Debate with non libertarian: need some references

Since I want to keep the topic clear of unrelated issues, I will simply post the arguments themselves rather than the URL, as the URL is unimportant, but the arguments are not:

Original Argument (not mine):

except congress wouldn’t applaud, because it’s infested with goddamn liberals, who did their best to demean or ignore the tax day tea parties, an expression of this righteous anger. And then that cnt janette napolitano (sp?) would put Peter Finch on a watch list. And that bigger cnt Robert Gibbs would try to make a joke out of it, in his awkward, mongoloid manner. F*CK YOU OBAMA!!!

first response to this argument (different person, but also not me)

The root of the problem is not republican or democrat ideals. The root of the problem is corporatism. Politicians with corporate interests are infesting our government, and are turning us away from individualistic values. They perpetuate misleading rhetoric and use their power in the government to seek out limitless ways to extract wealth from us and other nations. They don’t care about us, but they try everything they can to make us think theywork for our best interests.

My series of arguments;

1.

Well, there is truth to what you said, but it is not the whole story. Politicians who work for corporate interests are not the only bad kinds. There are other kinds with higher priorities, namely more power for themselves. In fact, it is often a mixture. Corporate swine try to get politicians campaign money and favorable media treatment in exchange for favorable legal treatment granted by politicians.

2.

Sometimes, they two types do not even like each other. It is often a gangster style relationship, in which one party tries to gain the upper hand over their collaborator, using any possible tool and method legal and otherwise. Sometimes, one of them slips, which the rival/formerly co-symbiote then betrays them. This is why, for example, Eliot Spitzer was torn apart. This is not to say that he was a good man, merely one who stepped on the wrong toes.

3.

Over the past 100 years, these symbiotic/parasitical relations have had an overall effect of destroying accountability, destroying the rule of law, as well as the due process of it. Fiscal responsibility has not only been destroyed, but made a mockery of. Businesses who do not participate in the corrupt establishment risk getting crushed by the monstrous fester of a bureaucracy and its countless laws, as well as its hyena lawyers and provocateurs (read: hired activists of various stripes and causes)

4.

Towards the top of the gang of ringleaders is the military and even more importantly, the banking industries. If one has read Adam Smith, every principle that he has advocated for has been callously violated by these powers. Smith advocated that a business should be successful based on how it serves its customers, that all its funds come directly from sales. This would help ensure that the business is accountable to its customers and would be unable to wield any unjust power.

5.

But this was of course, not good enough from the point of view of the largest banks, as it forced them to be much more considerably honest, transparent and accountable then they really preferred. They knew that to be able to secure a meaningful and powerful foothold in society, they would need to control a nation’s money supply. They would also need to be granted a monopoly, so that they would be immune from losses normally generated by bad market and bad business practices.

6.

Over the years, they have colluded and finally were able to get enough politicians to work with them to grant them this ultimate monopoly. As always, they used egalitarian rhetoric to slip under the radar of the people. They even funded progressives to create series of riots and rabble rousings to distract attention of what went behind the scenes in Washington. To further ensure that they would meet no opposition in congress, they had the Federal Reserve act pass near Christmastime.

I am only interested in backing these up with valid references that a person who is biased against libertarianism can take seriously. I am acquiring some right now, but it is a long and tedious process. If you could provide some additional ones, that would be great.