[throwanem]

> This methodology is perfectly in line with the free-market approach that the US has championed for decades.

Not really a libertarian myself, but were I to pretend for a moment that I was, I'd say that this statement of yours could not possibly be less accurate, and that federal interference of this sort is the precise, diametrical antithesis of what is meant by the phrase "free market".

[triangleman]

Ah, but then you ignore the many years of deliberate effort by politicians to equate "privatization" and "public/private partnerships" with "free markets", to the point where OP's statement is perfectly reasonable in light of history.

[throwanem]

My undoubtedly imperfect emulation of a libertarian wishes me to note in response that that's just the sort of thing which a statist politician, heavily invested of necessity in the status quo, would say, and that there's no reason why we should lend the claim credence just because it's been around for a while.

He suggested following that up with what I believe to be an Upton Sinclair quote, but I'd rather eat my supper than participate in an argument over Mises and Rothbard, so I think it's time I snapshot and terminate the running instance.