Printable View
Will this philisophy or party ever become a power player in this nation. Will they one take over the republican party or two become a viable third party. Are they relugated to being a fringe group? I myself do have libertarian leanings and gladly supported Ron Paul, now that he is out I know that I will vote for Romney and not the libertarian because he has no chance to win. What will it take for the nation to embrace a third party or for the melding of republican and libertarian?
Come on, man! Vote your principles FIRST! If your principles lie in libertarianism and Ron Newsletters Paul, then write him in as your candidate!Quote:
Originally Posted by UGLY
That's been my campaign motto for all "tea party" supporters and Ron Newsletters Paul supporters this November: PRINCIPLES FIRST! Write in your favorite candidate in November!
In all honesty, how you plan on voting is EXACTLY why third party isn't a viable option today in the U.S. No one votes their principles, but, rather, we cast votes AGAINST the one we fear most.
Politics is about winnig elections, and if my views are to be represented in this years election I have to throw my hat in the ring with the guy who most closely advocates for my views and has a viable chance to win the race. Myself like everybody else must operate within the political reality of the day in order to be effective at getting the messageout. Even Ron Paul knows he had to run for the Republican primary because his message would never have been heard as the libertarian candidate. Its an unfortunate game we have to play, I guess until someone like a Teddy Roosevelt comes a long and can make a thrid party viable.
Republicans don't seem a lot closer to Libertarianism than Democrats. Economically Republicans talk a good game but have never really shown that they truly believe. Their belief in tax cuts to stimulate the economy is not Libertarian at all, it is just a different approach on the Keynesian concept of stimulating demand. And there is a hard core wing of the Republican party that is far away from embracing any Libertarian social ideas.
Interesting that you say that, as libertarians initially was a movement of liberal/progressive people concerned with liberty, freedom, and civil rights.Quote:
Originally Posted by ODH
It was not until the 1990's, when regressives started spreading fears and falsehoods that Bill Clinton was coming for their guns, that they manufactured this belief in liberty and freedom first.
As predicted, this "concern" for freedom and liberty took a complete nosedive during the Bush "presidency," as they supported every freedom stripping measure that the guy could think of.
Guess what? They're back to being "libertarians" again.
Yes, I used strong language, but the trends that I describe are accurate to a "T."
Libertarians believe in very, very limited government, no welfare, medicare, medicaide or ss. They dont believe in the IRS or personal taxation really at all. They want the government to leave them alone and have a sound fiscal policy while maintaining our security but not playing world police.
Clearly they dont fall in line with either party but they certainly do not come close to falling in line with the dems and the majority of major issues.
As I said, this is the newly formulated "libertarians" that flocked into the party during the 1990's.Quote:
Originally Posted by UGLY
That has never been a historical stance of libertarians, simply because many of the programs that you refer to didn't exist in those days. The classical libertarians absolutely fall in line with democrats today, but not the hijacked version of "libertarianism," which, yes, fits very closely with many republican beliefs.
The Bill of Rights has ALWAYS been a thorny issue for republicans (research that I did in the early 90's proved that), and only became greatly interested in it during the Clinton years, forgot about it during the Bush years, and is back with a vengeance today! Hence, that's why you hear terms like, "lawyer up," "what about MY rights, instead of those of criminals?", "that kind of art is not free speech," and the wild opposition to the ACLU, which fights for...civil rights and liberties.
Freedom is very selective for regressives. Always has been.
I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. I've never heard any of that stuff other than from the left when they need the ACLU to trample the rights of other citizens.Quote:
Originally Posted by ban basketball
1. Do a google search, "ACLU conservative causes." Let us know what you found.Quote:
Originally Posted by UGLY
2. Or, you can ALWAYS try this one (note my source). ACLU Comes to Rush Limbaugh's Defense | Fox News