The coronavirus was not caused by rampant buy backs and borrowing. So yes

Ahh, but the buy backs and borrowing is what put over leveraged businesses into a precarious position where they were extremely vulnerable to economic shock. It didn't have to be a pandemic, it could've been any number of other events that caused a credit and demand shock.

Strip the equity, give the assets to someone who can properly manage the business.

Why should that matter? It's not like the businesses will evaporate. Equity will lose their shirts and we should let them.

Why don't they sell that stock back to the public to raise money for operating expenses? Because they'd have to sell it for much less than they paid a year ago?

I hate this idea that the taxpayer needs to subsidize risk for corporations. It creates a huge moral hazard where companies are incentivized to act as irresponsibly as possible. There are no consequences.

You'd make your point more effectively using logic and reasoning rather than an emotional outburst. Otherwise, as a genuinely curious reader looking to learn from "both sides," your side comes across as motivated more by emotion than reasonable argument. Which is fine for preaching to the choir… but that's about it.

Both sides? Do you make the same argument for hearing from literal Nazis? You just need to weigh the arguments for and against the final solution? I'm not directly calling Libertarians Nazis but the analogy holds, I find very little of value from their point of view. Generally Ayn Rand type libertarians are cash worshiping dragons of the Smaug variety. Their only real contribution to discourse is about the power of markets and I think we can discard them because belief in markets is not unique to them.

What do libertarians have to do with a central bank executing a massive increase in its balance sheet to execute a nearly unprecedented intervention into the national economy?

There are many words I might use to describe this policy. Libertarian is not one of them.

Yes.