Primative Weapons
See other Primative Weapons Articles
Title: Libertarians Are Taking Over The Republican Party
Source:
The Daily Caller
URL Source: http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/15/l ... ing-over-the-republican-party/
Published: Jan 16, 2015
Author: W. James Antle III
Post Date: 2015-01-17 00:08:54 by Hondo68
Keywords: Libertarian Republicans, come to an accommodation, national aspirational message
Views: 93845
Comments: 144
Former Michigan Republican Rep. Thaddeus McCotter says his party’s future belongs to the libertarians.
It’s a message McCotter has been spreading in interviews and to anyone who’ll listen. He’s even laid out his case in a smart book, “Liberty Risen: The Ultimate Triumph of Libertarian-Republicans, where he claims libertarians even have something to say to the Budweiser-drinking, boxer-wearing, pro-life, Boston sheet metal worker.
Most Republicans who hype the libertarian moment are libertarians themselves. Not McCotter. He is a Russell Kirk-quoting social conservative. “I’m not a libertarian,” he jokes. “I just play one on TV.” But while fellow social conservatives like Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum slam libertarianism, McCotter believes the GOP will find a way to integrate libertarian activists who care about government surveillance the way it once assimilated evangelical Christians who cared about abortion.
“When I was still in Congress I noticed younger Republicans saying, ‘I am a conservative, but I’m libertarian on some issues,’” McCotter told The Daily Caller. “They hadn’t grown up with Reagan and seen how [conservatism] had worked. All they had seen was the decline of the Republican Party.”
“Now if you read your Russell Kirk, you can’t be both a libertarian and a conservative at the same time,” he added. “But America being what it is, you can be whatever you want.”
In the past, Republicans might have used “libertarian” as a codeword for moderate. Arlen Specter, for example, liked to describe himself as an “economic-fiscal conservative and a social libertarian.” But libertarian is no longer a Republican euphemism.
“Moderate Republicans would like Common Core,” McCotter told TheDC. “Libertarian Republicans wouldn’t like it.”
According to McCotter, the shift isn’t just political and generational. It’s mainly cultural. “The 21st century doesn’t operate top down,” he said. “You wouldn’t let someone else program your iPod. Why let a top-down bureaucracy choose your health care?” The consumer-driven, highly personalized economy will eventually have an impact on a bureaucracy mostly designed in the distant past. He quotes Andrew Breitbart as saying, “Politics is downstream from culture.”
The Libertarian Party won’t go away, he said, but libertarians who actually want to govern will do so as Republicans, like presidential candidate and former 12-term Texas Rep. Ron Paul, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul and Michigan Rep. Justin Amash.
Libertarian Republicans can come to an accommodation with social conservatives, McCotter said — note that all of the above libertarian GOPers are pro-life. Even when they disagree on the substance of a social issue, he argued they can agree federal judges shouldn’t be the final arbiters of morality. He also believes “the failure of the neoconservative movement and even some of the realist movement” and a “war-weary” country gives libertarians an opening on foreign policy by appealing to voters who want to “crush the terrorist threat there without creating a government threat here.”
That doesn’t necessarily mean Rand Paul will be the next Republican presidential nominee, however. “2016 may be too soon,” McCotter told TheDC. “In many ways, Senator Paul has an advantage in that his father was the pioneer, in other ways it’s a disadvantage.”
“Libertarian Republicans need a national aspirational message,” McCotter said. “That’s hard to do, because libertarians are so individualistic.” Purist libertarians will resist, but liberals and conservatives aren’t immune to infighting over ideological points themselves.
If Rand Paul did win the nomination, McCotter doubts many Republicans who disagree with him would sit out the race. He noted the tight 2008 Democratic contest in which Barack Obama upset Hillary Clinton, concluding, “They kept their eyes on the prize, which is the presidency.”
Poster Comment:
Mittards will be assimilated
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-69) not displayed.
.
.
.
#70. To: redleghunter (#67)
No, libertarian conservatives... Goldwater, Reagan, and Buckley
Reagan was a Conservative. It is revisionist history to call him of the libertarian brand.
"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa
Wait for it. They'll post the following Reagan quote, typically leaving off the second paragraph. "If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so- called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is." "Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path."
From the horses mouth...
Oddly enough, he kept saying that he was a libertarian conservative, in interviews for years. Got a conspiracy theory to cover that?
He rejected self-proclaimed libertarians who were "almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy." Got a conspiracy theory to cover that?
Who didn't and doesn't? You are purposely being disingenuous when you try to claim all or most people who call themselves Libertarians are anarchists,but that's what you need to do to maintain your own political stances and protect them. ANY sane person over 12 years old knows there has to be some sort of organized government and rules to be enforced to protect the public. What is important is which side of the divide you fall on in most cases,the side of "You're not the boss of me!" like some sort of petulant 8 year old,or the side that thinks the government exists to promote their viewpoints and punish anyone that doesn't agree with them.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
The LP. Read their platforms over the years.
