Libertarians: Closer to Liberals or Conservatives ?

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

His nomination of Alito will serve to take away the rights of the individual.

That's interesting. Please explain why in the medical marijauana case the dissenting votes in favor of individual freedom were from Rehnquist, O'Connor & Thomas and on the Eminent domain case, the dissenting votes against low-income homeowners having their property seized by the government for corporate development were Rehnquist, O'Connor, Thomas and Scalia.

Seems in those two cases, individual freedom was being upheld by the justices with resumes close to Alitos.

Or are you just one of those liberals who thinks the only valid individual freedom is the right to an abortion?

I'm not a liberal. Liberals are pro-choice on abortion. I'm a libertarian. I'm pro-choice on everything.

[lehighguy]

Conservative judges voted against McCain-Fiengold in court. I know Scalia did because I read his dissent. There is precedent going all the way back to the founding days relating to newspaper and print advertisement and the entire idea of money = speech. I'm not sure what your claim is here?

Thanks for your gross generalizations BTW. I voted libraterian in the last election. And no, it's not just about excess, Republicans actually want us to live in some kind of 1950s Christian utopia and I don't agree with that. The excess helps though.

P.S. Maybe you are just trying to justify the fact that you don't like the people you vote for, but you justify it by saying the other side is worse. The idea of people who actually vote thier conscious is frightning to you, so you have to try whatever you can to stick them in the group you don't like.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

true conservatism is about God being in charge, men answering to God, women answering to their husbands

Wow. I already know I'm not a liberal, but if this is true, I'm also not a conservative.

[canis582]

"Or are you just one of those liberals who thinks the only valid individual freedom is the right to an abortion?"

This is known as setting up a straw man so you have something defenseless to beat up. Ann "crazy legs" coulter has taught you well.
---------------

Alito wants to expand police powers and take rights away from women.

Should an abused wife have to get permission from her husband in order to get an abortion?

Should police officers be allowed to strip search 14 year old girls without a warrant or probable cause?

Alito says YES!

[lehighguy]

Censorship. Everywhere. Have you insulted anyone lately, it's like against the freaking law. And god forbid you might try to pray somewhere. Personally I haven't gone to church in years, but the fact the religion is treated different from non-religous philosophies has always baffled me.

[lehighguy]

The goal of McCain-Feingold was to limit the kind of fund raising and advertising that was damaging to incumbents. Congress voted for a bill that ensured thier own jobs.

[lehighguy]

Welcome to libraterianism. If you understand Eco 101, and you don't go to church, you'll like it here.

[The Don]

A true libertarian believes that the economic "freedoms" advocated by conservatives are grossly insufficient. Additionally, the restriction of individual freedom and rigidly defined "moral values" are quite disturbing to them. Any "libertarian" who would actually vote Republican certainly does not have enough conviction in his ideals to actually consider himself one.

[canis582]

"And god forbid you might try to pray somewhere."

Has anyone's right to pray ever been infringed upon in the US?

Leading an entire school is prayer is not praying, its imposing your creed on others, which is a violations of their rights.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Conservative judges voted against McCain-Fiengold in court.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay? Point being? This is in relation to absolutely nothing I said. I know conservative justices voted against McCain-Feingold in court, which is why I posted a link to Scalia's commentary - and it's not necessarily true that conservatives voted against all of the provisions in the BCRA; it was a complicated case that actually involved 2 separate rulings, each with its own opinion and dissent -- neither dissent was written by Scalia.

My point wasn't that conservative justices were hypocritical for voting against the BCRA, or that they didn't vote against the BCRA, or whatever you think I'm getting at -- my point was that the right-wing narrative concerning jurisprudence (i.e., conservatives study 'the text' and 'follow the law' while liberals 'make things up' and are 'judicially active') is frequently inaccurate, disingenuous and hypocritical.

[ QUOTE ]
I know Scalia did because I read his dissent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Scalia didn't officially write a dissenting opinion; he added commentary because he thought the case was vital -- but he didn't write a dissent in McConnell v FEC.

[ QUOTE ]
There is precedent going all the way back to the founding days relating to newspaper and print advertisement and the entire idea of money = speech. I'm not sure what your claim is here?

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, point being? This is in relation to absolutely nothing I said. What I was trying to get at is this: to claim (as etgryphon did) that prohibiting campaign contributions is a violation of the First Amendment, you have to do some interpreting -- and interpreting (where Scalia says it stands to reason that the First Amendment extends to corporations, as liberals have claimed numerous amendments provide a right to privacy) is what judges do -- jurisprudence is not, as the right frequently claims, the difference between what conservatives do ('follow the the letter of the law') and what liberals do ('invent stuff out of your ass'). And McConnell v FEC is a prime example of why conservatives rely just as heavily on interpretation, reason, and other instruments of deduction to claim rights can legitimately exist which aren't explicitly in the text of the Constitution.

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for your gross generalizations BTW. I voted libraterian in the last election. And no, it's not just about excess, Republicans actually want us to live in some kind of 1950s Christian utopia and I don't agree with that. The excess helps though.

P.S. Maybe you are just trying to justify the fact that you don't like the people you vote for, but you justify it by saying the other side is worse. The idea of people who actually vote thier conscious is frightning to you, so you have to try whatever you can to stick them in the group you don't like.

[/ QUOTE ]

Read my post carefully :

[ QUOTE ]
(and this is just my personal experience, and this certainly constitutes an unfair jab at some for whom this description does not fit)

[/ QUOTE ]