Help Reason Talk Libertarian Ideas to Millions of TV Viewers

Your donations allow us to go wherever people are having televised conversations about politics and policy


Wishing all of you a good and #blessed Sunday (now wish each other a good Sunday!), and having dispensed with that, please note that I'm waving a basket under your nose because we are still smack dab in our 2018 webathon, in which we invite readers and viewers and listeners to help make this seemingly spontaneous order possible through your tax-deductible donations. For those 600+ who have donated so far, thank you! And for those of you still biding your time, checking out this website on the Lord's day, I've got button for you to click:

Today I want to talk about what a pleasure it is to go on TV in front of 1.6 million viewers and talk about the importance of libertarianism and the awfulness of warrantless surveillance while pointing an accusatory nose at a former CIA and NSA director. Because it's fun!

A key part of our mission here is to go where people are talking about news and public policy, and inject some sorely needed libertarianism into the mix. For instance, Elizabeth Nolan Brown going on Fox New Channel to try and explain to Laura Ingraham why the Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA) is terrible even for the victims it aims to protect. Or Shikha Dalmia talking to actual Australians about how she's still not a gun-grabber even after her family was caught up in a school shooting:

Or C.J. Ciaramella going on C-SPAN to talk about legalizing marijuana—on 4/20, no less!

There's a common misconception about making these kinds of TV appearances, and what your donations may have to do with them. Goes a little something like this:

No, Reason doesn't pay for MSNBC slots. More to the point, MSNBC (as well as Fox, CNN, and the other cable nets) don't pay for us to go on. That's in no small part because we like to be able to cross 6th Avenue—to appear wherever we're asked, without any contractual restrictions. Next time you watch a cable news segment (preferably our great pal Kennedy on Fox Business Network, for instance this coming Thursday!), notice how often a panelist is referred to as a "contributor." That's TVese for "they're getting paid, and you won't see them on another network." Your donations, therefore, help us remain free agents, able to spread these libertarian viewpoints across the widest possible distribution.

So you know what to do:

NEXT: Did I Really Once Think That George H.W. Bush Was the Worst President of My Lifetime?

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. Hmm…is Shikha’s best amendment actually the 2nd? Be nice to have her good on the others, yeah…but you have to admit that is anything but cosmo!

    1. Funny how they don’t show a clip of Shikha on immigration, her signature issue.

      If you listened closely, she had no ideological *defense* of the 2nd amendment, and only bemoaned that there were so many guns and you could never take them all from the hoi polloi.

      She wants a paradigm shift so we can be more like India. In India, guns are severely restricted. The plebes don’t have guns, but the ruling class do.

      Is that what you want? Then send Reason a big fat check!

      As for Matt’s clip, it was just sad. Less than 20 seconds of “cut spending, don’t spy on us”, in six and a half minutes of Deep State Globalist Everyone to the Right of Mao is Racist, with Matt a smiling Howdy Doody all the while.

      These are the clips Reason chose to show their “libertarian” bona fides.

      1. The Ciaramella spot was fine.

        Put it all together:
        “Weed, cut spending, propagandize for the pomos, and it’s sure too bad that American yokels have too many guns to effectively disarm them”

        Libertarian Moment.

        1. I actually didn’t listen at all. To any of them. I posted that after reading the piece. I normally only watch the vids if they look interesting. I was just musing about the possibiliity of what the text was claiming. Probably gave the wrong impression.

          1. Not particularly responsible of me to just go off the text, now that I think about it. But that’s all I was commenting on. I wasn’t interested enough to sit through what I figured were probably very long videos.

            1. I wasn’t interested enough to sit through what I figured were probably very long videos.

              That’ll be the day! When CJ Ciara-mellow et al are given more than a whistlestop “look at this Koch-mouthpiece idiot” token face time on any mainstream “news” network it might actually be worth watching.

  2. By the way I think this is actually one of the strongest webathon pieces I’ve seen so far. Uses good examples and ties it all together with a persuasive point at the end.

    Next you should go for the multimedia, which is certainly by far the most uniformly popular part of Reason with HnR followers. You could say, “Give us money so we can keep Stossel; you should see the price it takes to keep that fucker here!” Or, “Help us keep Andrew and Austin well fed enough so they don’t leave us to make a hilarious roommate comedy for ABC, and keep Remy putting off pursuing his destiny to become the Mideast’s biggest pop star.” Or, “Help us keep paying the commission to that old underground cartoonist who specializes in books about abortionists and draws a strip for us every three years or so that is invariably one of the best things we run in that whole time period.”

    1. Those labelz aren’t going to pay for themselves.

    2. Doubt you’re going to be seeing a lot of Heaton anymore given that he moved to Texas and started a podcast (There is Something Off With Andrew Heaton) on Glenn Beck’s network.

