What was it you said at one point (and I'm paraphrasing): I became a libertarian after spending time with conservatives?

After years of discussing the issue of liberty with social conservatives, it occurred to me that they have only a limited tolerance for liberty. Socons loathe liberals because they see (accurately) that these liberals want to impose a form of economic-environmental fascism on the nation. Unfortunately, the socon answer to this threat is to push for the imposition of a type of moral-social fascism that reeks of theocracy. Either way, both groups believe wholeheartedly in the use of State power to impose their prejudices on the rest of us (the issues differ, but the will to power is uncannily similar).

Bring up abortion or gay marriage at your next socon cocktail party, and watch the crazy come out.

If you vote for the communist sooner or later a dictator will inherit power - When he does if he doesn't share your values you are really in trouble. Always best to vote for the one who will do the least to you if that fails the one who can do the least if that fails the one who is least able to organize

Of course the best is to vote for the one who realizes everyone should be left alone unless they reach into anothers area

Jim C,

AS Oscar said - at the point of having to choose between a communist and a theocon it is a choice of fascisms.

I choose the communists.

I just can't abide having theocons imposing fascism in the name of the Maker.

"Proclaim LIBERTY throughout all the Land unto all the Inhabitants thereof"

And you know what? I listened to Huckabee and his economic program is not much different from the communists.

Oscar,

I became a libertarian after spending a number of years with communists. I never was attracted to theocons.

Further note:

It is only the conservatives in Congress who are keeping drug prohibition alive. The Communists/liberals are pretty much against it.

[In] a choice between a communist and a theocon... I'm going to vote for the communist.
--Simon

Communism is itself a theology. (Duh.)

It was spending time with Libertarians that strengthened me in my conservatism. The LP chief who flashed the notion that US companies selling tanks to the USSR would be A Good Thing to an inquiring Silicon Valley defense worker turned my toleration of Libertarians toward disgust and loathing.

Micha,

I haven't been one of those kinds of Libertarians since 9/11 and in fact I was never sympathetic to them. I quit the L Party over 9/11. It is one of the reasons I was not a Ron Paul supporter in the last election. But socialist Huckabee really disgusted me.

I'm anti-statist. Period. I'm of the opinion that there is very little the government should do and that is spelled out in the Constitution.

Still. The communists in America still pay some lip service to liberty in the private sphere (the drug war is a prime example). Republican socialists have given that up.

Still I'm more at home generally with Rs than Ds and I'm slowly converting my conservative friends to a more libertarian view. Note the small "L". That is intentional.

I'm with the "leave us alone" party.

The LP chief who flashed the notion that US companies selling tanks to the USSR would be A Good Thing to an inquiring Silicon Valley defense worker turned my toleration of Libertarians toward disgust and loathing.

While I can hardly blame you for feeling that way, I don't think most libertarians would argue that selling war materials to the enemy is "a good thing." They might defend the free market aspect, and they might argue that the government should not regulate private business, but that's not the same as saying it's good.

If that is the choice I'm given I'm going to do the same thing I did the last time I was given that choice. I'm going to vote for the communist.

M Simon, you seem to be bitterly complaining about a hangnail while entreating decerebration. (Honestly, if you did not vote against Kerry, I suspect that has already taken place). I suspect you cannot name a single substantive harm done you by the social conservatives/theocons, or even one credibly threatened. They just don't have the pull, and never have.

Tom,

I voted Bush in '04 and Palin in '08.

And yes Tom I can point to one place where the theocons have sway that is wrecking domestic tranquility and foreign policy. Drug Prohibition.

On top of that the call to bring Jesus back in the schools gives me the willies. I had to put up with that as a kid and I just hated it. Being Jewish and all.

There is a good reason for the 1st Amendment. You avoid antagonizing your natural allies. Take it to heart.

Teach your children Jesus at home. Leave him out of the public schools. You don't like the public schools? I'll get behind vouchers or what ever you find suitable.

Study the history of the public schools. It was designed by Protestants as an indoctrination system. It just got away from them.

