Posted on 11/16/2012 3:21:20 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
Not all are for national defense, open borders, etc. It’s a more diverse platform than that.
It’s more about not wanting people’s lives micro-managed by Statolatrists, who are prevalent in both the Republican and Democrat parties. Respect for liberty implies accepting that others may have values & lifestyles divergent from your own.
Not all are for weak national defense, open borders, etc. It’s a more diverse platform than that.
It’s more about not wanting people’s lives micro-managed by Statolatrists, who are prevalent in both the Republican and Democrat parties. Respect for liberty implies accepting that others may have values & lifestyles divergent from your own.
Because most of them don't take drugs, but they do pay taxes. Most libertarians I know are straitlaced workaholics. What they hate is wasting law enforcement resources on victimless crimes when there are lots of thefts, robberies and rapes that could be investigated in greater depth instead of being dumped into cold case files. Some of the money saved from not imprisoning perpetrators of victimless crimes could be spent on longer sentences for thieves, robbers and rapists. Their perspective is that the state should not be shoehorned into the parental role - that role is best performed by each individual's actual parents.
Well said. I personally know of one LOSERtarian who voted that way in this election. The individual is on call/email block for eternity.
I’ve changed my stance on Drugs substantially over the past decade.
I have no use for dopers or meth heads.
However, if we believe the basic theories of economics, and if we look at what we should have learned from prohibition, it becomes obvious that the current drug laws:
1) Make the wrong people rich
2) Are responsible for 50,000 dead south of the border.
Cary Nation set the stage for Al Capone.
Tough drug laws have very negative consequences.
Most of them I know are also pro-Open borders.
Why is the Nanny-State OK when it is Republicans issuing the marching orders?
You can try to sugar coat it any way you want... You’re free to bury your head in the sand, but you can’t hide from the fact that the republican party’s nomination of a northeastern liberal with an anti-gun, pro-gay, liberal judge appointing, pro-abortion past was what just “cost America big time.”
I was repeatedly informed by Team Mittens' representatives on this site, throughout the entirety of 2012, that:
a.) ... as a socon, my views and desires were "statistically insignificant" and "fringe," and therefore did not merit serious (or even grudging) consideration or inclusion; AND, simultaneously --
b.) ... as a socon, my lone, individual vote was absolutely essential, and the only sure thing standing between The Forces of Light and C'Thulhu's Extra-Dimensional Army.
At no point whatsoever did the thundering cognitive dissonance absolutely inherent in those two violently antipodal viewpoints occur to any of them, however fleetingly.
So, obviously, then: they ended up blaming Mittens' epic electoral belly flop on voter fraud. ;)
I 100 percent blame the Republicans who wanted Romney to begin with. Anyone with a brain knew he was the worst candidate ever chosen to be the Republican candidate. The problem I have with us conservatives is that we are forced to settle for the lowest denominator each and every time. When have we ever had the candidate of choice? We keep voting for the crap they put in front of us. I still believe that if Bloomburg somehow got the Republican nominee in 2016, that most on Free Republic would be talking about how great the guy is. I just think that we have not taken a stance on principles in so long that we forgot what it is like to do so.
Another druggy robbed my apartment ~ he was eventually caught and was discovered to have murdered two people.
Frankly, in my experience, there's always something with these guys that ends up proving they do not become devotees of the doctrines of ahemsa.
small l libertarians are just as if not more conservative than most so called conservatives..
we believe in a literal interpretation of the constitution..
we do not want to be ruled over by the federal government, regardless of which side of the political spectrum the feds are ruling by....
revert to the constitution and most if not all our nations problems will just go away, THAT is what we believe in..
which would you rather have, a party that has a cool platform that gets discarded once in power, or a platform that you can 80% agree with, can work to change, and know that once elected will stick with the platform?
In other words, do you like being deceived or not?
What he said
Might be a sharp spike at the beginning of the campaign, but eventually things drop off ~
The experience of China is before us ~ uncontrolled use of opium based drugs ended up costing them nearly two centuries of civilization and resulted in tens of millions of deaths.