  3. OT: Gary Johnson issued a pointless, dumb tweet praising George H.W. Bush. Someone should tell him that libertarianism is not war-criminal-friendly, especially when those war criminals say they have no regrets.

    He and Weld should be tossed out of the LP.

    1. I don’t think that there is a need for a complete assessment of someone’s life from everyone in the immediate wake of their passing. But Justin Amash, for instance, tweeted simply, “May his memory be eternal.” What I dislike about Johnson’s tweet was that it gratuitously cited the “honorable notion of public service.” I think this is precisely the sort of narrative that libertarians should be pushing back hard on–especially when you are a politician in the spotlight instead of a journalist or academic.

      Also, Gary Johnson left office in 2002, four years before Twitter even publicly announced its existence. It looks a bit silly that he then made a Twitter account calling himself “Gov. Gary Johnson” as though he were still the governor of something. Most people do not know that governors (and even presidents) do not really keep a courtesy title the way senators do, but this is an example where it really does look a bit ridiculous.

      1. Bush is “a wonderful public servant,” just like Hillary Clinton.

        I criticized Amash’s tweet, too. Rand Paul didn’t issue a tweet, but I doubt that was an intentional rebuke.

        What annoys me about Johnson is that he isn’t even in office, so there’s no need for him to weigh in on things like this. But look at Ron Paul. If anything, he’s been more open about bashing public figures like the Bushes since he left office. Why can’t Johnson be more like that? He’s so guileless.

        1. Massie did not tweet either. I think Amash’s was appropriate. He is, as you say, in office. And he did not actually say anything of substance at all. This is something, for example, you might say of your worst enemy when he passes, or what a priest might say of a vicious rapist and murderer. (I’ve seen both happen more than once.) It is completely refraining from commenting on the person’s life and its merits or demerits, as I pointed out. I think this is appropriate for anyone, of any legacy no matter how good or evil, who has recently passed; they do not need to merit it with anything they have done. You disagree, but I think this is more a matter of our respective preferred general customs and practices regarding the recently deceased than it is a matter of any interesting substance.

          Ron Paul called out the (rather embarrassingly excessive) worship of Reagan by the other candidates right in the middle of a Republican debate when his candidacy was at its hottest. One of the most delightfully awkward moments I’ve ever seen. It really got the younger me’s attention–and I was not anything remotely resembling a libertarian at the time.

          1. What’s sad is that the Democrats were worshipful of Obama, and the Republicans, in spite of a few Never Trumpers in their ranks, are every bit as worshipful of Trump. Rand Paul will almost certainly endorse him in 2020, which is dumb, because his constituents might be annoyed, but I doubt they’ll vote for the Democrat over him in 2022.

    2. HW is a ‘war criminal’………

      Yeah, with that sort of talk, no wonder the LP is seen by many as a fringe party.

      1. I’d consider using depleted uranium on civilian infrastructure and giving Iraqi civilians cancer a war crime.

        1. No, see, because it was Murica what done it. Same as torture: doesn’t count when we do it.

          1. Yeah, sweating KSM was ‘torture’. I had worse waterboardimg done to me as part of my military training. Go look up what Al Qaeda and ISIS have done to our guys when they capture them.

            Again, this sort of talk makes the LP come off as anti Maericsn, and a bunch of pussies. Not a great image.

            1. We all know Bush did wonders for the GOP’s message.

              Anyway, I don’t support the LP, and I won’t vote for them until they run pro-life candidates.

              1. That’s the last thing we need, for the LP to be infiltrated by the right-wing version of PETA.

              2. Non aggression principle consistency.

            2. We prosecuted Japanese after WWII for war crimes because they water boarded prisoners. The reason military training includes water boarding is to teach you what might happen in a POW environment. And lastly, we don’t set our behavior by the behavior of the barbarians we’re fighting, or we are no better than they are.
              But yeah, All War All the Time is the responsible, serious message to take to the general public.

            3. Because a much better image is cheerleading torture in the name of Uncle Sam!

  4. More to the point, MSNBC (as well as Fox, CNN, and the other cable nets) don’t pay for us to go on.

    Let me get this straight. Every time a cable news show is deliberated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the libertarian?

    Your libertarian moment is over, Mr. Welch. Condolences. The individualists lost. My advice to you is to do what Lou Dobbs did. Get a show, sir. The individualists will always lose. Do you hear me, Welch?

    1. Doesn’t he have a show?

      1. Funny nonetheless of course.

        1. Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.

  5. Is the most libertarian voice on television at the moment Kennedy? Greg Gutfeld might call himself a libertarian, but he certainly isn’t one.

