Cato Unbound has a symposium on a "Bleeding Heart History of Libertarianism" by Matt Zwolinski and John Tomasi. There is much to recommend in the essay and the subsequent discussion. But for the sake of argument for readers of CP, it seems that the all too common lumping of Mises with Rothbard and Rand is something that should be challenged.
So I want to suggest that the syllogism Mises = Austrian economics; Mises = Rothbard; Rothbard = Austro-libertarianism; demonstrate fundamental flaws in Austro-libertarianism; therefore, demonstrated that Rothbard is flawed, therefore, Mises is flawed; is in fact what is flawed and must by rejected serious thinkers in social philosophy and political economy.
Mises may have problems, but they are not the one's supposedly identified in Rothbard and Rand. Mises is a rule utilitarian, and the critical idea in his social theory is the theory of social cooperation under the division of labor.