Libertarian wing of GOP gains strength in Congress

washingtonexaminer.com ^ | 1/24/14 | Susan Ferrechio

[muir_redwoods]

Virtually no republican will get elected w/o the support of disparate groups that need to find away to get along. A straight, social conservative will find it hard to win in the vast majority of districts. A straight libertarian won’t win in these districts either. The TEA Party could be the banner to unite these groups. I have no problem with social conservatives who understand economics and that morality is best supported from the pulpit and not congress. I have no problem with libertarians who understand the value of tradition and personal discipline.

Purists can enjoy the warm feeling they get looking at the results when the democrats won again knowing they never compromised their conscience. We all need to be able to compromise and seek unity to save this republic. Our enemies are united.

[PapaBear3625]

I hate Democrat policies because they are big government. I hate Republican policies that support and encourage big government. How does being against unnecessary, intrusive government make me an anarchist?

I also consider myself a "small-l" libertarian. There are some "social conservatives" who are all for big government, as long as SoCons get to have a say in what the big government does.

[andyk]

You and others in the GOP seem to love to talk about dope. I just don’t get it!

I believe that the interstate commerce clause in no way gives the federal government the power to control private activities of free citizens within the several states. I really dont care what your state does.

How is that controversial?

[Old Sarge]

The only hysterical statements are your denunciations of me.

I have been to Libertarian rallies in the past. Privately, attendees all confide that the real party platform is decriminalizing drug use. Not limited government, not over-taxation, not foreign policy, but smoking free dope.

Many other FReepers have experienced the same epiphanies at Libertariran rallies. I don’t see you hysterically denouncing them, yet, but then the weekend hasn’t started.

You and I do agree, though, that “small-L” libertarianism is different from the “big-L” Libertarian Party. Especially where the Libertarians are nothing more than Leftist sock-puppets designed to dilute the anti-Left gene pool (as was proven in the Virginia governor’s race).

The only one making hysterical accusations is you. the only one heaping personal invective is you. You are not worth my time. Welcome to The List.

[dirtboy]

The 'Free Dope' is a strawman argument. Do you think the fedgov has the proper Constitutional authority to tell a state what they cannot do within their own borders - such as someone growing a pot plant in their basement for their own use? BTW, I don't smoke pot, I drink instead, and the fedgov felt compelled to pass a Constitutional amendment to have the proper authority to ban that.

You might want to read Clarence Thomas's dissent in Raich - maybe you wanna call him a free dope pothead as well?

[Timocrat]

I have been to Libertarian rallies in the past. Privately, attendees all confide that the real party platform is decriminalizing drug use. Not limited government, not over-taxation, not foreign policy, but smoking free dope.

As a libertarian I've also spent a lot of time around other libertarians and most of them approach the drug problem from a utilitarian standpoint. The war on drugs has achieved nothing except filling the prisons up with non-violent offenders but substantially increased the violence on the streets. The main focus of the official Libertarian Party ( with which I have a number of disagreements) is Limited Government as their masthead clearly shows See Here .

The Cato Institute which is the leading libertarian policy foundation spends very little if any of its resources on legalizing narcotic drugs. Cato has been at the forefront of promoting limited government while country club republicans have been quite happy to keep the government as big as possible including doling out subsidies to its corporate clients.

The problem with social conservatives is they are quite happy to be "The Tax collectors for the engorged welfare State" just so long as they are in power. When was the last time the Republican party in power made radical cuts to government spending ?

[andyk]

+1, well said.

[Magnatron]

I heard a great line the other day by a comedian:

“I can’t be a Democrat because I like to spend the money I make. And I can’t be a Republican because I like to spend the money I make on drugs and hookers!”

[Finny]

Amen, andyk. You have hit on the main reason I rarely bother to post on FR any more. I’m a conservative Christian, yet every time I support a libertarian principle or policy, I get accused of being a drunk, dope-smoking, homosexual child-molester.

I hate Democrat policies because they are big government. I hate Republican policies that support and encourage big government. How does being against unnecessary, intrusive government make me an anarchist?

WELL SAID!!

[Finny]

I also consider myself a "small-l" libertarian. There are some "social conservatives" who are all for big government, as long as SoCons get to have a say in what the big government does.

Well said.

The small-l libertarian Republicans advocate "conservatism" under one of several definitions of the root verb, "conserve." We apply "to use sparingly" as the essence of the conservative approach. We seek to cut government and use it sparingly -- it's what we mostly mean when we say "conservative."

They advocate "conservatism" under the other meaning of the root verb "conserve," "to protect from harm or decay." That is the essence of their approach. "Conservative government" to them means using the same government authority to "protect from harm or decay" American decency from a specifically anti-Christian set of evils such as abortion and the norming of homosexuality even to kids, which I abhor as much as they do (see my tagline) and passionately regard as an evils to be run out of Dodge.

However, I know that the Founders thought that using government to do it would be in vain. That's how they wrote the Constitution.

I can only hope that FR's all-libertarians-are-anarchists contingent represents a small portion of Americans, because refusing and alienating a vast segment of small-l libertarian Americans who stand on the same side of the river as we Christians, is dumb. I am a limited government conservative Christian. Small-l libertarian seems pretty Christian to me.

[Finny]

The Cato Institute which is the leading libertarian policy foundation spends very little if any of its resources on legalizing narcotic drugs. Cato has been at the forefront of promoting limited government while country club republicans have been quite happy to keep the government as big as possible including doling out subsidies to its corporate clients.

The problem with social conservatives is they are quite happy to be "The Tax collectors for the engorged welfare State" just so long as they are in power. When was the last time the Republican party in power made radical cuts to government spending ?

Bravo!

[ex-snook]

"When was the last time the Republican party in power made radical cuts to government spending ? "

When was the last time we weren't at war or nation building?

[Finny]

Old Sarge won't be reading this because I am now on his "The List" of FReepers not to read, because I called him on his ludicrous implication that the libertarian wing of the GOP (specifically NOT the Libertarian party) was advocating "smoking free dope," which by ANY logical interpretation means "dope provided for free and smoked without any legal prohibition." I described it as a hysterical and false accusation, which is what it was.

Old Sg comes back talking about how he's been to Libertarian rallies in the past, etc. etc. That valuable time he isn't going to waste anymore reading my posts, was badly spent in the first place because apparently he doesn't really read posts, he skims them and responds emotionally.

I will still read his posts because like nearly all FReepers, he has valuable insight. He will stop reading mine solely because he is proud and narrow-minded.

[Old Sarge]

No, I will stop reading your posts because you’re thread stalking.

[tanknetter]

+1.

Gallup has a poll out showing that 73% of Americans see bug government as the biggest threat out there.

But that 73% will easily allow itself to fall victim to the kind of divide and conquer tactics that give the Dem power again and again and again.

If there was a functioning right of center government we could argue semantics. But we dont and this is now about survival. We Conservatives damn well better figure out how to form a coalition with the “libertarians”.

[tanknetter]

Big government, not bug government. Freudian slip, not autocorrect that time ... ;-)

[muir_redwoods]

I have no religious feelings or leanings at all. I don’t think I’m unusual in that I wouldn’t have any problem voting for a religious conservative. The convergence for us is economics. Libertarians would never favor any encroachment on religious freedoms and almost half small “L” libertarians are pro life.

Somehow we libertarians and social conservatives need to combine efforts to get the socialists out of our country. The republic’s very survival depends on it.