That Time Al Franken Kept Telling Me Jokes About Mullets
There was music in the cafés at night, and talk of liberal-libertarian cooperation was in the air.

Some vault somewhere might contain a recording of the time I went on Al Franken's radio show, but I haven't been able to find the episode anywhere on the internet. It aired in 2005, before the former Saturday Night Live writer and future Minnesota senator had ever made a bid for office. I'm guessing that once he decided to run, one of his handlers realized it wouldn't be helpful to have a few years of radio comedy just sitting there for the oppo researchers to dig through. Or maybe the archive just dried up and disappeared, the way old files on the World Wide Web tend to do.
That show has been on my mind, though, because I just published an article looking back at the ways the political spectrum has been turned inside-out over the last two decades, and one of the topics I covered was that sudden burst of discussion, in 2005–06, of what might happen if the liberals and the libertarians could set aside their differences and get together for a while. Like virtually everyone else in the liberty movement, I wrote a couple of blog posts laying out my thoughts on that idea, but it wasn't one of those that caught the eye of a libertarian-friendly producer on Franken's staff. He got in touch because I had written a piece called "The Hippie and the Redneck Can Be Friends." And while that particular article was about drive-in movies and country music, not partisan politics, it was close enough for radio work—Al Franken wanted to know how Democrats could appeal to freedom-loving redneck voters, and that story's title apparently qualified me for the job.
How did the show go? I'm not sure: Like I said, I can't find a recording, so I have to rely here on some fragmentary 19-year-old memories. I know that Franken kept making jokes about mullets. I know that I made what may have been an ill-advised allusion to my host's bit role in Trading Places. And at some point in there, I made the point that if his party wanted libertarians to take it more seriously, it should give more than lip service to the civil liberties where Democrats were supposed to be good. It was nice, I said, to see some bloggers and radio hosts highlighting those issues, but it would be nicer if the party leadership would too.
Well, that was life in the Bush years: In 2005, the liberaltarian dream was widespread enough that someone could spot it even in an article on a completely different subject. In the 2020s, by contrast, it is possible to read something that was explicitly about liberal-libertarian cooperation and completely miss the context that birthed it.
In one of those posts on this topic that I wrote in '06, you see, I included this comment:
I really don't see much hope at all for turning the Democrats in a libertarian direction (though I'll cheer on anyone who's willing to try), but I know plenty of people who reflexively vote Democratic (when they vote at all) but are easily 80% libertarian in their own attitudes. Call them Whole Earth Catalog libertarians, Santa Fe Institute libertarians, bOING bOING libertarians. They appreciate spontaneous order, entrepreneurship (many of them are entrepreneurs themselves), decentralization, free expression, and peace. The hard-core do-it-yourselfers among them (and the veterans of the New Left) also appreciate the widespread private ownership of guns. They might not agree with everything in [a New Republic article called "Liberaltarians"], but hey, neither do I. That's fine. It's a big tent.
In 2021, a Harvard historian named Erik Baker quoted that post in the opening to an acclaimed paper ("The ultimate think tank: The rise of the Santa Fe Institute libertarian"):
In 2006, Jesse Walker, an editor at the libertarian web magazine Reason, identified a new political identity forming in his social milieu. 'Call them', he wrote, 'Santa Fe Institute libertarians'. These were people, in Walker's view, 'who reflexively vote Democratic (when they vote at all) but are easily 80% libertarian in their own attitudes'. Despite their loose cultural affinity with Democratic Party liberalism, the fundamental values of the Santa Fe Institute libertarians were the same as those of Walker and his Reason colleagues: 'spontaneous order, entrepreneurship (many of them are entrepreneurs themselves), decentralization, free expression, and peace'. Walker hoped that the Santa Fe Institute libertarians, with their liberal do-gooder energy, could help the libertarian movement make inroads into a mainstream audience that saw libertarianism as the sole province of Scrooge-like billionaires. 'It's a big tent', he insisted (Walker, 2006).
Every now and then, I remember Baker's paper and wonder how exactly someone could think my ruminations on crunchy nonvoters and gun-toting ex–New Leftists had been about "inroads into a mainstream audience," let alone "liberal do-gooder energy" or "Scrooge-like billionaires." Remember: This was 2005–06. One reason this discussion had been happening in the first place was because some Netroots liberals thought that calling themselves "libertarian Democrats" would make them sound more populist. If I had written a story called "The Hippie and Ebenezer Scrooge Can Be Friends," Al Franken's people probably wouldn't have extended an invite. (Nor was I describing a "new political identity." Baker evidently missed the reference to the Whole Earth Catalog, a publication founded in 1968.)