So there are two things I have against injecting religion in politics.

You want my vote? Earn it. Otherwise pound sand.

To win elections the party has to come closest to the marginal voters it wants to attract. Would you rather have libertarians (the leave us alone coalition) or RINOs? Your choice.

These Republicans don't seem to have any understanding of the "leave us alone" voters.

It would appear that you haven't clued that they want to be left alone, has it?

Tom,

Then why don't they return the favor?

And yes Tom I can point to one place where the theocons have sway that is wrecking domestic tranquility and foreign policy. Drug Prohibition.

Except they had very little to no part in implementing non-alcoholic prohibition, or in preventing legalization, or in the neoprohibition of alcohol which MADD is effectually embarked on. You might have noticed there are few Democrats at any level who are pushing any legalization, including the only nominally Christian Obama. That's because it isn't a partisan issue--it's not even a socon issue--it's a stupid policy I wish would go away, but it's nothing I can say either socons or Republicans are uniquely or largely responsible for.

On top of that the call to bring Jesus back in the schools gives me the willies. I had to put up with that as a kid and I just hated it. Being Jewish and all.

So hole in the sand is where you have your head?!

Newsflash, you live in a country surrounded by Christians who are taking their faith--including Jesus--with wherever they go, public school definitely included. If you honestly have a problem with moments of silence in schools--where you are free to pray to Chtulu or consider the apotheoetic sublimnity of Bob, or !wh or study french--if you really have issues with that, it strikes me as at best a slight streak of hysteria you need to work on, and at worst a paranoid and bigoted rail under your train of thought.

Hey, look at it this way. You know who to sic the JDL on if a swastika shows up on the local tabernacle...
...except it most likely won't be a socon or christian of any sort who did it.

Misplaced priorities, man.

There is a good reason for the 1st Amendment. You avoid antagonizing your natural allies. Take it to heart.

I see the attempt to remove God in any sense from the public schools, as being one which has had no good effect. Really, what has it improved? How can it even be constitutional for the feds to insert themselves into the process when both the 1st and 14th amendments were not seen as granting any such authority to the feds nor depriving the states of the governance of it until the Supreme Court invented the notion 30 some years ago. It's like the argument that the 2nd amendment only protects state militias. It has no intellectual honesty. The feds need to butt out.

Teach your children Jesus at home. Leave him out of the public schools. You don't like the public schools? I'll get behind vouchers or what ever you find suitable.

Simon, I think vouchers should be the way things go, and if the publicly recognized, county level organized schools survive--as I think they might if they are forced to genuinely compete--then I think vouchers should be pro-rated to remove support for religious instruction time. They should be predicated on some minimal level of standardized performance. But the unconstitutional non-sense about forbidding organized moments available potentially for prayer, or forbidding students to gather to pray at recess or at lunch--this is where you (presumably) are infringing on their rights. Stop it.

I don't even like the socons, they lectured me incessantly about my read and blue rule books (Dungeons and Dragons), that was my experience with them is school. Yes it left a bad taste in my mouth. It didn't, as I think you might have, let it warp me for life or keep me from hewing to the main chance for improvement towards liberty in this country, which the Democrats have no part to play in, except as opponents.

Study the history of the public schools. It was designed by Protestants as an indoctrination system. It just got away from them.

BS, it was designed by the Prussians to insulate against Marxism and the spirit of 1830. You need to get your money back for your history course. It and socialist insecurity.

So there are two things I have against injecting religion in politics.

Except this isn't injecting religion into politics. It's politics--via the leftist strain of the last thirty or so years of Fed action at the behest of the ACLU--attempting to eject religion from life. And doing it unconstitutionally to boot.

If you are honestly telling me you think you are better off with violating the first amendment rights of everyone to enforce rigid outward atheism in place of even not merely non-denomination, but not even specifically Christian of any sort moments of silence in public schools and forbidding student prayer by fed action--where the feds have no place in the first place--instead of keeping the national government inside it's constitutional bounds, I'm sorry. I just found out where you stop being a libertarian and start being a bully.

