Posted on 09/02/2006 9:01:49 PM PDT by freepatriot32
Why would you say that? Not all democrats are big government socialists - especially not in the south.
With Term Limits, and aggressive party challengers, the trend towards socialism could be stopped without losing power.
My guess is that those people aren't really libertarians.
You're 100% right about that - unfortunately neither of those is happening.
The bigger problem is that the national GOP is in favor of the spending and other areas that are turning off traditional GOP voters. Big spenders like Bush aren't mavericks - they are the flag bearers.
Sad but True...
Libertarians abide by the Constitution to a "T". There is no special right to gay marriage; therefore Libertarians wouldn't grant the homos any. If gays want to shack up and live together that's none of your business. But they won't get any special privileges, "hate-crimes" legislation, or other benefits from the government.
And as for Foreign Policy, the last thing America needs is a bunch of dope-smoking ex-Hippies fighting a half-hearted war against our nation's enemies.
Wow, another obligatory ad-hominem, wrapped up in a stereotype. You should become a stand-up comedian.
Libertarians will defend America when attacked, and they won't be doing the nation-building, throwing money down the drain on foreign aid, or trying to spread "democracy" in the Middle East that's going on now.
Look, I don't support the LP, I support the message. If more Republicans co-opted Libertarian ideas this country would be in much better shape.
Understood, I dont hate Libertarians, but I disagree with some of their policies (whether you admit to them or not), and I think they hurt the Conservative/Right Wing Movement.
Because it's flat out true.
Not all democrats are big government socialists - especially not in the south.
Those aren't libertarians, those are classic Scoop Jackson democrats.
Wow persuavive argument there. If you don't want to back up your assertions it's ok - just don't reply or say that you don't know.
There are massive amounts of usual Democratic voters that only vote for the democratic party because of their fear of the moral majority wing of the GOP.
Unfortunately large numbers of fiscal conservatives with libertarian (live and let live) social views have to decide between voting for the christian-socialist party (GOP) or the secular-socialist party (democrats).
I already told you, but you didn't bother reading the rest of my post and quoting the part you missed.
There are massive amounts of usual Democratic voters that only vote for the democratic party because of their fear of the moral majority wing of the GOP.
Liberals.
Unfortunately large numbers of fiscal conservatives with libertarian (live and let live) social views have to decide between voting for the christian-socialist party (GOP) or the secular-socialist party (democrats).
Moderates.
your post makes no sense - you claim that such voters don't exist then when i point them out to you just classify them as something and act like they don't exist.
You acted like small government democrats don't exist but they do. You can classify them as moderates all you want but they doesn't mean that they don't exist.
Democrat libertarians just don't exist. What you're describing can be best described as either "fence sitters" and "moderates", depending on the day, time and year. Libertarians by and large spend most of their time persuading members of the GOP to defect the GOP and vote for their guy. I've never once seen Libertarians backing a moderate or a conservative Democrat. In fact, most Libertarians on this board have spent every waking moment on Lieberman threads castigating the guy, and he's everything you claim Libertarians to be. He's not. He's flat out a liberal, who to his credit, has put the country ahead of ideology.
Name one who is currently in Washington.
The GOP voting record is secular.
The Democrat voting record on all things is way out in left field.
Sorry bud, but LEAP is not representative of the average street cop, judge, or prosecutor.
You quote an organization that has just over 5,000 people, and those 5,000 are not even restricted to current or former law enforcement, any libertine doper can join, and you pass them off as Law Enforcement? LOL!!!
You failed to address any of the points that I made. Look at all of the alcohol related problems that exist in this country. Put much more dangerous substances into the public sphere (Crack, Meth, Heroin, PCP, Et El.) And just watch the chaos.
Libertines fail to realize that human beings are depraved and evil, and left to their own devices will always tend toward wrongdoing.
Did I say they existed in Washington as elected officials? I made it clear I was referring to voters, not politicians.
You replied to the post were someone said the Daily Kos guy was a libertarian leaning democrat who for example was a backer of the 2nd amendment. You then said that was impossible because they don't exist.
Did you think the Kos guy is a representative or senator in Washington?
It has been clear from the beginning that we were talking about voters and not politicians.
Maybe you've misunderstood this whole exchange, including your original reply?
So... what's your excuse?
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.