Jul
26
2013

Tweet of the Day, There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Liberaltarian edition.

MSNBC just can’t help themselves, poor things.

The fascinating part is the way that a progressive network so casually went for the disemboweling stroke on libertarians, there. Which is unsurprising: the alternative is to face that Detroit is the way that it is because the most rabid ideological elements of [the] Democratic party had no opposition to its will and desires there for a half-century. And dear God, but it shows.

17 Comments

  • midwestconservative says:

    Speaking of Libertarians, apparently Chris Christie and Peter King think Hillary Clinton is better on foreign policy then Rand Paul. Now Rand Paul is weak on foreign policy no doubt, but unless Scoop Jackson rises from the grave there isn’t a single Dem out there who can beat your generic Republican on foreign policy even Rand Paul.
    I will note there are two Republicans who if given the right choices I could end up voting against and neither are Rand Paul.

    • midwestconservative says:

      I’ll grant you the Dems aren’t smart enough to give me a better choice so I’ll probably end up voting for either of those two candidates if they are the nominee.

      • acat says:

        I decline to support Christie in the *general*.
        .
        I *will* “waste” my vote if he’s the candidate.
        .
        Mew

        • midwestconservative says:

          I will undervote Christie, and maybe Bush ( the last name has done more damage to the Republican party and conservatism than any Democrat).
          I’m not a single issue voter, and I don’t particular want Rand Paul or Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio ( a Governor, preferably one who hasn’t done anything to tick any body off in the base)
          Chris Christie is not it. It doesn’t matter how much he attacks Rand on foreign Policy, and Republican who thinks any Dem is stronger on foreign policy than even the weakest Republican, is clearly a moron and should just stop talking.

  • jbird says:

    There is no way Chris Christie will survive the first couple weeks of the Republican Presidential Primaries. He’s alienating too many constituencies. The future of the GOP is to chart a middle ground between the Tea Party and the libertarians, not bank hard left.

    • Free-range Oyster says:

      The idea of the “middle ground” being between the Tea Party and the straight-up libertarians makes me smile. A lot. Now if only I could bring myself to believe that it could happen.

      • acat says:

        Defeating the Democrats should be sufficient, Oyster.
        .
        Sadly, the power of “and” is much diminished, in these benighted times.
        .
        Mew

    • Aruges says:

      The last two cycles would seem to bely the idea that a candidate like Christie can’t get the nomination. All he needs is a divided conservative block and he’s in. Cruz and Paul can easily provide that.

      • Aruges says:

        So, to avoid a Christie, we need a united conservative block. And to get that it would be nice to have some sort of conservative primary before the party primary.

        • midwestconservative says:

          It would take more than two conservatives to give Christie the nod, remember Romney only had about a fourth, and some of Romney’s supporters will not back Christie after the way he treated Romney back in 2012. 4 or 5 Conservatives would be sufficient to get Christie over the hump ( but Christie will have to compete with at least one moderate besides himself as well) any less and he doesn’t have enough votes.

  • Darin_H says:

    Shorter PMSNBC: “Please dear gaia, please let me blame anyone other than Democrats”

  • sicsemperstolidissimum says:

    So, conservatives try to preserve the foundations of society, the left tries to destroy them, because that is what constantly encouraging everything to change does, and Libertarians are the result of society’s foundations being destroyed? That actually makes a fair amount of sense.
    .
    Government, large cities and civilizations are not the natural order of man. Societies worth historical records are abnormal and uncommon compared to the ones that generally have not been been passed down to us. Big complicated societies take a lot of mental software to operate and hold back failure, much less grow and prosper. If the extreme end of the spectrum, opposite from city builders, is composed of people too dysfunctional to ever cooperate, then one could justify seeing Libertarians as being a step in that direction.
    .
    Really, they are probably just trying to do it as a branding thing. They are most likely trying to paint advanced forms of society involving restricted government as being inferior to their own favored wretched tyranny.

    • acat says:

      The obvious difference between a small-government city, with services provided by openly, competitively bid contracts, vs. a murky, bureaucrat-and-union-heavy city employee system seems .. like a no-brainer.
      .
      The problem I have with the GOP is how many idiots believe they can run the bureaucrat-infested union-contract-bound nightmare “better” .. and that “better” is somehow good enough.
      .
      Christie exemplifies the breed… So did Wafflin’ Willard.
      .
      Mew

  • [...] Moe Lane writes in response, “The fascinating part is the way that a progressive network so casually went for the [...]

  • Finrod says:

    Well, this makes it obvious that the Left considers libertarians a Threat.

    • acat says:

      A well-reasoned libertarian position peels a good bit of Dem support… Look at the bipartisan support for neutering the NSA.
      .
      If the IRS scandals were presented as a government overreach by the media, it should also peel support.
      .
      The ones who have the most to lose are the statists … I suppose I should thank Christie for self-identifying as one, so I can raise a middle claw at him.
      .
      Mew

RSS feed for comments on this post.


Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com