It bears repetition.

It would appear that you haven't clued that they (socons) want to be left alone, has it?

You not merely want to not leave them alone, to see whatyou've written, you want to stamp them out of public existence.

You go pound sand, you're scarier than they are. By far.

Then why don't they return the favor?

To put it another, shorter, way, the socons do want to be left alone. What I hear you saying is, "I'm going to keep on beating them with a stick."

Tom,

It appears that you don't get that libertarians want an end to drug prohibition. But we would settle for a push on med mj. Very large majorities favor it.

Name me one socon out front in the drug prohibition movement? You? Send me some links.

When are socons going to condemn "God Damn America" Values Voters? You know like Buckley writing out he Birchers. Or The Rs calling out Pat Buchanan.

And you still don't get it. Palin is my girl. I vote regularly for Don Manzullo.

I'm against Bush's "No Church Left Behind" can't wait to hear the socons rise up against that one.

I'm willing to be bought, what have you got to offer? Oh. Yeah. I don't trust Republicans when it comes to cutting budgets and fighting corruption. Democrats are worse? Faint praise. Where are the values and the willingness to live up to them?

'Cept Palin and my Cong. Critter Manzullo. Walked the walk. Look up his record on stimulation. And you will note that both Palin and Manzullo in their private lives are socons. I'm not prejudiced. But first show me the money so to speak. Manzullo has never pushed for any kind of moment of silence in school. Besides kids can pray silently all day in school if they want. Nothing stopping them. I was under the impression that Christians were encouraged to make no show of prayer. None. So why do real Christians need a special moment?

You want an alliance bring something to the table. Don't be telling me what you would like to force my kids to do. It don't sound so libertarian.

It appears that you don't get that libertarians want an end to drug prohibition.

You'll have to quote the sentence of mine that gave you that misapprehension.

Name me one socon out front in the drug prohibition movement? You?

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I am not a socon and have said nothing here that could make you think otherwise. Unless the fact I want you to stop beating them with an unconstitutional stick counts. As to the first part, I suppose you always think the enemy of your enemy is always still your enemy. If that's your idea of coalition building, I don't think you are clear on that concept. Lastly, neither legalization nor prohibition are what socons are primarily about.

Yeah right, "Palin is my girl", but you also wrote, "The real challenge for my dream girl, Sarah Palin, is to prove to the Libertarians that despite her excellent standing with the Religious Right she's not part of that same thread of religious activism." Explain to me how there is no disconnect on your part here, unless what you are saying it is reasonable that most Libertarians have a bigoted reaction to people who are personally conservative.

"I'm against Bush's "No Church Left Behind" can't wait to hear the socons rise up against that one." That was no child left behind, and as long as the government is unconstitutionally usurping a charitable role--nothing to do with the schools, BTW--you'll have to show how discriminating against religious charities is not doubly unconstitutional. It is not government's job to enlarge or diminish the religious part of the public area of life, I think you want to ignore that last part.

"When are socons going to condemn "God Damn America" Values Voters?"

I don't know that they haven't, and certainly they got no love from Republicans. What's your beef, that they exist? That's real libertarian of you. What next, you want tumbrels for them? The Republicans are ignoring them, what more do you want? Firing squads? Their votes will tend to increase the chances for limited government, and they will not get what they want, so see the flow is going to a better place, ride it and quit making waves. It doesn't help you.

"Democrats are worse? Faint praise.

Umm...Democrats are four time worse at least, that's faint?

I'm willing to be bought, what have you got to offer?

I'm quite libertarian myself, what I recognize that I think you fail to is that the question is what do Libertarians have to offer? All they ever are to a Democrat is a mark for their con and all the LP types are to Republicans are a headache. The capital letter LP types lose them more votes than they get them.

Manzullo has never pushed for any kind of moment of silence in school. Besides kids can pray silently all day in school if they want. Nothing stopping them.

I'm happy he hasn't pushed for it, the point is that there are places where the people want it and it is clearly none of the feds business to prevent it. What you are telling me is that you are fine in this instance with the national government acting unconstitutionally, and I'm telling you that's the real camel's nose under the tent that's a problem.