Good video. I am not convinced Reagan was of the same mind of a post modern libertarian. He believed in a strong national defense, overseas national interests, did not conceive the thought of pot legalization and most importantly advocated the overturn of Roe vs Wade. You have libertarians like tpaine who would like "Creator" erased from the Declaration of Independence. Reagan would never entertain such. He would call todays libertarians Democrats, Republicans Rockefellers, and the Democrats Marxist. 30 years ago the labels meant different things.
"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa
That's a flat out lie, and you know it. We were discussing that phrase in the declaration, and I remarked that the it still made perfect sense without mention of a specific god, a Creator, --- while acknowledging that indeed, there must be a creator. What in hell is your purpose, what do you gain, by putting out such a petty lie about me and libertarians? Get a grip on your silly overly religious zeal.
But the entire statement on rights is null and void if you take out "Creator." You would then have to take out "endowed" or add some other 'force' endowing. And the 'human spirit' or good will of the people can't be it as George III was part of that subset.
"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa
This was our original discussion on a different thread. Anyone that bothers to read it will see your petty lie.
Endowed by what exactly? Something or Someone is endowing.
"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa
Evidently Jefferson and Washington had similar feelings on the issue, but unlike the wealthy Washington, Jefferson's debt prevented him from being able to free what he did not own. [snip] Because Jefferson died deeply in debt, most of the other members of the Monticello African-American community were sold at auction and dispersed among different owners in Albemarle and surrounding counties. " www.monticello.org/site/j...son/jefferson-and-slavery "At the time of George Washington’s death, the Mount Vernon estate’s enslaved population consisted of 318 people. Washington himself had been a slave owner for fifty-six years, beginning at eleven years of age when he inherited ten slaves from his deceased father. Washington’s thoughts on slavery were contradictory and changed over time. This evolution culminated near the end of his life; Washington’s will mandated the freeing of his slaves upon his wife’s death, making him the only slaveholding Founder to put provisions for manumission in his will."
Nice research. I was unaware that Washington inherited slaves from such an early age. That must have been shortly after he chopped down that cherry tree that we've lectured The Children about ever since. : )
You aupport the snuffing out of innocent children. Regardless of how old the child is. Killing your kid isn't self defense. Self defense is when some old grouch atheist comes up to you to steal your roku, because his is broken. Then you put him down like an old dog.
I seem to recall someone chiding me the other day about this sort of thing... At least Fred talked me off the ledge.
1: It's not a kid until it has been born. Until then it is only a potential kid. 2:Since it is only a growth inside her body and endangering her life,removing it IS self-defense,just like removing a cancerous tumor. Self defense is when some old grouch atheist comes up to you to steal your roku, because his is broken. Then you put him down like an old dog. You can't even get that right. Killing somebody for stealing isn't self-defense. It is defense of property,not life.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Proving that you are a moron. It isn't a kid, but 1 minute later it is a kid. Science never was your strong point. You support murdering innocent kids. That have nothing to defend themselves with. That is one of the reasons you will burn. Because you deserve it. You can always repent if you so choose. It would be the wise thing to do. I hope you get right in the head Pete. I really do.
Yes a baby is just a tumor. Like you continually demonstrate. You are not only the enemy of law and morality but of science.
Tell that to the dead man who was put down like an old grouch even though he was a young black man. He just wanted the dudes shoes. He received a bullet instead.
Oh,the irony! You support murdering innocent kids. That have nothing to defend themselves with. That is one of the reasons you will burn. Because you deserve it. Getting wood over thinking about it,ain't ya?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
It's not a baby. It's a fetus. Speaking of science,what branch of science is it that states "Life begins at erection."?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
You probably think that makes sense,don't you? 1: That's not just stealing because you have to physically assault or threaten someone's life to steal their shoes. 2: What fantasy world is it that you live in that has young black thugs lusting after old man's shoes?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
No Pete. I actually like you and acknowledge that you have some good characteristics. It is just a couple or 3 subjects that you remain willingly ignorant. Issues that I consider important.
Police in Miami Township, in Montgomery County, said Jawaad Jabbar, 16, was at the Dayton Mall Saturday with some other teens attempting to get a pair of new, limited-release Air Jordan’s that were going on sale. Watch this story | Watch police news conference When he failed to get in line in time to get a pair of shoes, police said, Jabbar decided to rob someone who had the shoes. He approached two men just outside the mall and showed a gun, police said. http://www.wlwt.com/news/police-teen-killed-at-dayton-mall-was-trying-to- rob-man-of-shoes/30352428
I agree. I didn't put in every detail about the roku above.
People like to pretend. You are one of them. It's not a baby. It's a fetus. It's not a human it's a nigger. Same argument. You have no shame.
So did you ever get your wireless to connect to the TV or Roku from the metal shop building 100' away? I recall the discussion at LP. You got some good advice there from several people. You owe us a followup.
I have a roku. Also got the chromecast. The chromecast seems much better at streaming content from your desktop/harddrive. I use the chromecast much more. There is an app for chromecast called videostream. It is a great app. I've had the roku for a lot longer though.
Reagan : "But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path."
Where's the rest of the paragraph?
fe·tus
What he said in the paragraph was all well and good, but he reiterates that conservatism and libertarianism are following the same path. You do understand that, right? Your agenda here seems to paint libertarians as "anarchists". Nobody but you and the other So where's the rest of the paragraph?
