The Libertarian Vote and Republican Prospects

CATO ^ | David Boaz and David Kirby

[Zeroisanumber]

If by leaving it to the states, you mean the people and/or the legislature, then fine by me. Afterall, it is the Constitutionally-correct position.

Agreed.

But some leading libertarians are not so willing to leave it to the states. Pat Buchanan wrote an article not too long ago calling for a truce in the Culture War, in which he basically called for a states rights approach to social issues, including marriage. But "Reason" magazine's Nick Gillespie took issue with that by taking the thorougly leftist, thorougly absurd, position that such a truce is not acceptable because the Constitution demands abortion and gay marriage rights, and as such, the unenlightened masses of backward states must bow to a wiser rule of federal judges.

I disagree with Gillespe. Abortion and gay marriage are no more a federal issue than legalized gambling, and both issues should be left to the states. The only exceptions that I could see to that would be issues of racisim or religious descrimination which are urgent enough to require federal intervention/mediation.

Obviously, Gillespie does not speak for all libertarians, but he is one of the most visible mouthpieces for libertarianism on television. Still, I may be giving him too much credit for influence among libertarians, but it would be nice to hear more libertarians take your stated position.

Speaking for Libertarians is sort of like speaking for a herd of cats: You might be making the most noise, but we're pretty much going to do our own thing regardless.

The modern Libertarian position really formed itself around the later career of Barry Goldwater, who's committment to small government and individual rights was an excellent example of the Libertarian ideal.

[Sam Cree]

I don't think that libertarians are particularly believers in pure democracy, which is as likely as any other form of government to foster totalitarianism.

[mgstarr]

If the current Republicans actually practiced more of what they have preached, I'd vote for them. I've voted absentee and it was split three ways. Perhaps I'm just less dogmatic in my "old" age.

Lesser of two evils is hardly a winning strategy folks.

If this group of "conservatives" bore some kinship to the class of '94 I'd be interested, but it doesn't.

Like relatives who've overstayed, this Republican congress has started to smell for my tastes.

And yes, I'm now a registered Libertarian.

[Darkwolf377]

Lesser of two evils is hardly a winning strategy folks.

Of course it is. Never in my life has there been a party that reperesented exactly what I want. I imagine that's the same for 90% of people. Government itself is a necessary evil, so at election time it's ALWAYS the lesser of two evils.

[mgstarr]

Wow, so much for principal anymore.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Why don't you guys run as Republicans. There's plenty of room in the GOP for Libertarians. If they can have a RINO wing and a Christian wing, then they surely can have a Libertarian wing.

The LP itself is a joke - and I consider myself a small L Libertarian.

[Moonman62]

I thought libertarians liked going directly to the people for the decisions in the form of referendum votes.

They like that because it relieves them of the actual responsibility and accountability of governing. They would much rather whine and cry on the sidelines about how everybody else does it wrong.

[Trailerpark Badass]

Anti-gay marriage, pro-life, GOP-voting libertarian here, checking in.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Really? Is that why Republicans are poised for such a stunning electoral victory?

Where are the Libertarian stunning victories?
Holding a town water committee or school board position doesn't count.

[Zeroisanumber]

Why don't you guys run as Republicans. There's plenty of room in the GOP for Libertarians. If they can have a RINO wing and a Christian wing, then they surely can have a Libertarian wing.

There used to be a very strong pro-business Libertarian wing, but it's been steadily shrinking since the Reagan years.

The LP itself is a joke - and I consider myself a small L Libertarian.

True dat. One of my Libertarian friends said that the biggest obstacle to getting more rational people into the LP is the fact that right now it's a haven for cranks, stoners, and outright nuts.

[Zeroisanumber]

Where are the Libertarian stunning victories?

I'd claim Jesse Ventura, but then I would become depressed and ashamed.

[Aetius]

I don't think I disagree with anything you say. As a nation, we have elevated protections based on race and religion to the Constitutional level, so one can make a case for federal intervention (leaving aside the whole debate about the Incorporation Clause of the 14th Amendment). At no point, however, have the people consciously given consent to the idea that issues at the center of the Culture War (abortion, marriage, etc) rate as inalienable rights beyond democratic/popular control. And its certainly not the role of judges to arbitrarily say otherwise.

[Darkwolf377]

Yes, that's right--wanting to prevent the democrats from taking over and destroying my country means I have no principles.

[Celtman]

The drop in support from Libertarians?

      You misread the article. 

Article:
"The libertarian vote is in play."

That's libertarian, not Libertarian.  Please do not confuse the two.

[mgstarr]

Sadly no.

[freepatriot32]

ping

[zeugma]

Lesser of two evils is hardly a winning strategy folks.

If this group of "conservatives" bore some kinship to the class of '94 I'd be interested, but it doesn't.

Like relatives who've overstayed, this Republican congress has started to smell for my tastes.

Worth reposting. Ditto for me.

I've always been fairly libertarian in my outlook (more just a strict adherance to the Constitution really), but have figured the 'pubs were better for us than the 'rats. I'm not sure at all that this is the case any more. I was always a fan of split government. Perhaps we'd be safer with that, than what we have now.

[CWOJackson]

If the "libertarian" vote is in play given the war and all they are confused children. Unlike Libertarian confused Children.

[tpaine]

"-- Abortion and gay marriage are no more a federal issue than legalized gambling, and both issues should be left to the states. The only exceptions that I could see to that would be issues of racisim or religious descrimination which are urgent enough to require federal intervention/mediation. --"

Zeroisanumber

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I don't think I disagree with anything you say. As a nation, we have elevated protections based on race and religion to the Constitutional level, so one can make a case for federal intervention (leaving aside the whole debate about the Incorporation Clause of the 14th Amendment).

At no point, however, have the people consciously given consent to the idea that issues at the center of the Culture War (abortion, marriage, etc) rate as inalienable rights beyond democratic/popular control.

And its certainly not the role of judges to arbitrarily say otherwise.

Aetius


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


In the 14th Amendment the people consciously gave consent to the idea that life, liberty, or property cannot be denied without due process..

Justice Harlan recognized:     

"-- The full scope of the liberty guaranteed by the Due Process Clause `cannot be found in or limited by the precise terms of the specific guarantees elsewhere provided in the Constitution.
This `liberty´ is not a series of isolated points pricked out in terms of the taking of property; the freedom of speech, press, and religion; the right to keep and bear arms; the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures; and so on. 
It is a rational continuum which, broadly speaking, includes a freedom from all substantial arbitrary impositions and purposeless restraints . --"


Thus, -- "issues at the center of the Culture War" do indeed rate as inalienable rights beyond democratic/popular control.
They are protected by due process of Constitutional law from arbitrary and purposeless impositions..

[tpaine]

That's libertarian, not Libertarian.  Please do not confuse the two.

Celtman


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


If the "libertarian" vote is in play given the war and all they are confused children.
Unlike Libertarian confused Children.

CWO

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


A 'childish' comment.

Proposed new Libertarian party platform

Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1656559/posts


SECTION IV. FOREIGN AFFAIRS

Principles:
Except for circumstances of imminent national danger, a military policy of restraint and disclosure is best. While 9-11 proved that we cannot predict the future or propose a "one-size-always-fits" military policy, we should limit our military operations to those countries that attack or pose an imminent national security threat to the US. We should stop using the military to meddle in the internal affairs of other countries. The glaring exception would be necessary action to prevent mass genocides where no other force can reasonably prevent it.

Our military should be strong, prepared and sufficiently equipped to do their job.