And the fop orating on that stage is being laughed at by the vast majority of rational people, those whose religion is not their ideology.
I don't belong to any political party but find myself agreeing with the LP more and more. I know these kinds of theads always generate heated debate, but I think I need a bumper sticker that says, "I think I'm Libertarian!"
I'm a LP member, but I (and many other libertarians, small "l" and big "L") part ways with the party line on this issue. 9/11 was more than an act of terrorism - it was an act of WAR by a group of foreign religious fanatics who are hell-bent on our annihilation. Securing the borders and clamping down on immigration is a necessary step we must take in order to preserve our unique American freedoms for ourselves and our posterity.
* How Cato, and most Libertarians, think the war on terrorism has lost focus and no longer pertains to America's vital interests.
True. If we're really serious about stopping terrorism, we have to end the latest "War on a Noun" (i.e. terror), and recognize that we have a real enemy (radical Islam), which is just as real as the Japanese Empire was in December 1941. The "War on a Noun" approach has failed miserably when applied to other nouns such as "Drugs" or "Poverty", but in this case it cannot be risked: our national survival is at stake.
* The fact that Cato and typical Libertarians oppose post Sept. 11 corporate subsidies.
Libertarians oppose ALL corporate subsidies, regardless of the circumstances.
* The opposition of Cato and most Libertarians to military tribunals: "The Bill of Rights is more than scrap paper. And it applies to all persons, not just U.S. citizens."-Robert Levy, Cato's senior constitutional studies fellow.
Sorry, fellas, you missed this one, too. The scumbags at Gitmo have committed war crimes by plotting and carrying out horrific acts of terrorism against civilians, and are sworn enemies of America. I have no problem with trying these bastards before a military tribunal, and frankly, I believe that even American citizens (such as Taliban Johnny) that commit such acts should be afforded the same treatment.
It is desperately poor, and a bedroom community for illegal aliens who work in the ski resorts. A high percentage of other residents may have reason to fear or be unhappy with their country. It is traditionally a refuge for many who don't quite fit into today's society.
To think that because Libertarian's are thriving in Leadville you can build on that to win offices in Colorado or the United States might be just a tad overly optimistic.
Just my two cents worth. I don't have time to get into a philosophical debate about the Libertarian Party so if I don't make it back to answer the flames you'll know why. I just wanted to shed a little light on the town for those who are not familiar with it. BTW, I love the place and have for many years. If Libertarians can do something for the town, I'm all for it.
I like Libertarians because they are outspoken on issues of personal liberty. Its good to have them at your back in a fight.
Most Conservatives are what I call "small L" libertarians, and we have a lot in common. I have toyed with the idea many times of abandoning the Repubs for the Libs but I have not done so for the following concerns:
#1 Contrary to the above quotation, Libs seem to be very hostile to religion. I wonder if a believer can ever be comfortable with these guys.
#2 I am not ready to abandon the war on drugs. The fact that the war never ends doesn't bother me; the war against murder, and theft, and other kinds of crime never ends either. But I recognize that drugs are different; most of us are familiar with them at some level. But most of us have also had to fight to keep drug use out of our families. So before I am willing to legalize, I need to sort out a few issues:
If drugs are legal, by what right do we prohibit Madison Avenue advertising, promoting their use? If we legalize their use, do companies still have the right to refuse employment to drug users? Can we refuse public benefits to people who are unemployable due to their drug use? Can I shoot the guy who is trying to sell to my kids?
#3 There is nothing wrong with implementing immigration policies to exclude citizens of enemy nations, who are not refugees from those nations. There is nothing wrong with limiting numbers of immigrants to numbers that can be assimilated. I agree, though, and have said, that the Mexicans wading the river to look for work are not a danger to the culture... the leftists born here are a danger to the culture.
#4 A lot of Lib criticism of Repubs have to do with the fact that, as Repubs are part of the governing coalition, they are forced to deal with the fact that at least 50% of the voting public is socialist. Libs, once they are in actual elective office, and have to deal with the same realities, will have to face the same kinds of compromises. But Repubs have gotten used to being beaten up, and beaten down, and are maybe a little too quick to compromise. And Libs are effective in winning socialists over to our side, I assume due precisely to their more liberal stance on social issues like drugs, etc.
And the fop orating on that stage is being laughed at by the vast majority of rational people, those whose religion is not their ideology.