You really are too stupid and lazy to google things for yourself.
That's your fallback line every time you are busted. Therefore you use it a lot.
That's your fallback line every time you are busted. Therefore you use it a lot. I typically use Yahoo or Bing rather than Google, but none reach into the nether world of this poster's musings.
Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president
The older the better.
You two really need some supervision while surfing the interwebs. The seventh entry from that DDG search: Reason: Inside Ronald Reagan, 1975 Halfway down the webpage, you'll find the entire paragraph you were too dumb to find on your own.
Comments (110 - 144) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest"liberaltarians'?
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#71. To: hondo68 (#70)
(Edited)
No, libertarian conservatives...
#72. To: redleghunter (#71)
Reagan was a Conservative. It is revisionist history to call him of the libertarian brand.
#73. To: redleghunter (#71)
It is revisionist history to call him of the libertarian brand
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#74. To: Palmdale (#72)
(Edited)
Wait for it. They'll post the following Reagan quote, typically leaving off the second paragraph. [1975 Reason Magazine interview]
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#75. To: hondo68 (#74)
Got a conspiracy theory to cover that?
#76. To: Palmdale, hondo68 (#75)
He rejected self-proclaimed libertarians who were "almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy."
#77. To: sneakypete (#76)
Who didn't and doesn't?
#78. To: hondo68, tpaine (#73)
#79. To: redleghunter (#78)
You have libertarians like tpaine who would like "Creator" erased from the Declaration of Independence.
#80. To: tpaine (#79)
#81. To: redleghunter (#80)
(Edited)
libertysflame.com/cgi-bin...comment.cgi?an=37160&cn=0
#82. To: tpaine (#81)
#83. To: TooConservative (#50)
Wasn't that Washington whose wife inherited slaves and a small plantation? Washington found it difficult to manage and didn't like slavery at all, thought it bad for the country. As I recall, they were freed upon his death.
"When Jefferson inherited about twenty slaves from his father in 1764, Virginians had been working their plantations primarily with black slave labor since the beginning of the century. In 1774, Jefferson inherited 135 more slaves from his father-in-law, John Wayles, who had been directly involved in the importation of enslaved Africans into Virginia. This practice was not prohibited until 1778, by an act drafted by Jefferson himself.
#84. To: VxH (#83)
Washington himself had been a slave owner for fifty-six years, beginning at eleven years of age when he inherited ten slaves from his deceased father.
#85. To: sneakypete (#64)
And you are a robot that lacks the ability to tell the difference between self-defense and murder.
#86. To: A K A Stone (#85)
Killing your kid isn't self defense. Self defense is when some old grouch atheist comes up to you to steal your roku, because his is broken. Then you put him down like an old dog.
#87. To: A K A Stone (#85)
Killing your kid isn't self defense.
#88. To: sneakypete (#87)
1: It's not a kid until it has been born. Until then it is only a potential kid.
#89. To: sneakypete (#87)
2:Since it is only a growth inside her body and endangering her life,removing it IS self-defense,just like removing a cancerous tumor.
#90. To: sneakypete (#87)
You can't even get that right. Killing somebody for stealing isn't self-defense. It is defense of property,not life.
#91. To: A K A Stone (#88)
Proving that you are a moron. It isn't a kid, but 1 minute later it is a kid. Science never was your strong point.
#92. To: A K A Stone (#89)
Yes a baby is just a tumor.
#93. To: A K A Stone (#90)
Tell that to the dead man who was put down like an old grouch even though he was a young black man. He just wanted the dudes shoes. He received a bullet instead.
#94. To: sneakypete (#91)
Getting wood over thinking about it,ain't ya?
#95. To: sneakypete (#93)
#96. To: sneakypete (#93)
That's not just stealing because you have to physically assault or threaten someone's life to steal their shoes.
#97. To: sneakypete (#92)
It's not a baby. It's a fetus.
#98. To: sneakypete (#87)
your roku
#99. To: TooConservative, sneakypete (#98)
#100. To: Palmdale (#72)
(Edited)
They'll post the following Reagan quote, typically leaving off the second paragraph.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#101. To: Deckard (#100)
"But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path."
#102. To: sneakypete (#92)
It's not a baby. It's a fetus.
noun
an unborn offspring of a mammal, in particular an unborn human baby more than eight weeks after conception.
#103. To: Palmdale (#101)
(Edited)
Where's the rest of the paragraph?
neocons statists are buying that load of malarkey.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#104. To: Deckard (#103)
What he said in the paragraph was all well and good, but he reiterates that conservatism and libertarianism are following the same path
#105. To: Palmdale (#104)
So where's the rest of the paragraph?
#106. To: TooConservative (#105)
You really are too stupid and lazy to google things for yourself.
#107. To: Palmdale (#106)
You really are too stupid and lazy to google things for yourself.
#108. To: Palmdale (#77)
"The LP. Read their platforms over the years."
#109. To: no gnu taxes, Palmdale (#107)
(Edited)
I typically use Yahoo or Bing rather than Google, but none reach into the nether world of this poster's musings.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]