But I don't want to waste time complaining that someone missed a document's historical context, even if reading things historically is something you might expect a historian to do. I'm just fascinated by just how quickly a historical context can wash away in the first place. It would be fun to go back to 2005 or '06 and talk with some of the Democrats who wanted to work with libertarians to defeat folks like Vice President Dick Cheney; I could tell them that in 2024 a Democratic presidential ticket would working with Cheney to defeat the star of The Apprentice. I doubt that story would get me on Al Franken's show, but maybe I could earn a slot on Art Bell.
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
About halfway through this blast from the past it occurred to me that someone might be trying to train an AI system by stringing together random sociopolitical labels in random order. As someone who read every issue of Mother Earth News AND the Mother Earth Catalogue - you might be able to find my name on a list of founders in Hendersonville, North Carolina through my original lifetime subscription - I remember a fair number of those random concepts that populate this article. America is nothing if not a hodgepodge melting pot of sects and brief movements, but politics rarely has very much to do with what people actually think or want for themselves and society generally. The vast majority of politicians and officials are lawyers and others who simply want a comfortable lifetime position where they don't have to do anything but occupy space to knock down six figures before and after retirement. They couldn't care less whether you're a crunchy gun-toting hippie redneck or a liberaltarian Cheneyite. They know that the DNC, the RNC and the wealthy backers have a lock on the system and that the deep state is even more impervious to the last election than even "Yes Minister" would have you believe.
"The Hippie and the Redneck Can Be Friends."
*Looks over at Trump/Kennedy enjoinment*
They did become friends, and the security deep state/neo-liberal/neo-con establishment hated it, derided as "populism" has been on a 10 year bender to destroy it and everyone associated with it. Hell, it even took out Al Franken... herpetologist's handshake and all that...
And Greenwald, and Gabbard, and Brand, and etcetera, etcetera...
"derided as “populism”"
whenever someone says populism with a sneer, you know that they are authoritarian as fuck.
Literally just about listening to what the people want, the populace's hopes and wishes, but if you call it "populism" you can smear it.
I really don’t see much hope at all for turning the Democrats in a libertarian direction (though I’ll cheer on anyone who’s willing to try), but I know plenty of people who reflexively vote Democratic (when they vote at all) but are easily 80% libertarian in their own attitudes. Call them Whole Earth Catalog libertarians, Santa Fe Institute libertarians, bOING bOING libertarians.
Let’s just say, Mr. Walker, that in the ensuing years there was a lot of agreeing to disagree… a lot of subsequent movement of one side towards the other, and well… we ended up with a Reason-adapted-for-modern-audiences as evidence of that.
If you're 80% libertarian oriented but vote lockstep with marxists are you really 80% libertarian oriented or just a contrarian? Jesse may as well argue the libertarian case for the 3rd Reich at that point.
>>"The Hippie and the Redneck Can Be Friends."
guessing by how far off you were you don't know any hippies or rednecks but that's okay you accidentally were correct.
If nothing else came out of that weird, elusive “libertarian-Democrat” moment back in 2005, well, I did. It was this idea – that libertarians and liberals could advance each other’s agendas by making common cause – that got me to first start taking libertarian ideas seriously. And the more seriously I took them, the more clearly I realized what political camp I really belonged in.
It’s also worth noting that the Democratic Party establishment did seem to take this idea seriously at the time, and that the astounding victories that the Dems scored in 2006 and 2008, resepectively, were substantially premised on recruiting pro-business, pro-gun, fiscally responsible “libertarian Democrats” to run in red states and districts. The fact that they abandoned this strategy as soon as Obama was elected shows how shallow that seriousness actually was. And the fact that they haven’t won on anything close to that scale ever since shows how short-sighted it was for them to abandon it.
Here's the Red State blue governor who just wants to leave you alone.
Some vault somewhere might contain a recording of the time I went on Al Franken's radio show…
That’s a funny way to remember the failed leftist PR stunt that was Air America, but please, go on …
Al Franken? Remember when pretending to squeeze a pair of tits on a sleeping woman was the Worst Thing Ever?
That was such a dumb cancelation. The guy is an asshole and didn't legitimately win his position, but what a dumb thing to be ousted for.
Can't be bothered to read this, but was it mentioned that he only won due to a trunk full of ballots discovered days later with no confirmation of validity?
What the hell happened to Libertarians? The Libertarians are pinko leftists now. Libertarians thought so hard about ways to oppose Trump that they turned gay. Like little black sambo being chased around the tree by the Trump tiger until they all turned into Dylan Mulvaney.
https://substack.com/profile/36497587-rightful-freedom/note/c-75222275