Talk:Libertarian Republican/Archive 1

Archive 1

Bob Barr

Bob Barr switched affiliation to the Libertarian Party. Should he still be listed here? 71.61.81.160 05:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Other topics

The more I read about him, the more I become utterly confused as to how Hensarling is in any way libertarian and not simply a straight, real, through and through classic Republican. He's a big Bush supporter, predictably votes pro-life and against measures to eliminate religious descrimination, and has a straightforward conservative economic policy. Sure, he's not like most modern Republicans that support Bush, but I can't imagine he fits in a different sub-faction. I'm not seeing it. --01:42, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Do you really think that "They tend to be Pro-choice and Pro-death Penalty." is accurate since most of the people listed below are pro-life and many libertarians support a state's right to decide on this issue. Also most libertarians are against the death penalty, including Ron Paul. --unsigned statement

Deletion

Why does this need to be a stand-alone article? Why can't it be incorporated into the regular article on the United States Republican Party? Hydriotaphia 08:17, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

I tend to agree. Maybe call up a vote to migrate it into there? 71.61.81.160 05:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. There are also standalone articles on the Religious Right, paleoconservatives, social conservatives, Log Cabin Republicans, fiscal conservatives, Rockefeller Republicans, the Ripon Society, South Park Republicans and even RINOs. It is a distinct enough group to merit its own article, it seems. Twalls 02:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

It should not be deleted. I agree with Twalls. If everything about Republicans was squeezed into that article anyways, it would be way too long. It's definitely distinct enough to merit its own article.  hmwith  talk 18:32, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Rudy Giuliani

While it is true that a number of libertarian Republicans are Rudy Giuliani supporters, it does not follow that Giuliani is a libertarian Republican himself. Also - I know that self-descriptions do not make it so, but has he ever used any language to describe himself as such? Twalls 18:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

He supports public funding of abortions and gun control. Most people who call him such are confused or most notably Eric Dondero, someone who is ideologically confused and is not a reputable source in the slightest.--24.252.38.144 04:45, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Actions speak louder than words. A woman can walk around saying, "I am not a liberal," but could walk around, actually making liberal political decisions. Her actions would show that she is a liberal, even if she says she's not. Maybe Rudy has a few things inconsistent with Libertarian Republican views, but it mostly fits. While I didn't originally add him, I added the sources, and I have heard him referred to as a LR in major media sources. That's how/why I originally started to like him. Whether he says he is or not, he's referred to as a LR in major media outlets. Not every Republican or Liberal has every single view match perfectly with the standard, and neither do most Libertarians, or LRs. hmwith 13:27, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

His ideology is not in accordance with Libertarianism on key issues, as well as some general statements on his ideology. First, let me attend to the issues he is out of line with.

*Gun Rights: According to the Gun Owners of America, Giuliani has a terrible track record on gun control, and his professed (I'm fairly cynical) belief of leaving decisions up to the States when he supported the semi-auto ban of the Clinton administration. His lawsuit against gun manufacturers also had very unlibertarian ideas, with support for forcing the industry to create safety devices. In fact, his entire reasoning on gun control is blatantly liberal, with the exception of his sudden belief of federalism -- but how opportune he has to change it when he now needs the support of a larger conservative base?

*Illegal Immigration: Giuliani believes that "illegals should earn citizenship", and has defended illegal immigrants while he was mayor of NYC by believing that that (according to the NYtimes) "And from City Hall he often defended illegal immigrants, ordering city workers not to deny them benefits and advocating measures to ease their path to citizenship.".

*National ID: Giuliani supports having a national id card. Also, when he says we have to "know who is here," he obviously refers to having a national ID card to determine citizenship. Not quite a stance I'd link to a libertarian at all.

*Abortion: Giuliani supports PUBLICLY funded abortion. Absolutely not a stance supported by libertarians or republicans.

There are probably more, but I'm getting tired. Let me move on to problems in his general idealogy. The biggest declaration of having a non-libertarian worldview is the following quote from a speech Giuliani gave on May 1994.

