Posted on 09/15/2014 8:33:27 AM PDT by Kaslin
It was the use of a lonely 1975 opening quote to a libertarian audience as Reagan was trying to win them over to conservatism, that led me to post to you.
I’m not confusing anything, post 7 is their platform and political agenda.
You seem extraordinarily, massively, confused, which position in post 7 do you think is inaccurate, and you keep ignoring the question, why is libertarianism out to defeat conservatism, if they are merely conservatives?
Do you support the agenda listed in post 7?
http://reason.com/archives/1975/07/01/inside-ronald-reagan/print
REASON: Would you allow anything to go by way of hard core pornography as long as there are willing and consensual buyers?
REAGAN: I didn’t want the picture industry doing it. I just think it’s bad business. But I’m opposed to outside censorship.
REASON: Do you have any views as to the effectiveness of the Libertarian Party?
REAGAN: I’d like to see the Libertarian Party–I don’t say they should quit being a party–I’d like to see them, I’d like to see the conservatives, I’d like to see some of these other parties maybe come to this remnant of the Republican Party which is basically conservative in its thinking and, I think, akin to the philosophy I’m talking–I’d like to see them all come in (and this would include a large segment of the Democratic Party in this country, that certainly proved in 1972 that they do not follow the leadership of the Democratic Party any longer) and be able to say to them, OK we’re not saying to you give up what you’re doing, but, can’t we find a common meeting ground in order at least to defeat first of all those who are doing what they’re doing to us (and this present Congress is an example)? I think this is the most irresponsible and most dangerous Congress, in my experience, that this country has ever had. I think we’re seeing it in the crumbling now of our position worldwide, their attitude in Indochina. Maybe many of the young people that you write for, with their hatred of war and disillusionment with what went on, don’t feel this way and any thought of Indochina is going to be a red flag to them; but, for the first time in 200 years, the United States has violated its word, has abandoned an ally that it pledged to help and we’re seeing the result. Mr. Kissinger came home from the Middle East empty handed because even the Israelis said, "What? Give up the passes on the basis of your word that you will help us? We now see evidence that maybe you won’t help us. You can’t guarantee your promise." So the dominos fall. To me this is what’s most important–if we could all make a change in that Congress that now has a two-thirds majority.
I think the Republican Party should take the lead and, as I say, raise that banner and say this is what we stand for. And what we stand for would be fiscal responsibility.
Thanks for putting my straight. I ran into a couple of these guys and could not show them my point of view and could not figure what was going wrong.
It seems to me that republican does not equal conservative
After flirting with the idea and making the acquaintance of a few influential Libertarians in my state, I arrived at a few conclusions that led me away. The naive aspect of big “L” Libertarianism is that the world shares those values in the least. If they were to ever achieve their dream in this country, it would not last the year. The country would be overrun, divvied up and carted off to far less accommodating climes. Also, the denial of the basic humanity of a child in the womb is another major sticking point. I understand why the use of government force to compel a woman to endure a condition against her will is opposed by them, but there’s a far more compelling, life or death matter at stake for the other individual involved.
Yep, in that lonely 1975 interview he was courageous enough to speak on their social liberalism and stick to his guns on prostitution and gambling, and their weakness on national defense.
Even as a candidate, speaking to libertarians, Reagan was doing a pretty good job of trying to save the sane ones and make them conservatives.
I remember the libertarians of the time, as some learned more about how leftwing their agenda was, they moved over into the conservative column and abandoned libertarianism, growing up helped that, as did quitting drugs.
Your comments about drug addiction being decent and prostitution being humane are not depictions of libertarian positions.
There is a difference between being legal and being considered decent.
Your arguments and misstatements illustrate the exaggerations about libertarians common on these threads.
post 7 is their platform and political agenda.
Not really but I will go along for a bit. Where is a reference that post 7 is their agenda?
This says almost the direct opposite.
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Libertarianism
No. Liberals are FOR higher taxes and bigger government. Their eagerness to legalize drugs is proof of that.
“Liberals are FOR higher taxes and bigger government. Their eagerness to legalize drugs is proof of that. “
Huh?
I don’t see the proof. How does that work?
Liberals?
Are you starting a new libertarian party? Libertarians for higher taxes? Lol
You Lie.
Taking text out of context is lying. You should go to work for NBC News. They are good at doing what you just did.
Are you a social liberal, against social conservatism?
In post 44 you responded to a poster that told you that social conservatism is a problem for libertarians, and you seemed to agree with him, so what is it, are libertarians social liberals or social conservatives?
This libertarian is for liberty, lower taxes, quite small government, drugs to become illegal again. I want my freedom back.
Natural allies???
Hell No. Natural enemies, is more like it. Conservatives would rather vote for Jeb, Christie, Mitt, etc.... over Rand Paul anyday.
Definitely not - but Reagan wanted to take the Republican Party in a conservative/libertarian direction (and had some success on that front, sadly not permanent).
You want freedom? Yet you want to TRASH responsibility.
With great freedom comes great responsibility.
When you grow up and put down the bong pipe, perhaps you may become a conservative.
There are both. The social liberals predominate, in numbers as well as in having their views published. There are, however, social conservatives who see overbearing government leading to great wrongs in attempting to enforce morality, which by all rights should be taught at home, and individuals who are not taught morality in the home are not going to behave morally.
I see a lot of that in Ted Cruz
However the moderates, including the rove camp, are very strong in the party.
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.