« Wingnuts Gone Wild: "Psychiatrist" says liberals are mentally ill | Ken Bank's Blog | God tells Pat Robertson to sell dollars and buy gold »
GOP "libertarians" fear Obama will turn Bedford Falls into Pottersville
The Illinois state chapter of the Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC) posted an interesting, if not amusing, essay on their website warning against a radical social agenda that will be pursued by the Obama Administration. The RLC is ostensibly a libertarian-leaning organization which supports GOP candidates, like Ron Paul, who share their political orientation. As evidence of their professed concern for personal liberty they state on their home page, "We believe it is vital to repeal all laws limiting the right of an individual to act as he/she chooses - so long as he/she does not use force or fraud."
However, in the posted essay, this same bunch of "liberty-loving" clowns demonstrate that their love of liberty does not extend beyond gunslingers and predatory capitalists. According to these paleoconservatives masquerading as libertarians:
"The social policy advisors Obama has picked are leaders in the abortion business and honchos of the homosexual lobby. They aim to remake the U.S. in their own image. If they succeed, the entire U.S. will look like Greenwich Village during the Halloween parade, dog collars and all."
Of course, legitimate libertarians wouldn't care if the entire U.S., including Wassilla, Alaska, will look like Greenwich Village during the Halloween parade. But I'm sure many of them would enjoy watching Sarah Palin in black lingerie and jackboots marching down Main Street holding a whip and putting Ted Stevens in a dog collar.
Advertisement
What?! This is an absolutely absurd article. Firstly, one can be personally opposed to homosexuality and still libertarian, and even quite tolerant on homosexuality altogether. Nowheres in the libertarian credo does it say: "Libertarian = Support for Homosexuality."
Secondly, even many Gays, are opposed to the Radical Homosexual agenda, and public displays of extremist homosexual acts. Here's a couple websites you should check out: Average Gay Joe, Tammy Bruce and Gay Patriot. Not all of the Nation's Gay/Lesbian population are Leftwingers.
Thirdly, the Republican Liberty Caucus is hardly "paleoconservative." I should know. I founded the organization in 1990 in my living room in Tallahassee, Florida. And about half the co-founders of the group that were with me at the time were punk rockers/metal heads, (like Phil Blumel and Tom Walls, and myself included). Hardly what you would call "social conservatives." More, "alternative lifestyles" advocates. The RLC over the years has included a very large Gay contingent: One year the head of the Log Cabin Clubs was the RLC National Convention banquet speaker, Swingers, and at the 2006 RLC National Convention in Orlando, the Nudists even had an information booth.
Now, how many Republican groups you know that would have Gay/Lesbian advocates, Swingers, and Nudists among their ranks?
Added to the group being founded by punker rockers, ss that what you would term "paleoconservative"?
Eric Dondero, Founder
Republican Liberty Caucus
Fmr. Libertarian National Committeeman
Publisher, Libertarian Republican blog
December 25, 2008 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Added to the group being founded by punker rockers, [i]s that what you would term "paleoconservative"?."
I don't think it precludes being interpreted as anything in particular.
December 25, 2008 11:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dondero is a libertarian, only in his own mind.
It seems that Dondero has other fantasies rolling around upstairs in that abyss: "Radical Homosexual agenda"
He is right about the RLC not being paleoconservative. Hell, the RLC is even really conservative. They are right-wing activists masquerading in an attempt to hide their "Radical Agenda". When it comes to core conservatism, who are you going to believe: a self-promoting putz, or Barry Morris Goldwater?
C'mon Dondero, perform your routine about the libertarian justification for the War Upon Iraq for TMP Cafe members. Outstanding humour from a Reagancomic...It's pretentious blowhards such as yourself that have given libertarianism its bad name as nothing but a bunch on illibertarian greed-heads. Time has come for the "anarchist wing" of the Libertarian Party to defend against their being attacked by the putrid posing equivocators of liberty.
Welcome to the future, pretender.
December 26, 2008 12:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
BTW, I and the vast majority of libertarian Republicans are Pro-Choice on abortion. But we also oppose government funding of abortions, something that Obama supports.
So, you completely and rather stupidly in fact, misinterpret the libertarian viewpoint on the issue.
December 25, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Libertarian Republican" is an oxymoron.
While it is true that some libertarians are opposed to abortion, one cannot be a libertarian and support governmental interference into a woman's personal reproductive choices, nor medical decisions made between a woman and her doctor.
You don't really believe in less government intrusion, now do you Dondero?
