I took a fair amount of shit for making the observation here that the attempted theft of David Souter's New Hampshire home to make way for a proposed "Lost Liberty Hotel" isn't consistent with libertarian principles. None of the commenters was able to persuade me otherwise [yeah, calling me "over-cerebral" is such a devastating argument!]. So, if my words failed to persuade you, maybe Garry Reed can ... His new essay is Lost Principles Hotel. A sample:

Clements' web site (freestarmedia.com) proclaims him a media mogul wannabe with a TV show "in development" that will feature anti-government David and Goliath stories. One of the no-kidding suggested scenarios for his show: "Perhaps a government has threatened to use its eminent domain power to take someone's home and sell it to a shopping mall developer. Viewers can deluge the city council with mail, faxes and e-mail asking for repeal of the decision or show up to stop the bulldozers."

What? Doesn't Goliath Clements himself want to use government eminent domain power to take David (yes, "David") Souter's home and sell it to a developer? Guess Clements wants to be both David and Goliath simultaneously. Is that the lesson this hypocritical huckster learned from reading Ayn Rand?

Libertarians should never succumb to the egalitarian idea of justice that says everyone should get screwed equally. That's a concept of collectivism. Libertarians demand that everyone's rights be protected equally. Thievery through eminent domain is still thievery whether it's your house or David Souter's that’s being stolen.

Time to add Garry to my purely hypothetical short list.

[Speaking of friends, anyone know what's up with Brad Spangler? His site has been coming up 404 for several days now :( ...]