Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Libertarians Seeking 'True Conservatives'
GOPUSA ^

Posted on 02/24/2005 6:27:01 AM PST by Happy2BMe

Libertarians Seeking 'True Conservatives'

By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Morning Editor
February 24, 2005

(CNSNews.com) -- The Libertarian Party says its representatives were "very well received" by conservatives at a recent conference in Washington.

"We met a lot of people who are either supportive of our ideas or who simply support having an alternative to the big-government ideal put forward by the Republicans and Democrats," said Sam New, who organized the Libertarian Party's activities at the Conservative Political Action Committee Conference in Washington.

The Libertarian Party was a first-time cosponsor of the Feb. 17-19 CPAC Conference, and its involvement was a "big step forward" for the Party, said Executive Director Joe Seehusen in a report on the group's website.

"Our profile has been low for some time, and we were able to showcase our party in a positive light to many people and groups, including a large number of students and small business owners."

Seehusen, who considers President George W. Bush a socialist, said the Libertarians' support for limited government and appreciation for individual rights strikes a cord with many people who call themselves Republicans or conservatives.

"Many of them stopped by our booth to learn more," which is exactly why the Libertarians decided to take part in CPAC this year, he said.

The Libertarians believe they can appeal to "true conservatives" (as opposed to "big-government neo-conservatives") on a number of issues.

"By taking part in this CPAC conference, we hope to show that Libertarians are the true fiscal conservatives -- much more so than the Republicans are," Seehusen said on the Libertarian website.

He said the party is studying how successful groups market themselves, so the Libertarian Party "can more effectively reach out to conservatives" in the future.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism
KEYWORDS: conservative; conservativism; cpac; libertarian; lp; republican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 281-292 next last
To: robertpaulsen
The onus is on you to prove your fairy tale, not the other way around.

The tenth amendment says if the power isn't given specifically to the federal government, they don't have it.

You don't have a clue.

Have you ever used an illegal substance?

More crickets.

201 posted on 02/24/2005 11:44:25 AM PST by Protagoras (" I believe that's the role of the federal government, to help people"...GWB, 7-23-04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
Conservatism and open borders

Bush supports an amnesty for criminals who have entered illegally. He calls it something else, but it's an amnesty. It's very much like open borders.

202 posted on 02/24/2005 11:47:09 AM PST by Protagoras (" I believe that's the role of the federal government, to help people"...GWB, 7-23-04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras

"The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then get elected and prove it."

--P.J. O'Rourke


203 posted on 02/24/2005 11:49:50 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras

Yes I know, Bush on immgration issues at least leans libertarian, very similar to the Wall St. Journal. It's also true the vast majority of conservatives, while supporting him overall disagree with his immigration policies.


204 posted on 02/24/2005 11:52:41 AM PST by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
The 18th amendment was not required, but the temperance reformers thought it would be harder to change.

You're babbling again. The 18th Amendment could not possibly have any such effect, since it did not affirmatively require prohibition of alcohol. Absent such a requirement, Congress could end the war on alcohol via ordinary statute, just as they could if they had attempted to prohibit alcohol via ordinary statute in the first place.

Once the power was given to Congress via amendment, and it turned out to be a very bad idea, a new amendment was of course required to correct that mistake.

205 posted on 02/24/2005 11:52:58 AM PST by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
You are describing a pure democracy. Our government is not a democracy. Why are you using that tired analogy? It does not apply

It still applies, even though there is a representative layer in the system. We vote to take away the freedom of others, or we pressure our representatives to do it. Same effect either way.

Things like murder, theft, assault -- those are all moral matters.

Those things involve infringing on the rights, freedoms and property of others. They are not moral issues.

206 posted on 02/24/2005 11:54:04 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
You sell bridges, too?

You're quite belligerent, aren't you? Is it possible to have a rational discussion with you, or you merely an Internet blowhard?

207 posted on 02/24/2005 11:56:57 AM PST by 54-46 Was My Number (Right now, somebody else got that number)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe
But 'conservativism' is undergoing an identity crisis now in the Republican Party

You can say that again. It's getting hard to stay registered. In fact, it's probably only much undying disgust for the democrats that keeps me so.