December 26, 2008 12:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
If you're looking for a Fascist, try Barack Hussein Obama. The man supports:
Redistribution of Wealth
Greatly increased Taxation
A Return to the Draft/Mandatory National Service
Nanny-State policies such as Smoking bans, beefed up Seat Belt law enforcement, and Gambling restrictions
Reverse Discrimination through Affirmative Action quotas
Increased Penalties for Drug Use, via his Drug Warrior AG Appointee Eric Holder
Crack-downs on Free Speech through Bans on Conservatives/libertarians speaking at college campuses, and implementation of the Fairness Doctrine
He is about as far away on the political spectrum as you could possibly get from a libertarian. He's in the terrority of a Hitler/Stalin lite. Not quite Pol Pot, but dangerously close to Totalitarian.
December 25, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Take a deep breath and get back on those meds dude.
December 25, 2008 11:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wait...I though Obamunism was socialistic, not fascist.
December 26, 2008 12:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Congratulations, you just got your 15 minutes of fame. I penned an article in response to your idiotic remarks above over at Libertarian Republican blog.
December 25, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
what's the matter?
Afraid to cross post it here?
December 26, 2008 1:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Libertarians are actually Anarchists who want the
government to protect them from their slaves.
C
December 25, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Democrats are actually Fascists who want to enslave us all, through confiscatory taxation, and nanny-state regulations designed to protect us from ourselves.
December 25, 2008 2:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't forget the dog collars.
December 25, 2008 11:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd think a beanie with a whirly-gig would be more appropriate for dem dat worship the author of pathetic bodice-ripper fiction.
(chicken shrugged)
December 26, 2008 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
My first reaction to Dondero's comments was to start thinking about a rebuttal. Then I read the actual essay AND looked at some of the other stuff on the RLC website. It would be like arguing with my dog.
December 25, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
JerseyCurmudgeon: Libertarians and Republicans are famous for their hatred of regulations; let the markets decide, they say. The market is wise. The market is self correcting. Freedom! Freedom! We see where that delusion has gotten us.
As you say, attempting to rebut them is like arguing with your dog. As the Arabs say, "The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on."
December 25, 2008 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or, the freight train moves on, as in the freight train headed to Obama's concentration camps. That' what we're all headed for under Obama's Fascist administration.
You honestly think that what we've had under Bush these past few years has been "free enterprise"? It's warmed over Democrat lite. On the domestic agenda he gave the Democrats just about everything they wanted.
If you want to see what a Libertarian Administration would be like elect Mark Sanford, Sarah Palin or Gary Johnson President.
December 25, 2008 9:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
"...a freight train to Obama's concentration camps."
My dog would make more sense then this absurd statement.
Dondero, you're train has left the station and there is no one who can follow that has any relationship with reality. Sure, you found some followers. There are 300 million people in this country. No surprise you could coax a few into your fantasy world. But Obama is nothing like Hitler or any other fascist.
December 26, 2008 1:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
SARAH PALIN? Are you serious?
Whew. OK folks, this dude is certifiably insane. Argue with him if you want, but I could get more sense from my office chair.
December 26, 2008 10:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yup, nobody listens to us libertarians alright. That's why everybody and their mother these days are jumping all over each other to call themselves "libertarians."
We're the cool, hip deal all of a sudden. People who have nothing in common with libertarians, suddenly are saying stuff like "I'm rather libertarian on that," just so they can be cool.
But hey according to you, "nobody listens to libertarians."
December 25, 2008 9:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
At the risk of being judged 'uncool' I have to say you are just too weird Eric D. Your arguments are circular and and even if "everybody and their mother these days are jumping all over each other to call themselves "libertarians" that doesn't make you right about anything.
Oh.. and regarding, quoted text here, No thank you.
As Nick said above "The dogs bark, the caravan moves on".
December 25, 2008 11:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
missing quoted text: "If you want to see what a Libertarian Administration would be like elect Mark Sanford, Sarah Palin or Gary Johnson President. "
December 25, 2008 11:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
right-wingers are trying to redefine themselves a "libertarians" in an effort to disassociate themselves from the awful mess caused by the Presidency of G.W. Bush, and Republicans Gone Wild in DC 2002-2006. They want you to believe that this is not resultant from a real world application of their hell-on-earth political point of view.
More evidence that the LRC is not really a conservative organization. A foundational axiom of Conservatism is accepting personal responsibility for the effects of past actions, come hell or high water. Yet these clown run away from responsibility using renunciations as smokescreens to cover their complicit backsides. Didya learn that one from the Trokskyist Neo-Conservatives, or is the radical right just as dishonest and cowardly as they are?
December 26, 2008 1:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
NickthePick: Don't know about you, but I see these posts as interesting, if sad, windows into minds trapped in alternate realities.
