The Repub party needs to go back to it's roots of limited government and personal responsabilty.
Leave nanny statism to the dims.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
To: Blackirish
To: Blackirish
According to our research, about 15 percent of American voters hold libertarian viewsabout the same share of the electorate as the religious right, You wouldn't know that from Free Republic where the fundies have purged so many conservative-libertarians in their attempts to "purify" the party.
3 posted on
10/25/2006 11:15:40 AM PDT by
Dracian
To: Blackirish
This article is stupid on many levels. Just one example-why is a libertarian complaining about the refusal to give a government subsidy for research on embryonic stem cells?
9 posted on
10/25/2006 11:23:12 AM PDT by
almcbean
To: Blackirish
Spell check is your friend.
10 posted on
10/25/2006 11:24:12 AM PDT by
Protagoras
(We are not free because we are great, we are great because we are free.)
To: Blackirish
If "libertarian" means it's a-okay to tear babies limb from limb by abortion, and that man marrying man equals many marrying woman, please count me out!
To: Blackirish
The weird thing is, the social conservatives are less nanny statists than the so-called "moderates" who always vote for all the social programs that are offered to fix the problems created by a lack of moral values.
And judicial branch of the government ordered moral indifference and unborn child murder is hardly less government. Personal responsiblity has long been dead. No one has to fund their own retirement, educate their own children, pay for the research on or drugs for their sexually-promiscuously acquired venereal diseases, and on and on. Hostility to religion and any kind of moral social structure -- like a nature based, reality based, traditionally based definition of marriage -- has left no one but the government responsible for the disasters people make of their lives. The more responsible you are, the more baggage you have to pick up and carry for the irresponsible.
America gave up on freedom a long time ago.
15 posted on
10/25/2006 11:35:25 AM PDT by
The Ghost of FReepers Past
(Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
To: Blackirish
Both parties are involved in pushing America into hell, both financially and socially. It's only a matter of how fast. Repubs just go a little slower than Dems.
One World Goverment is the goal and America must be destroyed to achieve that end.
To: Blackirish
Libertarians have a few planks in their platform that fit well in a conservative Republican platform.
Evidence of that is that Libertarians often vote for Republicans to have any chance to move those issues forward.( taxes, property rights, gun ownership).
If Libertarians (at best) make up 15% of the Republican vote, it is a fools errand for them to attempt to take on the Religious Christians that make up 85% of the entire American population.
If Libertarians want queer marriage, legal drugs, abortion, high taxes, banned guns, no property rights, and a expanded Federal Government, they can vote for the RATS.
Its the Libertarian's choice to determine the issues in their platform that mean most to them. Its not up to Republicans to change to accommodate radical ideas to appease them.
You can't blame Republicans for some of the nutball things in the Libertarian platform.
28 posted on
10/25/2006 12:15:58 PM PDT by
Beagle8U
(Demonrats want the Gays out of Congress.....stand back and let them purge their base.)
To: Blackirish
The Repub party needs to go back to it's roots of limited government and personal responsabilty. I agree completely!
Also important to saving the Pubbies is the spouting of ID/Creationist nonsense, Intelligently Designed to destroy and discredit the Conservative Movement.
29 posted on
10/25/2006 12:16:04 PM PDT by
DoctorMichael
(A wall first. A wall now.)
To: Blackirish
As the Republican base fragments and Christian conservatives consider a fast from politicsChicken Little, is that you?
32 posted on
10/25/2006 12:27:24 PM PDT by
MEGoody
(Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
To: Blackirish
Before I go and read the whole article, I have to know if the definition of triangulation as being between libertarian and the social right is yours or theirs. I always thought that triangulation was Clinton term for threading the needle between the left and the middle, a sort of domestic form of the "Third Way".
38 posted on
10/25/2006 12:36:09 PM PDT by
Eva
To: Blackirish
Leave nanny statism to the dims. A significant segment of the Religious Right has not been supporting Republicans for the proper reason - because Republicans will fight for freedom of worship against Democratic legislation that tries to curtail it. Rather, they have stayed on board in the hope that their beliefs would some day be written into law. Thus, there is anger at Bush for not doing enough to advance the social conservative agenda - they want laws passed, not speeches.
The grand coalition is fragmenting a bit.
43 posted on
10/25/2006 12:40:45 PM PDT by
Mr. Jeeves
("When the government is invasive, the people are wanting." -- Tao Te Ching)
To: Blackirish
It's bad enough for the liberal media to pile on, but now the National Review is doing it too.
55 posted on
10/25/2006 1:05:52 PM PDT by
Moonman62
(The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
To: Blackirish
Republicans should reembrace the libertarian principles of the party. They should return to Reagans fiscal conservatism and Goldwaters social tolerance. Boaz and Kirby are themselves libertarians, so there's no surprise in their recommendations.
They may be right, but 1) social issues are a lot more complicated and divisive than they were in Goldwater's day, and 2) globalization has advanced a lot since the Reagan years.
Hands-off "social tolerance" means something different now than it did in 1964, just as a hands-off laissez-faire economic policy can be expected to have different consequences than it would have had in 1980.
104 posted on
10/25/2006 2:07:41 PM PDT by
x
To: Blackirish
the libertarian vote for Bush dropped from 72 to 59 percent, while the libertarian vote for the Democratic nominee almost doubled. Republicans margin among the libertarian swing vote thus narrowed by 31 points.What? That makes no sense to me. Someone tell me how that works.
124 posted on
10/25/2006 2:39:20 PM PDT by
PjhCPA
(C&R is worse than RINO)
To: Blackirish
Leave nanny statism to the dims.
Agreed.
To: Blackirish
Still looking for the fantasy land of Libertania?
Some children never grow up.
To: Blackirish
I think that this article is pretty close to the truth.
I always saw 1994 as a libertarian wave. I'm a weak to moderate libertarian, but enough of one to have a horror of Democrats in power.
The GOP leadership has been pushing people like me away, and they need to quit it.
179 posted on
10/25/2006 5:39:59 PM PDT by
Jim Noble
(Some moron brought a cougar to a party, and it went berserk.)
To: Blackirish
The articleis replete with fallacy afer fallacy.
For one, Libertarians are almost an extinct breed and bear little or not relationship with independents.
Another fallacy is that the republicans have polarized the nation...far from it! It is the left wing Godless infiltation of the DEMOCrapic party that has polarized the nation.
The rest of the article is just more gobbledigook.
230 posted on
10/25/2006 8:31:25 PM PDT by
eleni121
("Show me just what Mohammed brought:: evil and inhumanity")
To: Blackirish
And leave the dims at home, crying in their pillows because they lost another election they were "supposed to win". It will be high humor and great entertainment seeing the knashing of teeth among dims this November 8th. LOL.
238 posted on
10/25/2006 8:41:07 PM PDT by
phoenix0468
(http://www.mylocalforum.com -- Go Speak Your Mind.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson