Glenn Reynolds cast an early vote in Tennessee the other day. It
wasn't clear from reading Instapundit over the past couple months
who he was supporting in the Senate race -- he'd been criticized
from the right for being too nice to Harold Ford, Jr. -- until he
revealed
that he'd voted for Bob Corker:
I liked Harold Ford, Jr. when we interviewed him, and I
wouldn't shed any tears if he were elected; he'd raise the caliber
of the Democrats in the Senate. But when push came to shove, I
voted for Corker. I liked him, too, and ultimately the combination
of Ford's "F" rating on gun rights and the sleazy "outing" behavior
of the Democrats was such that I just felt I had to vote Republican
in this race. (In our interview, Corker said he'd look favorably on
federal legislation to require states to recognize each others'
gun-carry permits.)
Andrew Sullivan took this opportunity to
call Glenn a GOP stooge and question his libertarianism. Glenn
responded
by pointing out that on most of the social issues that Andrew cares
about, Ford isn't even vaguely libertarian. Andrew's
response:
So is Reynolds saying that Corker is more
libertarian than Ford on these issues? That's the only relevant
question when picking between the two of them on libertarian
grounds, and Reynolds ducks it again.
Well, no. If a libertarian sees no meaningful difference between
the candidates on those issues, he looks at other issues. Andrew
has either forgotten or is deliberately ignoring how the exchange
began, with Glenn citing "Ford's 'F' rating on gun rights." Andrew
might not care about this issue,
or even bother to attempt to understand it, but it is generally
important to libertarians. (While we're on the subject,
libertarians also usually don't like estate taxes, gasoline taxes,
and
over-the-top anti-drug rhetoric.)
topics:
Taxes, Libertarianism
