"Everybody freaks out." [Side glance to his immediate left.]
NEWS TO MATT WELCH: GOVERNMENT DOES SHIT BADLY
When Republicans are in charge it does. That's when you guys defend it most though, curiously.
It's true. The government suddenly went crackerjack a two months ago. Is it because Trump became president? Who can say? I can. Yes. Yes, it is.
Tony|3.7.17 @ 8:21PM|#
"When Republicans are in charge it does."
Yep, O-care and cash-for-clunkers were just wunnerful!
Cash for Clunkers.
PPACA
Fast And Furious
How many surges did we do in Afghanistan and Iraq in the last 8 years?
IRS
Health and Human Services
Park Police losing guns and having guns in their inventory that they don't know where they came from.
Government having no money, being shut down, so the NPS and related agencies spend more money to have people close off highway scenic observation points, parking lots, and the National Mall.
Yep. Only when Republicans are in charge.
McCain likes presidents who don't get caught.
A major loser
A black lady, a brit, and a redhead go into space
He was the villain in The Patriot but the hero in Armageddon, so I'm conflicted.
I don't want to miss a thing.
A "Mother, Jugs and Speed" for the 21st century? It's gold, Jerry, GOLD!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2NEGywTGF4
They do know that no one is going to watch this, right?
I WILL BE. Probably.
Buck Sexton: Everyone's a dirtbag.
Rich Lowry got old.
Kmele Foster has some powerful oppo on him.
Nothing is firster class than Air Force One. Foster could be our first black president.
Gary Johnson has not enough handlers to be president.
Seriously, what fuck is Alleppo?
Mispronounced dog food?
Johnson has to be totally baked right now.
There's the Fox News studio door, panel. USE IT.
Republicans, you are officially on notice.
..that?
So I hear that SugarFree hasn't been on beccause he is to ghost write Nicholas Sparks books.
That's right. Sugarfree = Nicholas Sparks.
Wait. I think I am thinking of Debbie Macomber. ...yeah Sugarfree = Debbie Macomber.
This is the future liberals want:
"I never dreamed I would be explaining anal and oral to my babies."
"It was created by a physician in 1985" That planning for the future tho
Fuck FBN. They canceled the late and great Independents.
Roger Ailes called Welch a dud.
They averaged about 20,000 viewers a night against Maddow's half-million. The markets spoke.
But Kennedy single-handedly raised that score to 200,000 viewers. By showing some leg, at last.
She can show some crotch for all I care. Still not watching Fox News Lite.
I watched Clueless instead. The blonde was cute but that black chick was annoying as hell. Turns out she became a conservative "contributor" at Fox News whenever they needed a token black conservative to lecture Obama.
It's almost as if having a smart, irreverent, not-as-hysterical-as-your-Facebook-feed libertarian take on the news is an attractive proposition...
Pretty sure it has NOTHING to do being on the #1 channel for racists: Fox News.
Say, how're Greta's and Megyn's ratings now?