Posted on 10/30/2008 3:21:39 PM PDT by EveningStar
This is going to be very short.
Libertarians who support Obama - both "Big L" and "small l" - are phonies. You can't be for both liberty and socialism.
Here are some examples (I'm deliberately NOT using clickable links for obvious reasons - yes, I know how to do them):
...http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/...
...http://www.reason.com/blog/...
I wish I could expand on this, but do I really need to?
Very true!
No true libertarian supports Obama.
Of course, we have a hard time with McCain too.
I didn’t know that Stalinism, the Weathermen terrorist bombers, virulent anti-white & anti-semitic, anti-First Amendment & anti-free speech thugs, ACORN massive voter fraud, and the rest of the Obama package could in any way be confused for libertarianism.
Unless by a fraud or a certifiable moron.
National Socialist Jews.
I did not know any Libertarians were going to vote Obama, this is the first I have heard about it.
The two are totally incompatable.
I agree 100%. What good is the liberty to smoke pot or peruse a bit of porn if you no longer have the right to your own property or the benefits of your labor?
Conservatives, including social conservatives, are the natural allies of libertarians, so long as the libertarians realize they are a small minority. Meaning? The social conservatives are not going to sacrifice everything they hold dear so the libertarians can get everything they want. So long as the libertarians realize who is guiding the ship, they are quite welcome to join with social conservatives to achieve smaller government.
Agreed. Obama libertarians are crackheads who call themselves libertarians because libertarians are opposed to drug laws.
I have yet to personally meet a Libertarian that is going to vote for 0bama.
I can't even wrap my mind around the idea.
Wait. Are they high? BC Bud strikes again?
Don’t be silly. They’re not crack heads.
Anyone can leave comments at Reason, and pointing out how they’re wrong isn’t difficult. The problem is that I’m almost always the person who does that. I’ve posted several dozen comments there (lately as Orange Line Special), and I rarely see someone who doesn’t agree with them. Lots of sockpuppets too.
So, if anyone wants to actually have an impact, go leave fact-based comments pointing out how they’re wrong.
Although they despise the Libertarian Party, the Ayn Rand Institute endorsed Kerry in 04.
This year over at mises.org every blog and blog response I've read has people leaning Obama. They are pissed that Barr got the LP nomination and they hate McCain's foreign policy. From reading some of the comments they are willing to take their chances with 0's domestic policy as opposed to Mac's foreign. 0 is polar opposite of everything Mises, Hayek, Bastiat and Rothbard fought for. Of course, Lew Rockwell, the head of the Mises Institute has a deep passionate hatred for Bush so I guess that is a factor.
Boggles the mind, doesn't it?
What a great way to put it.
No way under the sun to believe in libertarian ideas and be a socialist. Like being a theistic atheist....
It’s the fear of religious conservatives. They imply that most or all religious conservatives are of the Christian Dominionist - Christian Reconstructionist - Chalcedon Foundation type, who want to turn the US into a Taliban style theocracy.
I wasn't aware of ARI's endorsement of Kerry in 04, but it doesn't surprise me.
They seem to support the least religious major candidate, which is usually a Democrat.
Don't get me wrong: I love ARI and have a tremendous amount of respect for Peikoff. I've even donated money to them in the past and probably will in the future.
I've long thought the heads of ARI should just stay out of politics and work on pushing the philosophy of Objectivism. Even AR herself said it was too soon for a political party for Objectivists.
(Apparently a handful of Objectivists didn't get the memo. There is now an Objectivist Party.)
For ARI to endorse a candidate, now, is just pissing off a third to half of their supporters.
Boggles the mind, doesn't it?
And depresses the hell out of a person. :\
I remember ARI was really big on that in 04. I know a lot of Religious Right folks. Although we disagree on several things, especially religion related, they are very tolerant and respectful. Not one of them advocates or wants that type of government.
mthom: “The reasoning is very simple. Its very difficult for government to regulate your social life and they dont really want to.”
Actually, it is very easy to regulate social life, at least to the extent that social conservatives want, and the government has no shortage of enthusiasm for doing so.
The social conservatives I know believe in your freedom to do pretty much what you want so long as you aren’t harming someone else and you are doing it in private. For example, they feel homosexuality is a sin, but they aren’t in favor of rounding up or punishing homosexuals who keep their activities private. What socons don’t want is the ever increasing coarsening of public behavior.
After all, it isn't Mac who's quoting scripture in debates.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.