[Rate_Determining_Step]

(who thinks that both libertarians and objectivists ignore the obvious conclusions to be drawn from the respective philosophies.)

That would nice, but Libertarianism as such doesn't address philisophy - just politics.

Only the most ill-informed, casual thinking Libertarians claim that their political party is an integrated philosophy.

It is entirely acceptable and non-contradictary to be a mystical, anti-reason, altruistic, collectivist dope smoker and still be a Libertarian. I have unfortunately met more like this than than any group this side of the Greens. This included *Democrats* (!)

Suffice it to say, these traits are not Objectivism.

I was a Libertarian before I wised up. I don't see what an Objectivist can learn from "Libertarianism".

[OWK]

It is entirely acceptable and non-contradictary to be a mystical, anti-reason, altruistic, collectivist dope smoker and still be a Libertarian.

Not if the non-aggression principle (the cornerstone of libertarian political advocacy) is followed to it's logical conclusion.

Are there non-thinking dolts who call themselves "libertarian" because they think it sounds cool, without ever having bothered to find out what it is?

Sure.

Are there pointy-headed pseudo-intellectuals who stretch objectivism into all sorts of contortions to make it fit their worldview (making it essentially useless)?

Absolutely.

But that isn't an indictement of either libertarianism or objectivism. It's an indictment of dolts and pointy-headed pseudo-intellectuals.