Posted on 09/30/2013 9:24:47 AM PDT by shego
During his Ironman 21-hour speech, Sen. Ted Cruz read excerpts from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, name-dropped "libertarians" at least six times, and yielded to Sen. Rand Paul, who invoked Frederic Bastiat's "What is Seen and Unseen," a favorite among libertarians.
Ted Cruz, who retained remarkable composure over the long night, seems in all things deliberate. Political leaders seem to have become more comfortable talking about libertarians, even identifying themselves as such. Libertarians may have reached a tipping point within the Republican Party.
Last week, a FreedomWorks study on public opinion found that libertarian views within the Republican Party are at the highest point in a decade, today representing 41 percent of Republican voters....
We define libertarians as those who favor "smaller government" and think government should not promote "traditional values." Using this method, FreedomWorks data show that 41 percent of Republicans and Republican leaning independents are libertarian today.
Two separate data sources, Gallup and ANES, show the same trend: that libertarian views are at the highest point in a decade....
Of course, as I've have noted previously, not all these libertarians self-identify as such and many don't know the word. But even that seems to be changing, and it's not just Ted Cruz.
Sen. Rand Paul calls himself a "libertarian-leaning Republican." Glenn Beck now considers himself libertarian, saying "I'm a lot closer to Penn Jillette than I am to Chuck Hagel." Matt Drudge recently tweeted his frustration with Republicans on Syria, saying it's now "authoritarian vs. libertarian." According to FreedomWorks' poll, only 10 percent of Republicans "don't know" the word libertarian, compared to 27 percent nationally.
The data confirm that libertarian views may well have reached a tipping point in the Republican Party.
(Excerpt) Read more at cato.org ...
Actually, me and Jim Robinson and freerepublic and all conservative freepers at this conservative site are only resisting leftist/libertarian, gay agenda politics.
You seem truly fascianted with the whole gay thing, using plays and songs to make arguments for homosexualizing the military, making up lies about the Vietnam era military pursuing homosexuals to enlist because they were so exceptional.
You posted numerous patriotic enlistment posters seeing lesbians and homosexual recruiting in each of them.
You seem obsessed not only with advancing gay politics, but with the entire homosexual experience.
So you think culture is a function of government, then.
You asked about them. You denied that it happened. I responded to your purient interest with facts.
I know how much you prefer your purient fantasies to facts.
You make post after clueless post where you don’t understand what we are posting, you just make up your own versions.
Taxed Enough Already.
Sure, that sounds like a group that is really about abortion. Right. /sarc
He seems reality oriented to me.
Note that the US did pretty well without restrictions on immigration (except for the ban on importation of slaves after 1808) for a long time. During that time we even paid off the national debt.
This is a political forum discussing the homosexual agenda as politics, you seem immersed in it at a level of emotional obsession with little interest in the issues or politics of the gay agenda. Even your personal attacks seem to reflect your interest in sexuality rather than politics.
I have never seen at FR such an aggressive, dishonest and radical, and passionate and so bizarrely emotional, pro-homosexual push as you have made on this thread, it is good for you that JR is not currently available to see it.
this is a political forum discussing Ted Cruz.
Why do you want it to be all homosexuals all the time?
Get counseling.
Odd that you seem to think that my support of a competent military means something sexual.
Get counseling.
You really do just make things up, what we call lying.
No one said the tea party is about abortion.
What you did and what is probably the habit and trait that keeps you in permanent ignorance, is to ignore the polling on what kind of people make up the tea party that was actually posted and the subject of the post, and just make up something else entirely.
The royal family of the Ottoman empire seemed able to reproduce without marriage.
That is the counter example to ‘all societies have marriage’ argument.
Certainly Tea party people are on both sides of abortion/life. The Tea Party, to my knowledge has no position on it.
Certainly there are social conservatives in the Tea Party. The Tea Party is not a social conservative organization. Rather it is a organization devoted to fiscal responsibility.
Just as there are Roman Catholics in the Tea Party. Still, the Tea Party is not a Roman Catholic organization, and has no position on RC doctrines.
The polls of what kind of people are in the Tea Party are irrelevent.
The Tea Party put aside concerns on social conservatism of lack of same, and joined together to promote fiscal responsibility, because that is (1) needed, and (2) subject to wide agreement.
LOL, actually the people in the tea party are overwhelmingly pro-life and anti-gay marriage, and religious, that is shown in the polling in post 119.
As far as what the tea party focuses on, read post 402 and notice that is what I said.
Do you realize how much time you waste by just ignoring our posts or worse, changing them entirely?
Read the second sentence.
To: 4Liberty
Actually the largest group within the tea party are social conservatives, even what is known as the religious right, it doesn’t have that many libertarians.
They know what they are focused on right now, but they are not social liberals, so don’t think that is where they are if the question arises.
402 posted on 10/3/2013 12:41:53 AM by ansel12
I guess we're doomed to sink into a cultural wasteland now that the government is shut down.... [/s]
shego, this is freerepublic, you cannot just keep making up fake quotes for people.
Show me the quote.
See post 420.
They are largely social conservatives, but the Tea Party is not an organization to promote social conservative policies.
The decision was made not to permit the distraction of social conservative parties because to do so would detract from the message of fiscal conservatism.
Of course you may want to add it back in so the Tea Party would run up a string of failures. I would rather win with this group on fiscal conservatism.
I figure he has you there.
Exactly, look at post 420.
Now show me the statement that you claim is there.
“””You’re the one who said a failure of government to follow your policies would lead to the ruin of culture.”””
Cut out the quote and show me saying something in post 420 that I didn’t say.
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.