December 25, 2008 11:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
NickthePick: BTW, there is a disorder called "lock-in", in which people become so "locked in" to attitudes, beliefs, etc. that contrary evidence strengthens their attachment to these mental constructs rather than calling them into question. They also form or are attracted to groups that exist to validate their beliefs.
Here is an interesting article on the subject: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss2/art36/
December 25, 2008 11:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
What do you call mandatory national service?
I call it Fascist.
Bush opposes it, as he has opposed quite strongly any form of the draft. Obama, and his right-hand man Rahm Emanual are enthusiastic supporters of mandatory national service.
How about mandated health care? Forcing people to participate in government-run health care, is nothing short of Fascism.
Free speech bans through the Fairness Doctrine?
Income Tax rates at 70%+ for some?
Increased regulations and environmental restrictions on small business who are already way over-regulated?
It all comes straight out of the Mussolini playbook.
Obama is essentially "Fascism with a Smile."
December 26, 2008 10:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Q. What do you call mandatory national service?
It need be noted that the arse asking this question is a full bore supporter of the GWOT, yet doesn't believe that it is right that his life or the life of those associated with him should be in anyway exposed to jeopardy in the achievement of this goal. The tell-tale bawk of a caponhawk.
Q. Free speech bans through the Fairness Doctrine?
This has become another dodge for poseur libertarians, who lick the boot of collectivist business entities. Broadcast licenses have never been given out as property, but instead as a privilege under the justification of a bandwidth scarcity rationale. Broadcast licenses are nothing more than an entitlement to politically powerful corporate interests. They have nothing to do with a free-market. I do not believe it is the proper method to handle bandwidth, and would instead prefer it be handled as a property right to preexisting users of a specific bandwidth range, which is not vested in perpetuity. Bandwidth ownership should be a strictly use it or lose it paradigm, and the court system should resolve any controversies, not an appointive agency. Asserting that in exchange for a grant of monopolistic control over bandwidth, the government expects a quid quo pro intended to assure that differing political views have an opportunity to be aired is a fascist repression of free speech is absurd.
Q. Increased regulations and environmental restrictions on small business who are already way over-regulated?
Yet you are not advocating the real libertarian perspective which would be a proper counterbalance either. Any business which does environmental damage is rightfully exposed to real cost remediation from any party who is able to prove their natural and lawful rights to life liberty and property have been harmed in civil lawsuits, which are completely unimpeded through legislated "pro-business" restrictions upon their ability to seek redress. This includes damages caps, and as well as limitations on plaintiff standing. C'mon Dondero, tell me how you are an unabashed supporter of open courtroom access to any and all citizens seeking recovery for the damages done to them by business activities.
It seems that in at least these arguments, it is you who defends fascism, not individual liberty.
December 28, 2008 12:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Awful mess created by George W. Bush?"
Really?
Two Wars won in record time, and with the lowest number of American Troop casualties in the history of US Warfare.
And the Economic Recession? Coincidence that we had 6 good years of growth, and Presto! Democrats take control of Congress, and it all goes to pot.
Funny how you Leftists try to spin this Recession as Republican-created, when it is entirely the fault of Pelosi, Reid and the Gang.
December 26, 2008 10:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your hurling the asinine derogation of "leftist" at me only provides further proof that you are not a libertarian, but instead one who is locked within the imaginary prison of a political linearity.
Two wars won? You are an indefatigable BuShill, the evidence notwithstanding, aren't you? Further proof of your inherent illibertarianism is easily discerned from your callous disregard of a core tenant of libertarianism: initiating force is never justified. The War Upon Iraq was predicated on reason which turned out to be false, and the doctrine of "preemptive self-defense", which is certainly an unjust initiation of violence. The war in Afghanistan can hardly be called a win at this point, unless you've got your head up Perle's ass.
I see you avoided any commenting on my Goldwater citation. I'm not surprised, nor will I be surprised to see you falsely attributing your political point of view to him in the future. You aren't a libertarian, and you aren't a REAL conservative either. There isn't one amongst the whole feedlot of Contemporary Conservatism's ranks, fit to tongue shine the interred shoes of Senator Barry Morris Goldwater, although many of them boldly lie, claiming they walk the walk.
Riddle me this volunsteer: does Tennessee now need a bail-out from the TVA's coal ash, and will Senator Corker hold the fort on fiscal responsibility now that it's his constituency that is buried? I won't be holding my breath, nor will I be laying any money down on it, at any odds. Contemporary Conservatism sold its soul when it allowed in under its mantle, the new right and neoconservatives. Now it happily dances the jig of the moral relativist in a much finer performance than ever performed by the New left.
December 27, 2008 9:33 AM | Reply | Permalink