208 posted on 02/24/2005 11:58:06 AM PST by riri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Thomas Jefferson, as President, along with his Secretary of State, James Madison (who drafted the Constitution, and the commerce clause) used the Commerce Clause as their authority to restrict trade with Europe

LOL! Obviously, that fell under the "foreign Nations" part of the Commerce Clause, and is irrelevant to the "among the several States" part.

You're reaching so far you make Mister Fantastic look like a marble statue.

209 posted on 02/24/2005 11:58:12 AM PST by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
The Republicans are the party that says government should pay for a rich grandpa's Viagra.

They are the party that is led by men who used drugs, but still advocate that others be locked up for doing the same things they did.

And all these people can do is excoriate a party which they claim is so insignificant that it doesn't matter a bit, while ignoring the problems in their own party.

210 posted on 02/24/2005 11:59:00 AM PST by Protagoras (" I believe that's the role of the federal government, to help people"...GWB, 7-23-04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
But, but, but, robertpaulsen, I know many people who use drugs responsibly -- just to relax.
Yeah, right. People go through extraordinary measures to get their drug of choice, paying a premium inflated price in most cases, risking arrest, publicity, loss of their vehicle, home, job, family, and friends -- and they do this "just to relax, that's all".

Circular Reasoning: See "Reasoning, Circular"

211 posted on 02/24/2005 12:01:27 PM PST by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe

This party is a joke.


212 posted on 02/24/2005 12:01:47 PM PST by John Lenin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
It's also true the vast majority of conservatives, while supporting him overall disagree with his immigration policies.

But they agree with the biggest expansion of an entitlement program since LBJ? They agree with his signing the repeal of the first amendment? They agree with his declaration on 7-23-04 that " I believe that's the role of the federal government, to help people"?

Is that what "conservatives" believe?

213 posted on 02/24/2005 12:02:51 PM PST by Protagoras (" I believe that's the role of the federal government, to help people"...GWB, 7-23-04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
So when the 21st amendment repealed Prohibition, the power went back to the states, right?

The Twenty-First amendment expressly granted a federal power to assist in the enforcement of state prohibition. Yet more proof that the federal government had hitherto had no such power.

214 posted on 02/24/2005 12:03:27 PM PST by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: 54-46 Was My Number
Is it possible to have a rational discussion with you, or you merely an Internet blowhard?

hmmmmmmmmmm,,,inquiring minds want to know......

215 posted on 02/24/2005 12:08:25 PM PST by Protagoras (" I believe that's the role of the federal government, to help people"...GWB, 7-23-04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
No. Dems want on demand abortion. No questions asked. "l"ibertarians, like Ron Paul, were pushing for legislation qualifying an embryo as a human being. This would make it murder to terminate a pregnancy.

Until a strong, pro-life plank is added to the Libertarian platform, they will NEVER get my vote. Is that so hard to understand?
216 posted on 02/24/2005 12:09:25 PM PST by Antoninus (In hoc signo, vinces †)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: riri
In fact, it's probably only much undying disgust for the democrats that keeps me so.

The unifying principle of the Republican party has finally been articulated.

217 posted on 02/24/2005 12:10:46 PM PST by Protagoras (" I believe that's the role of the federal government, to help people"...GWB, 7-23-04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras

I'm not debating where Libertarians stand on every issue, personally there's quite a few I agree with them on, particularly gun rights. Free movement across borders however is not one of them and is the most important reason I cannot get behind the Libertarian party.


218 posted on 02/24/2005 12:11:52 PM PST by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest

I'm not a member of that party either.


219 posted on 02/24/2005 12:12:59 PM PST by Protagoras (" I believe that's the role of the federal government, to help people"...GWB, 7-23-04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Isn't over turning Roe V Wade a big part of that though? Even the GOP isn't touching that particular Third Rail.


220 posted on 02/24/2005 12:14:41 PM PST by Dead Corpse (The neighborhood is pretty dead at night, and I'm the one to blame....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 281-292 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson