[DeuceTraveler]

I found this on Boortz's homepage. PJ O'Rourke and other libertarians also were against the war which is why I haven't felt much love for the libertarians.

[Drango]

I think I'm beginning to understand why the Libertarian Party has a tough time getting the respect one would like to see.

Does the blue guy ring a bell?

[optimistically_conservative]

One would think with the looney left leaping like lemmings over the proverbial cliff, the libertarians would position themselves as passionate patriots preferring a different approach to peace and prosperity than Bush has taken.

But no, they will do the impossible and seem loonier than the lefties.

[buffyt]

I used to be Boortz's number one fan. Bought his books and gave them to graduates. Kept a stack of them on hand for just that purpose. One time I wrote an email to him and instead of ignoring it or writing back to tell me he disagreed with me, he wrote back using all foul language, four letter words. I thought that was totally inappropriate. I lost all respect for him right then. I am a lady and I don't even know him personally. My worst enemies wouldn't use language like that. He is course and rude and his 'fame' has gone to his wee little head.

[Maelstrom]

Quite a few libertarians are for the war, which is why I'm now Republican.

[xrp]

Get his name right, it is 'Neal' not 'Neil'.

[LowCountryJoe]

In their own words on their web page, the Libertarian Cato Institute states that they promote "individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and peace" - the basic components of true freedom.

Was this not good enough for the citizens of Iraq? I guess that according to them (the Libertarians) all despotism must be countered, without aid, through revolution and the sweat, tears, and blood that accompany it.

Hey, didn't France help us? Yea, sure, they did gouge us and they were serving their own interests...hmmm this is sounding familiar.

[mhking]

It took long enough...I was wondering how long it would be before they went after Neal.

The LP's take on the War on Terror was enough to chase me out of the Party blame near two years ago.

As long as they side with the Dems on the war, they're gonna continue to look as if they are drifting even farther afield than they already are.

[LanPB01]

I listened to an interview with P.J. O'Rourke while the Iraq war was going on, and he didn't sound against it to me. In fact, I can't recall the exact wording, but I remember he made some comments about how the Iraqi army deserved what they were getting, based on the damage they caused to Kuwait in the first Gulf War.

[Redbob]

"...these investigations could signal a return to abuses directed against civil rights protestors of the 1960's..."

And God knows there were no Communists or bomb-throwing subversives involved in those protests!
</sarcasm>

[Cultural Jihad]

... will have a substantial impact on the public's perception of what the LP stands for;

The only thing holding the LP down in the mind of the public is the LP. In the open marketplace of ideas, the public consumer well sees their shabby political product sitting on the electoral shelf, and wisely walks away from it.

[Snuffington]

PJ O'Rourke and other libertarians also were against the war

You sound confused. P. J. O'Rourke is a solid Republican, and while he might have made fun of some silliness about the way the war was conducted, he didn't oppose it.

[Diddle E. Squat]

I'll vote for Boortz over the 'Star Trek convention' segment of the Libertarians.

[Britton J Wingfield]

PJ is a Republican.

Small-l libertarian, no doubt, but registered with the GOP.

[Liberal Classic]

Bless you, Neal.

[Central Scrutiniser]

I am libertarian in my beliefs, but I think the party is a huge joke. Boortz has a great show, and I'd love to see him give a great speech there.