Agreed. Police state tactics in response to a moral collapse is what we’ve been doing. Drug use is a symptom of that moral collapse. So, we respond by taking away Constitutional freedoms for everyone, leaving us open to the proverbial knock on the door in the middle of night, well, no, they don’t knock.
Unfortunately too many parents are no more mature than their offspring. A few years back the 'state' of Missouri, had to restrict driver licenses for 16 year old new drivers graduated up to the age of 18. WHY because the stupid parents ignored and neglected to supervise their own children.
My exposure to dopers is limited but there is a wasteland of burned up minds creeping and crawling all across this land. There is no liberty in burning up ones brains. What is the cost of to tax payers caring for and coping with fried brains?
Every time a Republican loses an election some whiney Republican cheerleader comes out of the woodwork and rather than blame the candidate that lost, blames the libertarians because they didn't vote Republican. Well I have a bit o news for ya Jack:
As one of the other posters pointed out, Libertarians are not Republicans. Think about it.
AND, because they're NOT Republicans, why do you think that they should vote for Republican candidates? From a Libertarian perspective there isn't a whole lot of difference between the two major parties. Both are hell bent on increasing the size of government and making it more intrusive. Think back as to who gave us the
Until the Republicans decide to stop embracing socialism and being Democrats Lite and actually represent CONSERVATIVE values, then don't expect Libertarians to vote for anyone BUT libertarians. You don't expect Republicans to vote Libertarian do you? SO why the hell should you expect Libertarians to vote Republican?
It seems a pretty simple concept, but one that eludes many Republicans.
>>Why is the Nanny-State OK when it is Republicans issuing the marching orders?
Most of the comments by the rock-ribbed conservatives in this thread are incredible. Have we really become such totalitarians that we are ready to kick the libertarians out over the failed and useless “War on Drugs”? We have to face facts: we lost this election over vagina issues (abortion and birth control). We could have beaten the blacks and hispanics, if we had not scared away the single white female vote. We could learn a lot about real conservatism from the libertarians.
I've always thought that, too. Even when I was still a Republican, I didn't like the way so-called conservatives crapped all over Libertarians instead of courting them.
Maybe some of the Conservatives out there who value their values more than the 'elephant brand' had just had enough.
The GOP ran the most liberal candidate they had. If Ron Paul was more liberal, and the GOP (now) thinks it needs to be more "moderate" (read:LIBERAL) then why didn't the GOP run Ron Paul? Obviously, he would have gotten more votes if the analysis and claims here are correct.
You can't have it both ways, but We can clearly see: It is every one elses' fault.
Not the GOP,
Not the people who have thrown pro-lifers, pro liberty, pro-Constituion , anti-police state people under the bus EVERY ELECTION SINCE REAGAN!
You figured the guy from the other side was enough to drive people to the polls to vote for the candidate who was last on this side of their list? Kinda 'hopey/changey stratergy, ain't it?
How dumb do you think the people are?
We can plainly see the ongoing march toward totalitarianism, no matter which party is in power, right foot, left foot, all in the same direction.
Talk about an "Entitlement Mentality"!
The GOP isn't entitled to anyone's vote just because their candidate smells a little less like crap than the other guy.
You reach a point where people won't vote for either. Some of the American people spoke: "None of the Above", some protested the Major party tickets, and voted third party.
That is the Right of every American, right down to writing in their grandma if they so choose.
In a POTUS election year, if you want votes down ticket, you run someone at the top who will get the base out.
That did not happen. So just what did you expect?
The GOP has been tossing the base under the bus throughout the campaign, and here you are, instead of courting the libertarian (small 'l') vote for the future, you're putting the boots to people who voted their conscience, blaming them for YOUR loss. You think that is going to bring people into the GOP tent? Not without a firebrand.
When you folks are done in the blame-placing echo chamber, turn out the lights. We won't wait up for you.
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.