Koch Bros forcing Libertarians out of Cato, replaced with social conservatives

I am going to take a gander here and say our resident Libertarians don't know what the Cato Institute is, nor do they have a pocket US Constitution. Just a random guess, I could be wrong.

 

why would you guess that?

 

I both know what the Cato Institute is and own a pocket constitution. As a bonus, I know who Cato was, and can differentiate him from Kelvin Cato.

 

Because I associate them with Ron Paul and wanting to abolish the Federal Reserve and privatize all roads. Is it then any wonder the Libertarians have never gained an electoral vote or had the same impact in presidential elections like Perot or even Nader? I guess I was wrong.

 

ahhh...Cato.

Faithful defender of the Republic, or at least his place in its' class of elites. Forced to suicide to escape the popularity of a progressive who seized power, through brazen merit, for the people...and it must be admitted, for himself. Still, that progressive managed to get quite a bit done while the fine old noblemen watched as their established order of rich over poor, nobleman over rabble slowly degenerated.

Of course, nothing like this ever works well in the long run.

oddly fitting, but perhaps not in the way it was designed.

Wonder what they thought of Caesar-care?

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/oGvGGyLn9Os" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Social conservatives have no business being brought into Cato. Hopefully conservatives don't get a majority on the board, there are already enough conservative think thanks out there.

 

I think they should bring in economists and mathematicians first.

 

Hey we don't need them numbers people! We base our economics off Austrian Poetry!

 

The Koches' might be correct that the shares need to be divided, which would suck. I don't want them to be majority holders, but the law needs to be respected. I don't agree with their opinion that Cato needs to be more "political".

 

Yeah ... that is strange.

 

I would say so long as they follow all applicable laws, contracts, and agreements by which they are bound, there is nothing wrong with the Koch's trying to buy the Cato institute. If the founders had not wanted that to happen, they could have prevented the transfer of ownership. If they set up salable shares and shares have been sold, that seems perfectly in keeping with the intent of the founders. It would be the same if Soros was buying up shares and putting his buddies on the board. One would hope that a takeover by non-libertarians would mean that the Cato Institute loses any lib-cred it has, but many people probably won't pay attention. In the end, the Koch's are buying the goodwill, so they probably correctly expect to get something out of it.

 

By "political" do you mean electorally?

CATO for instance has always been very strong in trying to end the social security system.

 

It looks like they basically feel vindicated. Just like they think it is keeping with the "founder's intent" that corporations and the very rich can buy the country, they feel that it is in keeping with "founder's intent" that the Kochs can completely buy off CATO and turn in into a pale shadow of what it was.

 

i was referring to the founders of the Cato Institute who set it up with tradable shares. Two different groups of founders.

 

Yes, hence the use of the word "like." If I'm not mistaken, you think people have the ability to divine framer's intent as well, correct?

 

Keep waiting. Their response is coming.