Huckabee attacks Libertarianism

[StateBoiler]

While the best way to defeat Socialism certainly isn't to kiss up to it, Hucks got a way with words when on the attack (unless he's telling Alan Colmes to go to Sunday School) While he's not my favourite it's nice to see him take a shot at the anarchist white supremacist libertarians.

Very Democrat of you.

[Albus Dumbledore]

We need a new right party that's not focused on the fundies for support. Then we can get the 'ideal' some people want of most of the LP's members working with this movement. Think a secular conservative center-right party which economically ranges from center to center-right and socially from permissive leaning to center-right(Note how I don't say socially liberal or progressive).

Good luck with that. Here's our country's politics: Choice A and Choice B.

Democrats could easily become that. They're already starting to pick up big business and the blue collar types have been becoming more GOP.

[Frodo]

We need a new right party that's not focused on the fundies for support. Then we can get the 'ideal' some people want of most of the LP's members working with this movement. Think a secular conservative center-right party which economically ranges from center to center-right and socially from permissive leaning to center-right(Note how I don't say socially liberal or progressive).

Good luck with that. Here's our country's politics: Choice A and Choice B.

Democrats could easily become that. They're already starting to pick up big business and the blue collar types have been becoming more GOP.

In other words, you're saying Democrats are becoming Rockefeller Republicans? 

[Albus Dumbledore]

You are correct!

[StateBoiler]

We need a new right party that's not focused on the fundies for support. Then we can get the 'ideal' some people want of most of the LP's members working with this movement. Think a secular conservative center-right party which economically ranges from center to center-right and socially from permissive leaning to center-right(Note how I don't say socially liberal or progressive).

Good luck with that. Here's our country's politics: Choice A and Choice B.

Democrats could easily become that. They're already starting to pick up big business and the blue collar types have been becoming more GOP.

So that leaves the liberals and progressives to become Republicans?

I don't think you understand coalition politics. Groups don't disappear. They just adjust to which group gives them the greatest political advantage. And with how things look currently, the liberals and progressives are a sizable enough group to look after themselves and will have influence due to that size, period. The only subgroup I would say is larger than them currently are the Christian conservatives.

[CultureKing]

Libertarianism just strikes me as a very self-centered and cruel ideology. Basically it advocates for abandoning others and social darwinism (and don't tell me the markets would somehow magically right things in the world.)

[ilikeverin]

Hooray for Huckabee!

[MasterJedi]

Libertarianism is a failed ideology, people need to realize that.

What's the best course for America would be to form a party that's populist in a way that's economically centrist, willing to go either way on economics such as being for complete free trade but also helping workers and willing to help out the disadvantaged and the average American who needs assistance, but not to the extreme along with being socially conservative. That could be an almost unstoppable party.

[cannonia]

Libertarianism is a failed ideology, people need to realize that.

What's the best course for America would be to form a party that's populist in a way that's economically centrist, willing to go either way on economics such as being for complete free trade but also helping workers and willing to help out the disadvantaged and the average American who needs assistance, but not to the extreme along with being socially conservative. That could be an almost unstoppable party.

No such thing as economically centrist.  There's not even a political party that wants to hold government intervention at the level we have right now.  Politicians "earn their pay" by "finding" a new crisis and starting a new government program to "solve" it.  If that's not enough, then they will declare a new "universal human right" that merits even more intervention.

To address other posters, libertarianism is not a cruel ideology.  You're only looking at things from the perspective that people need government help.  The truth is that we've added layer upon layer of government programs without reducing poverty.  All of this government "help" induces more people to depend on government rather than themselves.  If government stopped offering benefits, people would either adjust and provide for themselves or choose to do without.

I'm not a pure libertarian, as I'm comfortable with government maintaining an interstate highway system, providing disaster relief and rescue operations, and even subsidizing critical national defense contractors.  Still, compassion is not the same thing as sending people dollars and regulations from Washington, DC.  And if there's a moral obligation to help certain people, I don't think it necessarily justifies taking someone else's money to do so.

[dead0man]

Libertarianism is a failed ideology, people need to realize that.

Where has it failed?

[J. J.]

I think that one of the most under reported story is that the Republican electorate had a chance to elect someone who was basically a social conservative, who was only a social conservative, and rejected him.

Me might be seeing the GOP moving toward a more libertarian position.

[RouterJockey]

To address other posters, libertarianism is not a cruel ideology.  You're only looking at things from the perspective that people need government help.  The truth is that we've added layer upon layer of government programs without reducing poverty.  All of this government "help" induces more people to depend on government rather than themselves.  If government stopped offering benefits, people would either adjust and provide for themselves or choose to do without.

I'm not a pure libertarian, as I'm comfortable with government maintaining an interstate highway system, providing disaster relief and rescue operations, and even subsidizing critical national defense contractors.  Still, compassion is not the same thing as sending people dollars and regulations from Washington, DC.  And if there's a moral obligation to help certain people, I don't think it necessarily justifies taking someone else's money to do so.

Exactly!  I agree 100% - well said!

[DanielX]

I must agree with fezzy; I do not think I could fit in the same political party as Huckabee. If he becomes indicative of future Republicans, then what little loyalty I have in that direction will disappear.

