User profile: ksand99

Thanks JahReb. My point wasn't rocket science, but Patrick felt he needed a two-reply, 15 paragraph diatribe to attempt to attack the logic behind it. Right...

So Patrick, why does NPRI seemingly invite only far-right wing people to speak at their keynotes?

"The Independents have left the Democrats and next years election will tell the story that Americans are tired of the "Move On" politics of the Left."

So says LarryVegas, who also claimed Obama was going to pronounce the public option dead more than two months ago.

And today it's going to be voted on in the House.

Your crystal ball is cracked, Larry.

"Yes those are distinctions but this was not a point you were making, let's delineate a few more things,"

It's very clearly a point I was making... which is why I went out of my way to name-check prior keynote speakers of NPRI.

"1) Hosting someone to speak means you celebrate their position."

Here, again, is the crux. We know a few things thanks to your handy-dandy Youtube of Rove's speech.

First, he was given a hearty standing ovation prior to uttering a single word. I've been to a fundraiser or two, and speakers typically aren't given standing-o's prior to speaking.

Second, he wasn't invited as some sort of long-standing exploration of the issues, but rather, as a fundraising tool. NPRI exploited Rove and Rove's views to fill their coffers because they knew their target market.

Third, NPRI is VERY DIFFERENT than Columbia because Columbia regularly represents the spectrum of analysis, whereas NPRI historically represents far-right and neocon views and historically invites far-right and neocon speakers to their events.

See, I would buy Columbia University as independent, solely based on that fact... on the fact that they have a long tradition of varied viewpoints.

Why is it, Patrick, that NPRI only represents one viewpoint? I'm shocked you seriously buy their party line. I thought you were smarter than that.

"2) That you can't be libertarian or independent and listen to him speak."

Again, consider the circumstances. The video doesn't lie, Patrick. I'd be willing to hear Condoleezza Rice speak, but I sure wouldn't give her a pre-speech standing ovation.

And no, no actual libertarian would give Karl Rove a standing ovation. I'll say that outright. If they truly believe the tenets of their political philosophy, I can't see a justification for that.

"The fact that you think inviting someone to speak means you celebrate their position is utterly ludicrous. It makes me question your intelligence."

First, let's delineate a few things.

Yes, I think there's a difference between Columbia hosting the President of Iran, where there were mass protests, because the goal was discourse...

...whereas NPRI prostituted Karl Rove for cash.

Was Columbia's invitation a fundraiser? No.

Was NPRI's? Yes.

Does Columbia have a storied history of inviting people from both sides of the political spectrum to engage in debate? Yes.

Does NPRI have a similar history? No... quite the opposite.

You don't think it's a little disingenuous to squeal about government spending when you voluntarily invite Karl Rove to proselyte to an adoring crowd?

"Ksand stop being such an old dramatic irrational curmudgeon. You've obviously never been to a political event, don't know what common curtsey [sic] is, or you just don't care to be an honest, rational or civil adult."

Oh stop being a child. I'm asking very rational questions that you're afraid to answer. Sorry, but for an organization that claims to be "libertarian," why would you invite someone who planned/advised one of the largest expansions of government in history? Invite them to a forum? Maybe. Invite them to preach to a roomful of sycophants? No.

You have the right to ask whomever you want to dinner. I never disputed that and now you're making up stuff because you can't answer some simple stuff. I'm asking why, not claiming you don't have to right.

My point, which you're missing, of course, is that it's disingenuous to claim to be a libertarian or independent and then celebrate one of the most divisive people in American political history.

Why not just be honest about it?