Which posters are RIABNs?

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Libertas is a RIABN.

lol

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Libertas is a RIABN.

Definitely much more Republican lately.

Nay, I haven't changed, perhaps it looks that way because you've been trending hard toward the Democrats lately.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Why not register independent so you could vote in either primary?

MAGOP is decent, although of course I strongly prefer the (cosmo-)libertarian Weld/Baker wing over the moderate-to-liberal Romney/Brown wing.

Wut...

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Why not register independent so you could vote in either primary?

MAGOP is decent, although of course I strongly prefer the (cosmo-)libertarian Weld/Baker wing over the moderate-to-liberal Romney/Brown wing.

Wut...

Weld is very libertarian (such that the LP declined to run against him both times he ran for MA-Gov, and they gave him their ballot line during his brief run for NY-Gov).  He wants to legalize drugs, have full equality for gays, and significantly roll back taxation and the welfare state.  Baker comes from Weld's administration (his first job was in a libertarian think tank) and shares most of Weld's views.  Neither of them are going to be featured on the front of LRC, but they represent a wing of the MAGOP that's much more libertarian than the national party.

The LP nominated Bob Barr and Wayne Root. They have no problem supporting very non-libertarian Republicans.

Neocons like William Buckley were also against the war on drugs. These people only care about the money, they don't give a damn about liberty. 

Weld and especially Baker are just boring Moderate Hero Rockefeller Republicans. Ideologically they're closer to Bill Clinton than to Ron Paul. Not to mention Baker has a record of wasteful spending as budget chief for the Big Dig disaster.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

'Twas the ever so wonderful '90s LP of Harry Browne fame.

The LP is still the LP, prone to selling out it's values for a chance at a little extra publicity.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

C'mon now, that's not what I meant.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Err....yes. Charlie Baker could easily pass for a DLC Democrat like Bill Clinton. But nobody in their right mind would ever confuse him for a libertarian like Ron Paul.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Publicity by not running a candidate?

Yeah.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I meant that they, like Tom Tancredo, only supported marijuana legalization because of the financial burden of maintaining the war on drugs and the potential tax income to be made on it. They have no philosophical inclination toward liberty. They are technocrats, not libertarians.

And Baker doesn't even share the opposition to the drug war AFAIK. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Err....yes. Charlie Baker could easily pass for a DLC Democrat like Bill Clinton. But nobody in their right mind would ever confuse him for a libertarian like Ron Paul.
[/quote][/quote]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Prove it? How are they different, other than that one is a Democrat and one is a Republican? They're both moderate hero centrists who love abortion and claim to be big on balanced budgets.



Here's classic Murray Rothbard trashing phony big government "libertarian" Bill Weld after the LP embarrassingly endorsed him:


BIG-GOVERNMENT LIBERTARIANS

You must be logged in to read this quote.

LRC in general is good for taking down phony media-anointed "libertarians" that give real libertarians a bad name.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What Libertarianism Isn't

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Weld never once raised taxes, so Rothbard doesn't have his facts straight.  He also faced Democratic veto-proof supermajorities in both houses, so he didn't exactly have much leverage on spending.  I'm really uninterested in the philosophical outlook of a candidate, I'm concerned with their positions on the issues.  I find it interesting how two people like, say, Justin Raimondo and Pat Buchanan can arrive at mainly the same conclusions despite having very different worldviews.  But while I find it interesting, I don't find it relevant, especially when it's based on speculation with no backup.

Bill Weld was a big spending Rockefeller Republican who happened to support medical marijuana. He was not a libertarian, but as governor he even destroyed his own Republican Party. It's embarrassing when the mainstream media holds up people like him as "libertarians".

Bill Weld's Revolution that Wasn't

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

As it's amusing for Mechaman to watch Liberals and Cosnervatives argue, it's amusing for me to watch two Libertarians duke it out to say what's Libertarian and what isn't.

Who's duking it out with regard to "what's Libertarian and what isn't?" That's not what's going on.

It's just a bit baffling to consider some of the candidates wormyguy is supporting as a libertarian.

I certainly can't see any reason to have voted for Meg Whitman.