"We look upon authority too often and focus over and over again, for 30 or 40 or 50 years, as if there is something wrong with authority. We see only the oppressive side of authority. Maybe it comes out of our history and our background. What we don't see is that freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be. Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do."

That statement is a complete slap in the face to any insinuations that Giuliani is a libertarian. Libertarians do not believe that freedom is about giving up individual freedoms in the pursuit of security... in fact, it's the exact opposite! Do I need to bring that famous Benjamin Franklin quote up? I don't think I do. All his views that are congruent to libertarian ideals can be easily explained by Giuliani being a liberal, not a libertarian/conservative.

I would also like links to sites that refer to Giuliani as a libertarian republican... preferably ones that aren't blogs or that ontheissues page.--24.252.38.144 10:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

The edit removing the mention of Giuliani could hardly be considered vandalism. It was made in good faith. The assertion that Giuliani is a libertarian is certainly controversial, and the article should reflect the fact that Giuliani has both supporters and detractors among libertarians and libertarian Republicans. Twalls 15:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

It was removal of information without any edit summary or reasons for it. Someone just randomly removed it.  hmwith  talk 15:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

But let's face it; Giuliani is hardly a libertarian. He's socially liberal and fiscally liberal. He doesn't belong on the page.--24.252.38.144 20:04, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to be removing Giuliani until better proof comes along that he adheres to a libertarian ideology. His own page mentions nothing about libertarianism (except for a link to an article on why libertarians should avoid him). I recognize you believe him to be so in good faith, but I simply believe that putting him in this category is a gross mischaracterization of what libertarian republicans are. I am 24.252.38.144, by the way. --Korey Kaczynski 20:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

This isn't my opinion here, as whether or not I believe Rudy is a Libertarian Republican doesn't matter, but the media has widely considered him to be a Libertarian Republican for a while now. I've heard it on many national news broadcasts, and I'm trying to find a published source. Also, question: How is MSNBC not a reliable source?  hmwith  talk 20:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

The article stated that he had a libertarian stance on abortion, not that he was a libertarian himself. Furthermore, his stance on allowing public funding of abortion is neither a libertarian nor a conservative view, but a liberal one.--Korey Kaczynski 03:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I would also add that being that libertarians can easily be for or against abortion, as ideologically they would view individual responsibility in abortion. The difference would be that they'd view abortion in different terms, depending on the viablity of the fetus. After all, libertarians generally believe that any action that doesn't harm another human being is permissible, so abortion (being partially a question of whether or not a fetus constitutes a life) can be approached from different perspectives under libertarianism.--Korey Kaczynski 03:13, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with whether MSNBC is a reliable source. A comment by an MSNBC writer noting that Giuliani takes certain libertarian-leaning positions is not proof that he is a libertarian. Certainly, Giuliani's own record and own statements do not strongly back that assertion. The most one can say is that he has fiscally conservative and socially moderate tendencies. Twalls 14:12, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

If I misread or misinterpreted the article, which it appears that I did, I apologize. Thanks for kindly correcting the reliability of the source for that statement. I wasn't even the one who originally added Rudy, I just added sources for it.  hmwith  talk 19:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

WOT

The part about libertarian Republicans being willing to overlook civil liberties violations in support of the war on terror is unfounded, and seems like a cheap swipe, unless one considers someone like Rudy Giuliani to be a libertarian Republican (and virtually no one does). One can argue that some are more pro-defense, etc.. Twalls 03:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Paul Broun?

Can anyone provide libertarian credentials for GA congressman Paul Broun? I looked him up a few days ago after reading this article, but couldn't find anything to differentiate him from a plain old conservative. Reading this increases my suspicion, but surely someone knows more about him than I do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.97.102 (talk) 21:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Jefferson, Mill, Locke, Smith

Garrick75, how could these guys be libertarian Republicans? Jefferson co-founded the Democratic-Republican Party, quite a different animal than the GOP - it actually later became the Democratic Party. JS Mill, John Locke and Adam Smith were not US citizens, much less members of the GOP. Your other edits were really good, btw. Twalls (talk) 17:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)