    1. I don’t know anything about Greg Gutfeld. What has he done that is so bad?

      1. The Greg Gutfeld Show is an interesting attempt at a conservative late-night talk show, but even though Gutfeld calls himself a libertarian, he doesn’t say anything remotely libertarian on foreign policy, immigration, and civil liberties (see his tweets on Snowden). And he’s pretty subservient to Trump, never criticizing him on his show or saying anything that might challenge his audience.

        1. Gutfeld considers himself a conservatarian. As opposed to ex ‘Red Eye’ co host, TV’s Andy Levy, who is largely libertarian. Plus I think you’re out there a little bit.

          1. Is that the one that Kmele Foster is on? Everybody here seems to adore him. (I don’t know anything about him.)

            1. Update: Just glanced over Kmele’s Twitter account, and saw him retweet Gutfeld coming to an unexpected rescue.

              1. Gutfeld is absolutely right on this front. Conservatives act like social justice warriors when it comes to Israel and anti-Semitism. Look no further than Seth Mandel’s Twitter feed these past few days.

                1. You’re more likely to encounter criticism of Israel in the Knesset than you are in the U.S. Congress. It’ll be interesting to see how Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the socialist “crusader” whose views are so radical they’ve been glorified by much of the U.S. media, gradually becomes malleable on this issue, even in spite of her earlier tweets.

              2. Twitter has got to be the shittiest user interface ever. It is so hard to follow a conversation. One of the reasons I don’t use, or even read, Twitter.

                1. It is just a very, very bad social media site. I am continually shocked it has lasted this long, especially since it has never made any profit in twelve years, doesn’t seem to have much of a business model, and doesn’t seem to be particularly loved by anyone. MySpace made more sense than this.

          2. “Plus I think you’re out there a little bit.”

            I’m devastated.

            1. I don’t care one way or the other, but your kind of commentary is not the sort of thing that will attract more people to the LP or interest them in libertarian ideas. Nor do I find them particularly representative of them.

              Maybe that’s not a priority to you, but to some of us it is.

              1. You’re the one who’s pro-torture.

                1. I’m pro want someone like you considers to be torture but really isn’t.

                  A lot of you people here are really soft and have no concept about the rest of the world, or what real misery is. I am not.

        2. Greg Gutfeld doesn’t come off as libertarian, but Kat Timpf is a regular on his show, and she is libertarian.

          1. She is. But she always looks unhappy on his show. Maybe I’m just imagining it, but she looks like she finds Greg annoying. I could be wrong.

            Either way, he’s a blowhard.

  6. The TreasonNN staff should compensate me for reading their work!

    1. It would be funny if Reason sent some HnR commenters out to the shows instead of staffers the next time it is asked. If only for an April Fool’s Joke or something.

      1. Well, it wouldn’t be boring.

        1. “Left minus right equals ZERO!”

          (Tucker Carlson stares back with his mouth agape.)

          1. Ok, I’m with you on that one. Hihn, or whoever the hell he is, on national tv, would be priceless.

            1. Reason would get banned from CNN after threatening to push (insert TV commentator) into a wood chipper.

              1. *after a commenter threatened to push…

                1. How did the chipper joke get started?

                  1. “How did the chipper joke get started?”

                    Somebody here opined that a certain public servant should be fed to a woodchipper. A certain prosecutor was stupid enough to take the comment as an actual ‘threat’ and demanded that Reason turn over the commenter’s ID information. Reason did not do so, and informed the parties involved of the demand, just before they got a gag order.
                    Since the gag order was too late, that bell had been rung and the story was picked up by several sources who spread it further, with predictable results.
                    I believe the prosecutor is no longer employed as such

                    1. C’mon, let’s name the asshole: Preet Bharara.
                      (BTW, that was also the prosecutor’s name)

    2. Or at least send you a copy of ‘Jugs’ every time they publish a Shikha article. As restitution.

  7. I just made my contribution, and need to decide on digital or print subscription. Can anyone comment on the pros/cons of the formats?


    1. TLI. The digital is rather comprehensive. Is there any particular reason you might potentially, specifically prefer the print?

      1. Is there any particular reason you might potentially, specifically prefer the print?

        You can use the print version to start fires?

      2. Can’t wipe your ass with a logic gate.

      3. I was initially thinking digital, to add to my kindle account, but upon investigation it seems the kindle subscription is completely separate, and not an eligible selection for a web-a-thon contribution. Apart from kindle, I do all of my digital reading in an RSS reader, which I’m not sure the digital version supports well.

        The print version might have some additional benefits in terms of ease of casual browsing, and ‘coffee table’ appeal. My wife might even end up reading it from time to time. ?\_(?)_/?

        Just wondering what people’s experience with the different editions was.

