[steve-b]

You do touch on an esoteric dilemma of the very corruptible nature of politics, questioning if libertarian politicians would invariably become part of the problem they propose to solve.

I daresay that if libertarians were elected, in fifty years they would be as corrupt as the current crew. Well, we will have had fifty years of restored freedom, and having to fight the same battles again and again is the way of life.

[pghliberty]

This is why the LP has attempted to be philosophy based rather than a "team" like the democrats or republicans. What does "republican" mean any more? Caving in to Big Steel and Agriculture (so much for free trade...)? Flip flopping on environmental baloney? Bailing on privatizing even 1% of social security? Claiming victory by giving democrats "only" half of what they want? The team name has supplanted much of the real ideology.

To be libertarian by definition requires a base philosophical set of rules. Evaluated on the aforementioned total departures from “platform” (although such a term implies more stability than clearly deserved), if republicans had similar (any??) standards, George Bush, by definition, would no longer be republican.

Instead, and alas, “Hoorah!” for the Republican Team.

In any event, to use your own terms, even just 50 years of something libertarian is better than the near total abdication of professed ideology exhibited by republicans at the moment.