Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePhanastasio
Naturally. The Libertarian Party is more closely aligned with the Republicans in terms of fiscal and economic beliefs and radically liberal in social matters, more like many Democrats.
|
That's exactly it. I think one of the biggest problems of Libetarinism is that so mnay people just can't get passed the economic right wing element so associated with conservatives.
Nonee of the conservatives abolished govt. departments as Friedmann belived should or could be abolished.
Regan didn't announce the Presidential oath should be re-written to allow atheists to take it
Regan didn't decriminalise narcotics and use american diplomatic power to arrange for cocaine to be grown, processed, distributed and put on the market in the U.S.A so that the cocaine trade could flourish.
None of the Bush's repealed laws prohibiting the market in people playing Russian roulette as a Libertarian party would do
.
Let's look at the U.K. We all know M.Thatcher sold the monstorus N.H.S off in 1987 only for T.Blair to have to renationalise healthcare in the u.k. Hang on. So, called lover of the free market M.Thatcher didn't sell the monstorous N.H.S. She kept taxing the country to fund it thereby encouraging people to spend their money on more ***'s and booze 'cause they didn't have to worry about getting liver disease and cancer 'cause there's the N.H.S to pick them up, or try to, when they're squalid indulgences catch up with them
Did M.Thatcher, Blair, Brown, Cameron or the 'liberal' Clegg have in their manifesto the abolishon of the the monarchy or that they were going to stop throwing people in jail for the heinous crime of not wearing any clothes or not paying a licensee fee used to fund the state broadcasting corparation?
They didn't do all those things because their not Libertarians.