  8. When Welch goes on Bill Maher, doesn’t Maher’s show pay for the flight to LA, or at least give Welch some free snacks?

    1. No, but they’ll pay to let him watch The Equalizer 2 on a little screen.

    2. Maher is different. It’s an entertainment talk show, Like Fallon, Ellen, Trevor Noah, Steve Harvey, etc. Not that you’d know the difference in practice between that and “opinion” (most of MSNBC and Fox) or even “news” (most of CNN); it’s all pretty blatantly entertainment at this point. But nominally they are supposed to be different. Entertainment shows’ guests–professional entertainers or not–are all “performers” as far as union agreements go, so they get paid SAG-AFTRA scale. It’s barely anything, but they do have to pay it. (I don’t know where precisely the lines fall. For instance Today is a “news” show, I believe even that part where Hoda and Kathie Lee sit around getting drunk and drooling over Hollywood actors; but their seemingly similar competitors might be “entertainment.”)

      1. …”Journalism” (news or opinion), on the other hand, does not pay interviewees as a matter of professional ethics. (This is what separates them from “tabloids” and “tabloid TV,” because God knows nothing else does except their inability to get scoops.) There are some limited exceptions, but none remotely cover the cases at hand; and in any case they’ve been sharply reducing them of late because things were getting a bit fast and loose. They can of course pay the professional journalists they employ. For TV news departments this should include not only the anchors and correspondents, but also both the “contributors” who appear on a fairly steady basis (even if via satellite) across a network’s shows and regular panelists on a particular show. (Both of which are likely to sign an exclusivity contract, which is what Welch was talking about there in the end about wanting to avoid.) They can also pay guest panelists who are filling in for regular ones. But they can’t pay just plain guests, no matter if they happen to be experts or professional journalists–indeed, even if that’s the reason for them to be called upon. It might not always be clear to the viewer the difference between someone who is “being interviewed” by the anchor and someone who is her “colleague” “contributing” in coordination with her. But it makes a big difference on paper.

        1. …This piece should have probably made clear that some of the Reasonoids in the embedded videos were indeed paid for their appearance. But the overall point stands I think.

      2. Damn unions! Even if right to work is adopted by the rest of the states, the Hollywood union will probably still hang on for the duration.

        I assume Welch is not a dues paying member of SAG-AFTRA (whatever that is), but can’t he be a independent contractor and negotiate his own rate with Maher? I hope Welch donates all of that union negotiated “scale” cash to reason.

  9. You know who else used media to air their views?

    1. Jason? No, sorry, that was Medea.

      1. She founded the Iranians (Medes)! No wonder they’re always out for revenge all the time!

    2. Croesus, king of Lydia?

  10. Fashionistas #RESIST!

    “Dolce & Gabbana cancels Shanghai show amid controversy over ‘racist’ ads”
    “Fashion house Dolce & Gabbana canceled a Shanghai fashion show amid controversy involving ads that users claim trivialized Chinese culture.
    The company posted a video series on the Chinese social media site Weibo, along with Twitter and Instagram, that featured “instructional” videos on how to use chopsticks to eat pizza, pasta and a cannoli. The videos ? featuring a Chinese model ? were eventually taken down, but not before users took screenshots and began circulating the controversial ads.”

    Yep, pretty oriental woman eating pizza with chopsticks; sure sounds ‘racist’ to me!

    1. I am actually surprised they got all butthurt. The Chinese are certainly known for being proud of their nationality (a polite way of putting it) and rather sensitive. But they normally don’t do the American college-kid thing. More likely to be pissed off if you do a play about some battle they were in seven centuries ago and refer to the Uighurs as “bloodthirsty evil cruel savages” instead of “bloodthirsty evil murderous savages” or something.

      Anyway I love Dolce and Gabbana because they keep talking without a filter and are a throwback to a less give-a-fuck time.

      It appears the Daily News thinks my interest in this will make me similarly interested in the fact that the new Sonny and Cher play will be respecting Chaz Bono’s famously closely guarded privacy by keeping his secret that he used to be a girl.

      1. But they normally don’t do the American college-kid thing.

        Make a special wonton soup for him.

        1. I love how he was so on point with his impressions he did the perfect impression of someone doing a bad impression. Like that bad impression sounded like the love child of Charlie Chan’s daughter getting fucked by the Swedish Chef.

          1. Not as good as simply the sound of the Swedish Chef’s lovemaking.

            I’ve heard.

  11. Look, everyone knows full well that MSNBC is a libertarian outfit, just like Block Insane Yomomma was our greatest libertarian president.

  12. To bring libertarian ideas to the masses, you need to have libertarian ideas. Reason has degenerated into a progressive outfit for which libertarianism amounts to nothing more than free drugs, free sex, and open borders.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.