Frankly, I'm going to say that Nixon's Southern Strategy was the biggest mistake the GOP has ever made - and it has had pretty disastrous consequences for the nation as a whole, and for particular groups as well. People also overestimate its effects on Reagan's presidency - in 1980, the South was one of Reagan's weakest regions against Jimmy Carter, the last Democrat to appeal to southern whites. 

Heck, given that Maryland isn't going to be a close state, I think I will vote for Barr. His political positions, while not perfect, are a lot closer to mine than McCain's are.

[SPC]

Don't forget legalizing drugs!

and prostitution.  We shorten it (and make it sound better) by saying we're against the punishment of victimless crimes.

Except that prostitution isn't a victimless crime.  However, we should stop making being a victim (i.e., a prostitute) a crime.  Life without parole for being a pimp and a month (first offense) for being a john sounds about right.

How is the prostitute a victim? She is voluntarily selling her body for money, as she views the money as being more valuable than her body.

[SPC]

Libertarianism just strikes me as a very self-centered and cruel ideology. Basically it advocates for abandoning others and social darwinism (and don't tell me the markets would somehow magically right things in the world.)

Explain how it is self-centered for me not to want to impose my will on anybody else? In fact, it would seem that libertarianism is the humblest ideology, since it requires that all actions be voluntary. Social darwinism wouldn't happen, since so long as there is a free market, there will not be shortages, and thus might makes right could not happen.

[SPC]

I think that one of the most under reported story is that the Republican electorate had a chance to elect someone who was basically a social conservative, who was only a social conservative, and rejected him.

Me might be seeing the GOP moving toward a more libertarian position.

However, the Republican electorate had a chance to elect someone who was basically a neocon, who was only a neocon, and selected him.

I wouldn't count on the GOP becoming libertarian anytime soon. However, I will still be supporting Paulite Republicans for federal office, including Peter James and B.J. Lawson.

[ilikeverin]

Don't forget legalizing drugs!

and prostitution.  We shorten it (and make it sound better) by saying we're against the punishment of victimless crimes.

Except that prostitution isn't a victimless crime.  However, we should stop making being a victim (i.e., a prostitute) a crime.  Life without parole for being a pimp and a month (first offense) for being a john sounds about right.

How is the prostitute a victim? She is voluntarily selling her body for money, as she views the money as being more valuable than her body.

Oh, yes, the thousands of young women every year who have been subject to human trafficking just love to sell their bodies ever so much.

[Albus Dumbledore]

The solution is to legalize and regulate prostitution along with enforcing our immigration laws(to stop human trafficking).

[Brandon H]

Getting a off topic, but as to whether is there is room for libertarians in the Republican Party: the party is only concerned with two things. 1. You support the Iraq War and 2. You support John McCain. Otherwise, the Republican leadership could care less if you are a conservative, libertarian, populist, or even a liberal. They didn't tell the libertarian wing to f*** off because it's controlled by fundamentalist populists (quoting Fezzy). They told the libertarian wing to f*** off because it is opposed to the war. Now look at Liebermann. Liebermann isn't a conservative and isn't a Republican, but he supports the war in Iraq and look how close he and McCain are. I'm sure he had a lot of help getting re-elected from Republicans in 2006. So support for the war is more important than support for limited government.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Except that prostitution isn't a victimless crime.  However, we should stop making being a victim (i.e., a prostitute) a crime.  Life without parole for being a pimp and a month (first offense) for being a john sounds about right.

How is the prostitute a victim? She is voluntarily selling her body for money, as she views the money as being more valuable than her body.

Given the way most pimps "work", she probably sees having unbroken bones as being more valuable than the possibility of venereal disease.  Few prostitutes are volunteers, though of course most johns need the illusion that they are in order to not feel guilty about it.  In those countries such as Sweden which have decriminalized selling sex, but have tough enforcement of the crimes of buying sex and pimping, they have managed to drastically reduce prostitution.  Sweden doesn't have the Eastern European prostitutes that plague most of Western Europe (though they used to) because the organized crime groups that control the volunteers you speak of don't dare operate there any more.

[dead0man]

Oh, yes, the thousands of young women every year who have been subject to human trafficking just love to sell their bodies ever so much.

Do you think legalizing prostitution would make this situation worse or better?  What side are arguing for?

[HardRCafé]

If you took the worst characteristics of the Republican Party aned put them into one person, you would have Mike Huckabee.

But he can play a guitar just like a-ringin' a bell!

[SPC]

Don't forget legalizing drugs!

and prostitution.  We shorten it (and make it sound better) by saying we're against the punishment of victimless crimes.

Except that prostitution isn't a victimless crime.  However, we should stop making being a victim (i.e., a prostitute) a crime.  Life without parole for being a pimp and a month (first offense) for being a john sounds about right.

How is the prostitute a victim? She is voluntarily selling her body for money, as she views the money as being more valuable than her body.

Oh, yes, the thousands of young women every year who have been subject to human trafficking just love to sell their bodies ever so much.

When prostitution is illegal, she can't call the police when she is violated, for obvious reasons, When prostititon is legal, she can.

[HardRCafé]

Wow.  There is no reason for us ever to vote for the same people.