sounds good to me!
REAGAN: If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path.
That is wrong. Liberatarian is a deeply immoral philosophy. Liberty for me, but not for thee. Look, I don't care what consenting adults do in their bedroom, but the social science is in. Children do best when raised by their married biological parents. Virtually all of the hot-button social issues ultimately reduce to consenting adults putting their own self-interest ahead of the best interests of the children.
I know libertarians aren't likely to be swayed by conservative social scientists like James Q. Wilson. So instead pick up some books on evolution like 'The Myth of Mongamy', 'The Triumph of Sociobiology' and 'The Blank Slate.' The lesson is simple: it is a good evolutionary tactic to invest time and energy raising your own biological children. It is a bad evolutionary strategy to invest time and energy raising someone else's child.
Not sure how we’ll reconcile the differences on the WOD unless social conservatives concede it’s not in the governments power to enforce.
Only if Allen Buckley, fake Libertarian for senate in Georgia, is flayed alive.
The idea a tax lawyer could seriously be considered a Libertarian is bad enough. The fact Buckley threw the senate race into a runoff is unacceptable. However, it was not Buckley's fault, it was the libtards who voted McCain/Buckley, not the card carrying Libertarians who voted Barr/Buckley. What a freaking joke.
If you live in Atlanta, and need a tax lawyer, DO NOT take your business to Buckley. Let Buckley starve.
Ron Paul for example became popular because of his stances on spending, immigration reform, and, of all things, legalization of drugs. Unlike Ronald Reagan, who more than anything else, presented real solutions for the problems of his day, the Republican party has grown rigid and out of touch with contemporary America's problems. Many conservatives did not vote for Mitt Romney just because he was a Mormon. Talk about out of touch.
Conservatives will just have to bite the bullet on this one and recognize it's better to have something all the time instead of trying to have everything all the time and getting nowhere. That's just the reality of politics.
“Conservatives could, however, adopt the combination of economic populism and social conservatism advocated by Mike Huckabee and others.”
HA! Yeah if they wanted yet another big government socialist phony.
There is no tension between libertarians and conservatives. They are one and the same. The only tension is between libertarians and socialists and their cousins the neocons.
I think a big step for conservatives would be to once again recognize and revisit the genius of federalism. Conservatives must hold their noses in the short-term when it comes down to issues such as legalization of drugs, homosexual rights(maybe even marriage *cring*), certain expressions of speech, porn, etc. Abortion, is of course murder and should be outlawed at every level of government, but other issues may be a moral hot button for conservatives who want to see them banned from the entire USA, but were never actually intended to be treated as such by the Constitutional framers.
This type of movement would not solve every moral social problem that conservatives want to solve through government, but would once again give the type of freedom and free thought vital to a healthy Republic, which in turn will give opportunity for local governments to ban immoral activity. As we have it now everything is all or nothing as far as vice and virtue goes. Both can be taken too far.
Sorry, but in my book there's no such thing as "big-government conservatism". Not possible, an oxymoron. Above all, I believe the very definition of a "conservative" is someone who believes in smaller, limited government. If you're for expanding "big" government, you're NOT a conservative IMHO. Hence, neither Bush I nor Bush II has EVER been a conservative, and describing either as such is insulting to true conservatives.
I doubt the social conservatives would ever let the LIBERTARIANS be in their Party. That is why the GOP lost.
Maybe coalition if either - Neocons leave the GOP or they kiss Ron Paul’s arse in Macy’s window next Election Day.
.
Libertarians that suppport socialists are socialists, not libertarians. This is pretty simple stuff. Even the legal scholars in America should be able to get a handle on that.
All right!!!!!
sure any Libertarians that aren’t stoned....let’s meet at a booth in Denny’s
sounds good to me!