“There’s a lot that I really, really like about libertarianism. Smaller government. Hands off economics. Live and let live. I love it. Big fan. What I don’t understand is why capital (L) libertarians seem to go insane once foreign policy is involved.”
Good conservatives want smaller government and hands-off economics. So does the Tea Party. There are a couple of candidates (and some new Congressmen) who share that as well, all without the BAGGAGE.
To your question about foreign policy issues - here, my FRiend, is probably the best summation I’ve seen of the important differences between Conservatives and Libertarians:
Well, this just looks like a hit list on Ron Paul. Not undeservedly, as I think Ron Paul is largely a kook.
Conservatism has different branches. The principles of conservatism are fundamentally libertarian, in that well cultivated individuals working together in common, voluntary cause are the ideal of civilization.
There are statist versions of conservatism that are more family, socially or religiously oriented. Just as libertarianism unchecked by conservative values devolves into anarchy, conservatism unchecked by libertarian values devolves into Puritanical tyranny.
I have no use for either anarchy nor Puritanism, except in the real estate between them where responsibility meets individuality.
As Ron Paul is an irresponsible crank, I'm happy to let him run wild, but he's no more an ideal libertarian than David Duke is an idea conservative.