Stan Jones is the head of the LSC (Libertarian Smurf Caucus) and occasionally suffers bouts of dementia brought about by a lifelong addiction to smurfberries. 
Posted on 11/08/2006 2:27:12 PM PST by quidnunc
New York – Glum Republicans might turn their attention to the Libertarian Party to vent their anger. Libertarians are a generally Republican-leaning constituency, but over the last few years, their discontent has grown plain. It isn't just the war, which some libertarians supported, but the corruption and insider dealing, and particularly the massive expansion of spending. Mr Bush's much-vaunted prescription drug benefit for seniors, they fume, has opened up another gaping hole in America's fiscal situation, while the only issue that really seemed to energise congress was passing special laws to keep a brain-damaged woman on life support.
In two of the seats where control looks likely to switch, Missouri and Montana, the Libertarian party pulled more votes than the Democratic margin of victory. Considerably more, in Montana. If the Libertarian party hadn't been on the ballot, and the three percent of voters who pulled the "Libertarian" lever had broken only moderately Republican, Mr Burns would now be in office.
Does this mean that the libertarians are becoming a force in national elections, much as Ralph Nader managed to cost Al Gore a victory in 2000? Hope springs eternal among third-party afficionadoes, but the nature of the American electoral system, which directly elects representatives in a first-past-the-post system, makes it nearly impossible for third parties to gain traction. The last time it happened was in the 1850's, when the Whig party dissolved over internal disputes about slavery, opening the way for the emerging Republican party to put Abraham Lincoln in office. And acting as a spoiler is dubiously effective at achieving one's goals. In theory, it could pull the Repubicans towards the Libertarians, but in practice, it may just elect Democrats, pushing the nation's economic policy leftwards.
(Excerpt) Read more at economist.com ...
Yes, the GOP did plenty to lose the election, but the GOP base came out and voted anyway.
Yes, the GOP leadership has less spine that a jellyfish and have left conservative values.
But the liberalism of the libertarians pulled votes in close elections.
Libertarians are more inclined to want to hurt conservatives (and thus the security of the nation) than they are with winning (they haven't got a chance of that).
Stan Jones is the head of the LSC (Libertarian Smurf Caucus) and occasionally suffers bouts of dementia brought about by a lifelong addiction to smurfberries.
anti-defence
Libertarians support a strong national defense.
and pro-drug.
And people aren't using drugs now even though they're BANNED?
Besides:
Republicans for Choice
Log Cabin Republicans
Main Street Partnership funded by Soros
Your dog isn't hunting.
Ouch!!! LOL
And least we forget the Spitting Druid...one of the stars of the LP that year.
You just keep telling yourself that, and paying higher taxes.
Trust me...like a whole lot of people I won't be forgetting their treachery any time soon.
The Republicans kicked themselves in the 'nads. They have no one to blame but themselves.
If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path. ~Ronald Reagan
You do enjoy your threats.
Nope, not a threat, simple reality. A concept that seems to elude the cut of their nose to spit their face crowd.
So, that leads me to a little quiz and a conclusion to be drawn.
Question 1: Which party suffered most because of Libertarians votes? dhimmicrats or the GOP?
Answer: GOP
Question 2: Which party benefited most from Libertarian votes? dhimmicrats or GOP
Answer: dhimmicrats
Question 3: Who benefits more from dhimmicrat victories? Terrorists or the USA?
Answer: Terrorists
Conclusion: Libertarians votes benefited terrorists and dhimmicrats more than the USA.
The real reason is because they were too busy feeding at the public trough!
I think that the Democrats will take at least three seats in the Senate as a matter of historical precedent. That means that we are fighting over three seats, and the DNC will chip away little by little until they get enough traction to make a fight out of it.I think that their tactic is to portray a vote for an incumbent GOP running for re-election in Congress, as a vote for Bush, the war, the Dubai port deal, illegal wiretapping...
A 15 seat swing in the House is doable.
Proponents of "in-your-face", "ignore the media" politics are foolish.
Now it's time for big-time politics, not for Jerry Springer antics, and big-time politics require effective mass propaganda dissemination.
We need to retool our media handlers, they are failing the GOP miserably.
If media is a six-shooter in the gunfight known as politics, we have to stop walking up to the OK Corral with empty holsters.
88 posted on 03/06/2006 10:36:41 PM EST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
Who'd have thunk it!
Me employable by the Psychic Friends Network.
Bridges to nowhere--spend, spend, spend!
"If you knew anything about basic physics you wouldn't worry too much about a dirty bomb. In fact, given the data on radiation hormesis, it might actually reduce the incidence of cancer and lead to greater public acceptance of nuclear power."
LOL!!!
All the nuts are out today.
(Celebrating, really.)
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.