Jeremy wrote:Mike Huckabee doesn't even know what a libertarian is and neither do you. The reason why I have suddenly "turned" on Huckabee was because of the misguided insult towards libertarians that you mentioned.
Let's take a trip down quote-alley.
"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is." - Ronald Reagan (1975)
I suppose we're all imbeciles and have no clue what libertarianism is, eh? Huckabee and his supporters are too dumb to understand the term libertarianism, right?
Since you used Reagan's quote, I find it curious as to why you left out what Reagan said immediately after the quote you quoted:
"Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path."
Later in the interview:
REASON: You said earlier that government doesn’t exist to protect people from themselves. Let’s take the desert island shipwreck situation. Would you be in favor of any laws against gambling in the shipwrecked island situation?
REAGAN: You’ve named an issue that is one of the most difficult for me to reconcile. I know this gets into the whole area of the sin laws and here again I think you’re in one of the grey areas. There’s one side of me that says I know this is protecting us from ourselves; there’s another side of me, however, that says you can make the case that it does get into an area in which we are protecting us from each other.
I cannot go along with the libertarian philosophy that says that all of the sin laws can be ruled out as simply trying to protect us from ourselves. You can take the case of the father who gambles his money away and thus leaves his family dependent on the re’ of us. You can take surrounding areas–the necessity for protection against dishonest gambling–which requires added government duties and obligations."
Source:
http://www.reason.com/news/show/29318.htmlOh, and Huckabee wasn't being "misguided" or "insulting" (though you and other libertarians might have taken it that way) when he spoke about libertarianism being the biggest threat to conservatism and the GOP. He was merely speaking the truth and what he personally believes. And to be honest, partially quoting Reagan on his view of libertarianism and conservatism nearly 33 years ago, proves absolutely nothing.
Libertarians and what they believe in have changed from the days during which Reagan spoke of. If libertarianism is so similar to conservatism and come from the same place, then why is there a Libertarian Party and why do libertarians seem to feel the need to bash both Republicans and Democrats, trying to draw support away from either side? If it's such a great political philosophy, surely it can attract more members based solely on its own ideology and merits.
Libertarians are too tunnel-visioned for my liking. They don't seem to care for anything but as little as possible to no taxes and as little as possible to no government. They will condemn anyone who even thinks about raising taxes, as if taxes are pure evil and not a necessity in modern society. They will condemn anyone who wants to spend tax money on anything. Simply put, libertarianism is only an ideology and cannot work in practice. Please tell me where I'm wrong, since you're a true libertarian and only those like you seem to understand what libertarianism really is.
By the way, did you even read his new book or did you believe in the BS excerpts on the Internet, regarding his comments on libertarianism? Because he dedicated an entire chapter to "Faux-Cons" and explains why he believes in what he believes. Instead of taking Huckabee haters' word, why don't you actually read what he wrote? It's sad that you have learned nothing this primary season in regards to how Huckabee was treated by the MSM.
Jeremy wrote:Anyway, Mike Huckabee does not support smaller government as shown by this National Taxpayers Union graph from the 2008 primaries.
*bar graph*
Mike Huckabee also supported higher taxes as a governor. He did not reduce the size of government.
Yet another odd omission of the full facts in your bar graph:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v514/ ... ls2008.jpgSource:
http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=154Most of Huckabee's supposed spending proposals are in the National Security/Defense category, according to your source; similar to Fred Thompson's supposed spending proposals. So I guess Huckabee (and Thompson) isn't a conservative because he wants to make the U.S. more secure, huh? Funny how he was criticized as not having enough national security experience/credentials back in the primaries and now he's criticized by the likes of you for wanting to spend more in that department. "Damned if you do, damned if you don't."
Oh, and about your last comment... I'd take libertarians like (you and) Bob Barr more seriously if he actually ran something (like a state) instead of being just a talking head in Congress. It's easy to harp on others without ever having to run a government yourself, have to be responsible for balancing budgets, and actually having a record to defend/show for.
Also, like "dei" said, he was MANDATED by the courts to raise those taxes in Arkansas. It was either raise some taxes or cut spending on crucial state programs like Medicaid (mandated), education (also mandated by the courts), prison system, etc. You should know better than to falsely and unfairly criticize Huckabee on his tax record, given that you were once a supporter of his. Or maybe you just didn't study up on his record at all? Either way, I'm disappointed in the garbage you've been posting, Jeremy. And in the end, you have proven Huckabee right about his opinions of libertarians like yourself. Good day.
by Al Bregar on Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:29 am 
