Rough Libertarian Critique of Conservatives

[cawacko]

Unfortunately a lot of truth in what is stated here.


Reason.com Editor Nick Gillespie writes: "...it's fascinating to me that the conservative movement can't recognize some elemental facts. First and foremost that the world they're trying to create, especially when it comes to intolerance of alternative lifestyles, is never going to happen. And that by insisting, as Sen. James DeMint and Rep. Jim Jordan have, that you can't be a fiscal conservative without being a social conservative, you're alienating all those independents who just might give the GOP a second chance at running the federal budget...the fiscal con wing was exposed as just that, a total con job. Under Bush and a supposedly conservative Congress, federal outlays jacked up about 60 percent in real terms. Second, defense cons blew it. They had two wars to show themselves as effective, and they screwed the pooch, wagged the dog...whatever. After a good, long ride at the top, they did nothing well. They didn't create a coherent foreign policy that suggests when the U.S. might intervene and when it shouldn't (the Global War on Terrorism is not simply vague, it provides no stopping point for Wilsonian interventionism, which is decidedly not conservative). And third, social cons have lost, period. Gays are not going back in the closet and demands for equal standing under the law are logically coherent from a conservative POV. Gays didn't destroy marriage or the family (neither of which is in ruins, by the way, but that's another issue)."


http://reason.org/news/show/reason-alert-annual-privatization-r

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

... by insisting, as Sen. James DeMint and Rep. Jim Jordan have, that you can't be a fiscal conservative without being a social conservative, you're alienating all those independents who just might give the GOP a second chance...

 

[cawacko]

Hey Troll, we agreed you would not post on theads I start so GTFO!

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Hey Troll, we agreed you would not post on theads I start so GTFO!

 

[WinterBorn]

This insistence that you must be a social conservative in order to be a true conservative is just bullshit.

I agree that the conservatives are blowing their chances here. Far fewer people are interested in the social conservative agenda than are interested in conservative fiscal policies.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Unfortunately a lot of truth in what is stated here.


Reason.com Editor Nick Gillespie writes: "...it's fascinating to me that the conservative movement can't recognize some elemental facts. First and foremost that the world they're trying to create, especially when it comes to intolerance of alternative lifestyles, is never going to happen. And that by insisting, as Sen. James DeMint and Rep. Jim Jordan have, that you can't be a fiscal conservative without being a social conservative, you're alienating all those independents who just might give the GOP a second chance at running the federal budget...the fiscal con wing was exposed as just that, a total con job. Under Bush and a supposedly conservative Congress, federal outlays jacked up about 60 percent in real terms. Second, defense cons blew it. They had two wars to show themselves as effective, and they screwed the pooch, wagged the dog...whatever. After a good, long ride at the top, they did nothing well. They didn't create a coherent foreign policy that suggests when the U.S. might intervene and when it shouldn't (the Global War on Terrorism is not simply vague, it provides no stopping point for Wilsonian interventionism, which is decidedly not conservative). And third, social cons have lost, period. Gays are not going back in the closet and demands for equal standing under the law are logically coherent from a conservative POV. Gays didn't destroy marriage or the family (neither of which is in ruins, by the way, but that's another issue)."


http://reason.org/news/show/reason-alert-annual-privatization-r

A FUCKING MEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Unfortunately a lot of truth in what is stated here.


Reason.com Editor Nick Gillespie writes: "...it's fascinating to me that the conservative movement can't recognize some elemental facts. First and foremost that the world they're trying to create, especially when it comes to intolerance of alternative lifestyles, is never going to happen. And that by insisting, as Sen. James DeMint and Rep. Jim Jordan have, that you can't be a fiscal conservative without being a social conservative, you're alienating all those independents who just might give the GOP a second chance at running the federal budget...the fiscal con wing was exposed as just that, a total con job. Under Bush and a supposedly conservative Congress, federal outlays jacked up about 60 percent in real terms. Second, defense cons blew it. They had two wars to show themselves as effective, and they screwed the pooch, wagged the dog...whatever. After a good, long ride at the top, they did nothing well. They didn't create a coherent foreign policy that suggests when the U.S. might intervene and when it shouldn't (the Global War on Terrorism is not simply vague, it provides no stopping point for Wilsonian interventionism, which is decidedly not conservative). And third, social cons have lost, period. Gays are not going back in the closet and demands for equal standing under the law are logically coherent from a conservative POV. Gays didn't destroy marriage or the family (neither of which is in ruins, by the way, but that's another issue)."


http://reason.org/news/show/reason-alert-annual-privatization-r

I wish I could give about 50 rep points for posting this. Gillespie has flat out nailed it. He has described perfectly how the republican party has proactively alienated people like me.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

This insistence that you must be a social conservative in order to be a true conservative is just bullshit.

I agree that the conservatives are blowing their chances here. Far fewer people are interested in the social conservative agenda than are interested in conservative fiscal policies.

