[PeterParker]

So, I saw another post awhile back mentioning potential candidates, political parties, disdain or love for the libertarian party, the fact that Falwell and other evangelical leaders were befuddled by who to back, etc.

I have also been on numerous blogs, sites, etc. from all sides of the political spectrum (I always seek to balance what all are saying and attempt to make a reasoned conclusion based on what is coming from the respective horses' mouths.)

Having said that, I have come across some interesting information that some may be aware of, others, maybe not so much; but nonetheless should create an interesting discussion (that is until party line people resort to the old standby: "Well, because it's what a good christian should do...")

Please for the love of God, before offering an opinion, at least read the actual links and feel free to add your own, but read them nonetheless; and please don't simply rely on the "I've heard about this guy or that thing" stuff you got from a 30 second snippit in USAToday or secondhand information you got from somewhere on a soundbite whether from a sermon, speech or radio bit (whether your particular poison is Conservative talk radio or NPR.)


As an independent myself (evaluate each on what is said as opposed to automatically wearing the jersey of one of the big two), I will start with some interesting information that I came across last week of which I was not previously aware concerning some grassroots organizations and third party alternatives to the "God is always a Republican" dogma that has seemed to be the status quo for christians for awhile.


I read with interest the following about the various strains of "Libertarian" (left leaning, right leaning and centrist.) I discovered the following info about a whole Libetarian Ideal within the current Republican Party, some of whose ideals are reflected by some of our own fine institution's philosophies.


1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Liberty_Caucus Republican Liberty Caucus

The Republican Liberty Caucus is a political action organization dedicated to promoting the ideals of individual rights, limited government and free enterprise within the Republican Party in the United States by:

A. Promoting these ideals among Party officials and its various organizations;

B. Identifying and supporting candidates sympathetic with these ideals; and

C. Promoting Caucus membership among Party registrants, officials, and officeholders.

It can be considered the "libertarian" wing of the Republican Party. It also operates a political action committee, RLCUSA-PAC.

Principles:

The following is the published list of the RLC guiding principles

The Republican Liberty Caucus supports individual rights, limited government and free enterprise.

1. We believe every human being is endowed by nature with inherent rights to life, liberty and property that are properly secured by law. We support a strict construction of the Bill of Rights as a defense against tyranny; the expansion of those rights to all voluntary consensual conduct under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments; and the requirements of equal protection and due process under the Fourteenth Amendment.

2. We support the Constitutional restrictions on federal government powers enumerated in Article I, Section 8 as an absolute limit on all government functions and programs. We oppose the adoption of broad and vague powers under the guise of general welfare or interstate commerce.

3. We oppose all restrictions on the voluntary and honest exchange of value in a free market. We favor minimal, equitable, and fair taxation for the essential functions of government. We oppose all legislation that concedes Congressional power to any regulatory agency, executive department, or international body.

We support the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, the republican form of government it requires, and the right of all citizens to fair and equitable representation.

We believe these are also the proper positions of the Republican Party.

2. http://www.rlc.org/ Official Site of The Republican Liberty Caucus


3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolibertarianism Neolibetarian, Republitarian, etc Defined

To describe neolibertarians, Dale Franks says this: [3]

>When given a set of policy choices,

A. The choice that maximizes personal liberty is the best choice.

B. The policy choice that offers the least amount of necessary government intervention or regulation is the best choice.

C. The policy choice that provides rational, market-based incentives is the best choice.

>In foreign policy, neolibertartianism would be characterized by:

A. A policy of diplomacy that promotes consensual government and human rights and opposes dictatorship.

B. A policy of using US military force solely at the discretion of the US, but only in circumstances where American interests are directly affected.


4. http://www.afn.org/~afn04641/opinions.html

[El Scorcho]

Please for the love of God, before offering an opinion, at least read the actual links and feel free to add your own, but read them nonetheless; and please don't simply rely on the "I've heard about this guy or that thing" stuff you got from a 30 second snippit in USAToday or secondhand information you got from somewhere on a soundbite whether from a sermon, speech or radio bit (whether your particular poison is Conservative talk radio or NPR.)

That entire paragraph comes across as condescending to the point that I almost don't feel like replying to this thread.

I read with interest the following about the various strains of "Libertarian" (left leaning, right leaning and centrist.) I discovered the following info about a whole Libetarian Ideal within the current Republican Party, some of whose ideals are reflected by some of our own fine institution's philosophies.

I read your links, and I don't really see anything I haven't seen before. The Neolibertarianism discribed on Wikipedia is just the same libertarian party that I've seen for the last ten years. In fact, the prominent figures they cited are the ones I've been familiar with for some time now. I don't see the distinctions between left and right as you mention above, either. The libertarian party is both left and right, depending on the category of issues they're addressing. That's not a problem for me until we get to two issues, which they use their "1. We believe every human being is endowed by nature with inherent rights to life, liberty and property that are properly secured by law." belief to justify.

