There is nothing in Libertarian principles that justifies murder. In fact, of course, murder flies in the face of the basic tenet of Libertarianism.
Thus, it is nonsensical to say that Libertarian principles require that people be at liberty to murder their babies in the womb.
Article is BS, he’s basically describing Libertarian Party members, not unaffiliated libertarians.
While he’s mostly right about the social and economic issues, outside the LP there is no general libertarian foreign policy.
On this thread so far, it seems the tactic will be to say that “no we aren’t like the libertarians that actually vote their values by voting for a libertarian party platform, we are actually conservatives just like you, pro life, strong national defense, and conservative economics.
Pot legalization is the most important issue in the country. National bankruptcy is small potatoes compared to that monumental issue. /sarc
Most of the recent presidents have been more authoritarian.
Carter, Bush the 1st, Clinton, Obama....
What's the author been smoking? Self-described independents are more likely to accept a communitarian philosophy then anything that might be described as "soft libertarianism". How else to explain the California's voter? In 2008 the state overwhelmingly chose Obama to be their president, then they turned the page on their ballots and voted against homosexual marriage. They didn't conform to the author's ideal of fiscal conservatism combined with social libertinism - instead they showed themselves to want the exact opposite. They liked Obama's left-wing economic policies; Obama's social liberalism was a liability for him, one which he successfully downplayed.
True libertarians are essentially anarchists. I don’t trust them anymore to lead than I would a left winger or a hard core right winger with draconian rules.
There is a necessary amount of law required. The more moral and self policing the citizens are, the less is required. The more amoral or immoral and unrestrained the citizens are, the more laws are required to maintain peace and order.
The Founding Fathers recognized that our form of government is only effective when dealing with a basically moral citizenry. As the lack of character and decency increases, our countries ability to function decreases.
Extremely false. The author of this article has no business writing for an organization called the "Small Government Times" if this is his thesis.
Libertarians are people who share the ideas of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Samuel Adams. There is no "foreign and social policy liberal[ism]" in anything they did, not in the way the word "liberal" has been perverted these days (to mean crypto-Marxist). Libertarians have nothing at all in common with the foreign and social policies of those who call themselves "liberal".
As far as being an "economic conservative", I'm not even sure what that means anymore after 8 years of GWB (which includes 2 years of signing off on Nancy Pelosi budgets, as well as things like Medicare Part D).
What exactly are the principles of being "economically conservative"? That phrase will turn out to mean a) nothing at all; b) "Marxist wrapped in conservative rhetoric"; or c) libertarian. If there's a fourth possibility I'd be most appreciative to be enlightened as to what that might be.