The whole idea that you have to be some ideological anything and pass some god damned litmus test to be a Republican at all is total bullshit. All you need is to share are some common values and common goals and a willingness to compromise to achieve those ends. Besides, social conservatism has been and is currently on the wrong side of history. It's why I have never been a social conservative. In today's times social conservatism cannot stand up to the forces of freedom. Individual freedom and liberty will win every time and our own history has shown us that time and time again. It showed it 1783 and again in 1865 and again in 1964 when the forces of social conservatism were utterly rejected by the American people.

 

[apple0154]

Unfortunately a lot of truth in what is stated here.


Reason.com Editor Nick Gillespie writes: "...it's fascinating to me that the conservative movement can't recognize some elemental facts. First and foremost that the world they're trying to create, especially when it comes to intolerance of alternative lifestyles, is never going to happen. And that by insisting, as Sen. James DeMint and Rep. Jim Jordan have, that you can't be a fiscal conservative without being a social conservative, you're alienating all those independents who just might give the GOP a second chance at running the federal budget...the fiscal con wing was exposed as just that, a total con job. Under Bush and a supposedly conservative Congress, federal outlays jacked up about 60 percent in real terms. Second, defense cons blew it. They had two wars to show themselves as effective, and they screwed the pooch, wagged the dog...whatever. After a good, long ride at the top, they did nothing well. They didn't create a coherent foreign policy that suggests when the U.S. might intervene and when it shouldn't (the Global War on Terrorism is not simply vague, it provides no stopping point for Wilsonian interventionism, which is decidedly not conservative). And third, social cons have lost, period. Gays are not going back in the closet and demands for equal standing under the law are logically coherent from a conservative POV. Gays didn't destroy marriage or the family (neither of which is in ruins, by the way, but that's another issue)."


http://reason.org/news/show/reason-alert-annual-privatization-r

It looks like a couple more posts like that and we'll all be Conservatives here.

 

[WinterBorn]

I wish I could give about 50 rep points for posting this. Gillespie has flat out nailed it. He has described perfectly how the republican party has proactively alienated people like me.

I think the GOP had better figure this out or they will be in trouble for quite a while.

 

[The Dude]

How many are like that?
Let's not forget, Obama is not for gay marriage or legal pot.
He's socially conservative without being a blowhard ala Bach to mom about it.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

I think the GOP had better figure this out or they will be in trouble for quite a while.

I've been saying that since 96.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

How many are like that?
Let's not forget, Obama is not for gay marriage or legal pot.
He's socially conservative without being a blowhard ala Bach to mom about it.

He aint exactly radically opposed to them either.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

It looks like a couple more posts like that and we'll all be Conservatives here.

despite your progressive rhetoric, you're a Libertarian deep down inside. So is Mott, though he refuses to quite come out of the closet yet. I think Mr. Gillespie just gave him a little shove though.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

This insistence that you must be a social conservative in order to be a true conservative is just bullshit.

I agree that the conservatives are blowing their chances here. Far fewer people are interested in the social conservative agenda than are interested in conservative fiscal policies.

And I say let them. Let social conservatives destroy their political power. It will simply make the Libertarian ascension (as is our destiny) that much easier.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

despite your progressive rhetoric, you're a Libertarian deep down inside. So is Mott, though he refuses to quite come out of the closet yet. I think Mr. Gillespie just gave him a little shove though.

I agree with many of the positions of Libertarians My stance is that, as a political party Libertarians show, as has been stated elsewhere, all the leadership potential of Fredo Corleone.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

And I say let them. Let social conservatives destroy their political power. It will simply make the Libertarian ascension (as is our destiny) that much easier.

No it won't. Until Libertarians, as a political party, learn how to lead and build affective political coalitions and win elections, what happens to Republicans won't mean shit for Libertarians. Libertarians would be far better off working with others in the Republican party to build their power base with others who oppose how social conservatives and right wingers are dragging it down.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

No it won't. Until Libertarians, as a political party, learn how to lead and build affective political coalitions and win elections, what happens to Republicans won't mean shit for Libertarians. Libertarians would be far better off working with others in the Republican party to build their power base with others who oppose how social conservatives and right wingers are dragging it down.

what do you think we're doing now?

 

[Mott the Hoople]

what do you think we're doing now?

I agree, Libertarians have made gains inside the Republican party. If they would tone down their "government is the problem' rhetoric, which many interpret as a self fullfiling prophecy for incompetent government, I think they would do even better. Particularly with moderates and independents.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

No it won't. Until Libertarians, as a political party, learn how to lead and build affective political coalitions and win elections, what happens to Republicans won't mean shit for Libertarians. Libertarians would be far better off working with others in the Republican party to build their power base with others who oppose how social conservatives and right wingers are dragging it down.

Care to place a wager on that?