[dcwusmc]

Well, if your brand of "conservativism" is diametrically opposed to (l)ibertarianism and (l)ibertarianism is about personal liberty and the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land, it's obvious, isn't it? You are anti-freedom and anti-Constitution. Simple. And the words just flowed right out of your fingertips, didn't they? "Conservativism and Libertarianism are diametrically opposed. This article doesn’t belong on this website. Neither do you." Who'da thunk it???

So if it's not personal freedom and the Constitution you're wanting to conserve, WHAT IS IT you want conserved? The new, modern socialist or fascist state? A different brand of authoritarianism? What?

[The_Eaglet]

I see conservativism and libertarianism as overlapping categories. They are not identical. I find Paul appealing for his conservative positions and those positions that are both conservative and libertarian, such as limited government (especially on the federal level), no federal income taxation, and deferring to the reserved powers of the states and the people (USC Amendment X, etc...).