The reasoning of a Conservative.

Eric Dondero, has challenged me to a reasoning duel, and I have accepted in good spirit.

Firstly, not all Libertarians are Anti-Defense. In fact, a very large segment of us are staunchly Pro-Defense, even within the Libertarian Party. For example, in 2003, at the start of the War in Iraq, then LP News Editor Bill Winter conducted an internal poll of Libertarian membership. He found fully 40% of LP members supported the invasion.

Yes, the LP is a lot less Pro-Defense than it once was, but that's only because the vast majority of Pro-Defense Libertarians have left the Party, and joined the Republican Liberty Caucus.

Secondly, to say that "Libertarians never win elections," is completely inaccurate. By some estimates 400 to 500 Libertarian Party members currently serve in public office nationwide. Just last week we here at LR reported on a Libertarian who won election to the Cedar Falls City Council in Iowa. Two weeks before that, in the off-year elections Nov. 3, 11 Libertarians won office nationwide, including Dan Halloran to the New York City Council. In fact, that's more elected officials than any other third party in the US.

Over the years, 10 Libertarians have been elected to State Legislators in Alaska, New Hampshire, and Vermont. And for the record, Congressman Ron Paul of Texas is a Lifetime Member of the Libertarian Party, a dual Party Republican/Libertarian. (Sort of like Lieberman is both an Independent and a Democrat).

Yes, for practical purposes the RLC is best. But without the Libertarian Party, we Libertarian Republicans would have no "safety valve," nowheres to escape if the GOP were to become too statist like the Democrats. The LP serves as our insurance policy. And I for one, am very glad they're around.

- Dondero - http://libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com/2009/12/rlc-vs-lp-round-ii.html

Conservative response -

40% of registered Libertarians supported the initial phases of the war in Iraq, I think a larger percentage of Democrats supported the effort at the same time. This does not impress me, that just 40% of a political movement/party which is suppose to represent the values of our Founders, is in favor of war to protect those same values.

I could debate on the merits of the Republican Liberty Caucus all day long, but my attention is needed else where in the official 100% Ronald Reagan approved Conservative response.

400-500 Libertarians are elected across America, now imagine all of those who could have been elected, if they ran on the Republican line instead, I am talking about the elections that count ; congressional, gubernatorial, the race for the White House, etc. All of these elections have one thing in common, whether it be congressional or a Libertarian in a local office, it is taking votes from the GOP, not a positive outcome.

Another reason to defeat Congressman Paul, and replace him with a Conservative Republican.

An insurance policy? That is the problem with millions of Republicans who are looking at a new political movement, a new platform, a new party to run in place of the Republicans. Instead of focusing on the Republicans, making the party stronger, they're looking for an "escape valve" so to speak, and that escape valve would spell the end of two dominant political parties in America.

I will never be able to persuade Libertarians on this issue, however, the Republicans represent our best chance of returning fiscal Conservatism to Washington, strong Constitutional Justices to the Supreme Court and those that are inferior, protecting our Nation at all costs via defense, and for social Conservatism which means a great deal to most Americans. 700,000 voters cast their ballots for Libertarian or Constitution candidates for President, those 700,000 votes cost Senator McCain two states, imagine if the election was closer.....

Bookmark our site!

Consider advertising on our site!