Posted on 02/22/2014 4:21:53 PM PST by majormaturity
From the article: Young Americans for Liberty’s political action committee – Liberty Action Fund – bills itself as a youth-driven, grass-roots machine ready to harness enthusiasm for former Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, and leverage it into support for constitutionally focused and libertarian-minded congressional candidates. The PAC is an offshoot of Young Americans for Liberty, a libertarian youth organization with 500 chapters and more than 125,000 participants, according to the YAL website.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
IMO, “Young Libertarians Aim to Be Players in 2014 Elections” would make a better title for your thread.
I’m not fan of the total libertarian package but I see exactly zero future for conservatives or libertarians if we don’t find common ground to unite around.
First the Libertarians would have to be small ‘l’ Libertarians (Ronald Reagan is the best example) who are not ashamed or afraid of being Social Conservatives or lacking that, would promise to work with Social Conservatives, dropping their fight against Social conservative laws like Anti-Abortion laws and fighting the Gay Agenda, Conversely, the Social Conservatives would have to work for the Limited Government that Libertarians desire. Most already do, desiring less government in most if not all areas of their lives.
If that sort of compromise can be achieved, this collaborative movement or approach will work, if it cannot be achieved, expect more infighting that does nobody any good.
Nor am I. However, desperate times call for desperate measures.
Thank you, duly noted. I was just a bit concerned that if I used that title, some might ignore it because of the word “libertarian.” However, I think you are right - more precision is better. Thanks again.
>> First the Libertarians would have to be small ‘l’ Libertarians
Yes.
There are two prominent social issues that young folks need to understand: 1) killing nascent human life is not libertarian, 2) forcing the citizens to support and service homosexual behavior through law is not libertarian.
Not sure what you mean, but “Social Conservatives” to me means fiscally tight, but socially loose. NJ is a great example of this model. I don’t perceive the Tea Party as merely social conservatives; I see them as true conservatives - less spending, less intrusion by big gov’t. Maybe I’m wrong.
*****************************
? What is your definition of "socially loose"?
Fiscally tight (reduce spending & gov’t costs) but allowing abortion, gay marriage, pretty much anything short of screwing in public, on the personal behavior side. Freedom in terms of personal choices and life; but stay out of my wallet.
You may be completely misinformed. That does not describe a social conservative.
Visit NJ - then get back to me. Perhaps we aren’t connecting on the phrase, but the point is, can the Libertarians and Tea Party unite for a common victory? Other than that, please post the correct definition of a social conservative for my learning. Thanks.
Based on clearly anecdotal evidence, i.e., young people I know personally, they are “libertarian” precisely because they oppose the conservative social positions on gays and abortion. In that order. Gay rights is THE civil rights issue of their generation. Abortion as an issue doesn’t even come a close second. Otherwise, especially on economics, these young folks are already very conservative. With this kind of irreconcilable difference, I can’t picture a great coming together, unfortunately.
Social conservatives are pro-family, pro-traditional marriage, and pro-religion.
Case closed. You’re absolutely right.
Libertarians are serious, enough to kick in the right doors and show up and do the heavy lifting, at precinct, county, state and national conventions. Noise and youth and energy at minimum, makes a statement.
I’m seeing too little of all that among conservatives. Putting Libertarians down is a huge mistake, given the ground they gained with state convention rules that hamstrung conservatives.
Noted. Different definitions then in different parts of the country. I like your definition better.
***********************
I don't think so.
I have several black conserva-tarian friends on twitter and in the real world who say they would love to see a Cruz/Paul ticket.
Excellent example.
We have RINOS and fiscal conservatives, social conservatives. This means painting Libertarians with one brush misses all those Libertarians who will happily allign with us.
If-we-quit-calling-them-names, and pecking against their flank radicals, as if they are their sum total.
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.