In the typical state-Beltway think tank exchange, the state pretends to be influenced by the think tank so that the think tank can get donations from big businessmen who want face time with state officials. Cato, for example, has hosted Greenspan and Bernanke at its functions, and at inimate gatherings with big donors. But there is another part of the deal. When the crunch comes, as after 9/11 or now, the think tanks back state aggrandizement. Cato, for example, now endorses bank nationalization. This is extremely useful to the bad guys. If "libertarians" are for a state powergrab, who can be against it? Besides the Austrian economists and the real libertarians, that is. (Thanks to Kalim Kassam for the link.)