I'm not prejudiced.

Yes you are. From what I've seen you write here, you want religion and even any notion of spirituality eliminated from public life at all levels, and forcibly so by fed action, constitution be damned. That's what you've been telling me. That sounds bigoted to me.

Besides kids can pray silently all day in school if they want. Nothing stopping them.

That strikes me as a fatuous lie. Of course there are things stopping them, for one thing, the practical consequences of doing so.

I was under the impression that Christians were encouraged to make no show of prayer. None. So why do real Christians need a special moment?

Who says there's a show of prayer during a moment of silence? How could there be? Pantomime:rolleyes:? The reason the socons are pushing for such things is because such things used to be commonplace, and they were unconstitutionally extinguished as a result of lawsuits brought by organizations like the ACLU. It is an effort at repair, not expansion or indoctrination.

Don't be telling me what you would like to force my kids to do.

OOHHH, forcing them to have an opportunity to study an extra five minutes for calculus while other people quietly do as their own conscience bids. How evil I am.

Like I said, you have misplaced priorities.

It don't sound so libertarian.

The one who's sounding really unlibertarian here to me is you, you want to unconstitutionally use the feds to aggressively enforce atheism where it simply has no place doing so, where the local balloting process has decreed there shall be a moment of silence in the public school schedule during students can pray silently if they choose to. Even in that terribly limited circumstance which is not merely nondenominational, it provides equal advantage to atheist, buddhist, satanist, jewish, and erisian students. It's isn't even religious on it's face, since nothing religious is compelled.

For you to be so strident in your opposition in such a small not inherently religious thing, strident to the effect you endorse by implication blatantly unconstitutional actions by the feds, and evidently so strident be cause, gasp, nominally christian persons like the idea--this strikes me as both bigoted and unlibertarian.

You keep on saying I need to bring something to the table. I don't know why, I'm one guy.

I've told you endorse school vouchers, and even endorse pro-rating them against time spent in religious studies.

I've seen you write that you like that idea too (proration not included).

What more do you want?

All I want is for you to stop beating the socons with a stick. It's counterproductive at best.

Tom,

Re: Palin: I have seen no sign she is going Alan Keyes on me.

The enemy of my enemy can still be my enemy. Friendship is as friendship does - even if the friendship is only temporary.

I'm not going to go through the rest of your points. Let me just say that any one who sings "God Damn America" is not my friend and may never become my friend without a serious change of heart. And after all that is what this post is about.

BTW I can name a socon who is anti-drug war. Joe Farrah of WND. Oregon Guy who blogs at his own place and comments here.

I'm on very friendly terms with a number of libertarian socons. The Alan Keyes types: not so much. And Joe Farrah has a serious homo hate.

If the "Values Voters" want to vote against Obama I have no intention of stopping them. But it doesn't mean I'm going to endorse their platform. Being allied with Joe Stalin didn't make America a pro-communist country.

Winston Churchill. ... "If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons."

So let me just say that any one who fights Obama is doing a good thing.

Tom,

No I want Judaism enforced. If it was good enough for Jesus it is good enough for me. And it should be more than good enough for Christians.

====

BTW silent unannounced prayer needs no enforcement pro or con. Only atheists pray in public. Christians pray in secret.

I actually meant "No Church Left Behind" i.e. Faith Based Initiatives.

I have no more problem with the existence of "God Damn America" Values Voters than I do with the existence of Pat Buchanan. Neither should be considered a part of the Republican Coalition. If they want to vote for Republicans I will not stop them.

In any case the Party is not going to pay any attention to me. I still intend to voice my opinion.

Dude,

You are mistaking Libertarians (which I am not) for the Leave Us Alone Coalition which shows up at Tea Parties.

What does the Tea Party faction have for Republicans? Votes. If they earn them.

Don't Tread On Me

Even the US Navy is on the side of the Tea Parties judging by what is flying on their jackstaff's these days. :-)