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.
(o)
Sounds sensible. Won't happen though. The only way to get any libertarian ideas in place is to elect Republicans (or even Dems) that have libertarian beliefs (like Ron Paul).
Completly untrue. Libertarians simply believe that forcing others to believe as they do through coersion is wrong.
The State does not exist to provide you with a giant gun to point at people whose behavior/tastes you don't like. Its only purpose is to protect individual rights- remember "free will"? That's where virtue comes from, and virtue is what made this Republic great.
The law varies between the states, but I believe some states implement your model. A felon who's served his time can re-apply for suffrage, with those such as your example being granted it. I like this system.
"True moral-liberals looking for true conservatives."
Yeah, whatever. Most small 'l' libertarians such as myself who usually to vote Republican (I live in Manhattan, so I often have the luxury of a protest vote), think government should stay the hell out of the morals business. And out of the business business. Nothing turns me off more than a Republican telling me how to live my life - that's the job of Democrats and other lefties.
True conservatism is about getting the government off our backs and keeping it off. I trust the marketplace. And that includes morality. People need to learn to be moral by acting moral - and not depending on the government to enforce morality. And if you can't convince people to adopt your morality without using the government to shove it down my throat, then suck it up. In that case you lost in the marketplace of ideas, and it is not the job of the government to prop up marketplace losers. That, my friend, is called communism.
"Completly untrue. Libertarians simply believe that forcing others to believe as they do through coersion is wrong.
The State does not exist to provide you with a giant gun to point at people whose behavior/tastes you don't like."
Hear, hear!
Their fiscal conservatism was certainly demonstrated in their behavior in the Ohio and New Mexico elections.
Alright. Works for me.
Libertarians oppose social programs, true. But on the social issues, they're way to the left of the liberals.
Libertarians want the government out of abortion, drugs, suicide, prostitution, pornography, and gambling, favor gay rights, and believe that "children always have the right to establish their maturity by assuming administration and protection of their own rights, ending dependency upon their parents or other guardians, and assuming all responsibilities of adulthood."
(ie., if a 13-year-old girl goes out on her own, supporting herself by prostitution or pornography, she's an adult.)
OK, all you conservatives out there! Let's hold hands with the Libertarians.
I know, it's sad. The Republicrats have erected too many barriers for third-party participation in the political process. The problem with someone like Ron Paul is that at some point the party leadership will force him to vote against his conscience and for big government. Like George Washington said, parties are self-serving.
I am not saying legalize those things. What I am saying, however, is that the Founding Fathers intended all those things to be State issues since they aren't specific powers given in the Constitution to the Federal gov't.
Fair point, but a decade is not enough. They need to repeat the vote qualifier of maintaining a body temperature of 37°C for a period of 18 years.
Greed IS good. What on earth are you doing in FR (instead of DU) if you have a problem with people getting rich?
The only name I recall was sinkspur, so I guess a "PING!" is called for (since I'm mentioning him).
You have to hand it to President Reagan though. He gave it his best shot. It didn’t take. Sad.
Good (if you're the sort of person who belongs here rather than amongst the government-worshippers of DU).
"For example, you know we wouldn't be seeing these eminent domain abuses currently in front of SCOTUS if the Libertarians had any significant representation. I certainly don't see the Republicans or Democrats doing anything for these people."
Right. And it is worth noting that the White House was set to file a brief supporting the right of the city to use eminent domain. This is like the brief the White House filed in the Michigan affirmative action cases that supported affirmative action in principle. WTF!? Nothing galls me more than when Republicans get behind leftist causes. Eminent domain is communism pure and simple, and then we find Republicans about to go along? Thankfully, the
White House came to its senses and did not file the brief. But the fact that they even considered it, let alone worked on it, is cause for disturbance. Right now, Reagan is spinning in his grave so fast, we could hook up electrodes and power New York for free.
That makes you a kook. Disagreements on drug policy are expected. But immediately flailing into such exaggerations and personal accusations with so little evidence is absurd. It’s a sign of immaturity at best or perhaps emotional problems. Either way, it’s counter productive to promoting your beliefs.
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.