I do not support abortion or the legalization of all drugs for personal recreational use. The libertarian party does. That's the bottom line. I will never ever support the idea of abortion as a sane and valid medical procedure. I also don't equate the war on drugs to prohibition like Libertarians do. I can't get behind that, and those are the sole two issue that will keep me from voting libertarian.

I'm not saying I'm voting for the major parties, because it's not likely that I will. I'm just not voting libertarian either.

[RubberMallet]

why? hearing a 30 second snippit on npr is probably more accurate than anything you can find on wiki....

[PeterParker]

Please for the love of God, before offering an opinion, at least read the actual links and feel free to add your own, but read them nonetheless; and please don't simply rely on the "I've heard about this guy or that thing" stuff you got from a 30 second snippit in USAToday or secondhand information you got from somewhere on a soundbite whether from a sermon, speech or radio bit (whether your particular poison is Conservative talk radio or NPR.)

That entire paragraph comes across as condescending to the point that I almost don't feel like replying to this thread.

I read with interest the following about the various strains of "Libertarian" (left leaning, right leaning and centrist.) I discovered the following info about a whole Libetarian Ideal within the current Republican Party, some of whose ideals are reflected by some of our own fine institution's philosophies.

I read your links, and I don't really see anything I haven't seen before. The Neolibertarianism discribed on Wikipedia is just the same libertarian party that I've seen for the last ten years. In fact, the prominent figures they cited are the ones I've been familiar with for some time now. I don't see the distinctions between left and right as you mention above, either. The libertarian party is both left and right, depending on the category of issues they're addressing. That's not a problem for me until we get to two issues, which they use their "1. We believe every human being is endowed by nature with inherent rights to life, liberty and property that are properly secured by law." belief to justify.

I do not support abortion or the legalization of all drugs for personal recreational use. The libertarian party does. That's the bottom line. I will never ever support the idea of abortion as a sane and valid medical procedure. I also don't equate the war on drugs to prohibition like Libertarians do. I can't get behind that, and those are the sole two issue that will keep me from voting libertarian.

I'm not saying I'm voting for the major parties, because it's not likely that I will. I'm just not voting libertarian either.

First of all, don't be so sensitive, it was tongue in cheek in tone with a slight hint of sarcasm thrown in for good measure...if you read the links as you say, then that point doesn't apply to then does it? Thus, it shouldn't be condescending to you. I put that in there because many don't take the time to read supporting info before they blast away without taking a second to take a step back to even consider another vantage point, even as an academic excerise.


Secondly, your response about the Libertarian party is precisely why I prefaced it the way I did. You are using preconceived ideas that left leaning Libertarians hold in your response which is precisely why I put in the points about the Republican Liberty Caucus, the so called "libertarian" wing of the Republican Party which I have just recently discovered. The guy I found and mentioned in the other thread just recently, Ron Paul, for example is a kind of "Republitarian" who is an ardent supporter of family values and is pro-life from what I've gathered so far.


I am simply wary and weary of christians automatically picking the "big name" republican candidate who becomes buddy/buddy with the so-called christian right self-described "heavyweights" because they give lip service to a few social issues buzzwords the faith based voters like to hear, while the fiscal policies and other problems that arise with policymaking by that candidate during his tenure in office are glossed over by those same voters because they've staked their reputation on that candidate. It's kind of like when a dude dates a girl and starts out okay and then the girl starts ringing the guy around, yet he is still so enamored with her and desperately wants to save face so he keeps putting up with her ______ while his buddies see the light and implore him to stop making excuses for her.


But, we've got no beef as far as I'm concerned, Scorcho, just a difference of ideas.

[El Scorcho]

Secondly, your response about the Libertarian party is precisely why I prefaced it the way I did. You are using preconceived ideas that left leaning Libertarians hold in your response which is precisely why I put in the points about the Republican Liberty Caucus, the so called "libertarian" wing of the Republican Party which I have just recently discovered. The guy I found and mentioned in the other thread just recently, Ron Paul, for example is a kind of "Republitarian" who is an ardent supporter of family values and is pro-life from what I've gathered so far.

My problem with Ron Paul and other Republicans like him are that they're claiming Libertarianism, but only to a point. I don't think you can do that. You either buy into a value system or you don't. You can't pick and choose like that and make it work. Personal liberty is so strongly at the core of Libertarianism that abortion and total legalization will always be a part of their platform. If someone claims that it's not, well then they're only serving to give a false face to Libertarianism. It's the same with Republicans who say they're moderates. They've been wishy washy with true conservative values that it's almost to the point where such things don't exist in politics.

My point: Why claim a adherence to a political system that you don't truly believe in?

[SuperJon]

Maybe it's for a different thread, but why should cigarettes and alcohol be legal and marijuana not? They both mess you up far more than marijuana.