Unanue gets Cape May County line

So this guy announces from Vail Colorado that he wants to represent New Jersey in the Senate, and he's getting the line in multiple counties?

The NJ GOP is really getting pathetic.  

Enough said. You're a joke.

Clarky,

Thank you very much and I appreciate you taking the time to correspond with me and recognizing my quick wit, which I have to agree with you, I am a very entertaining fella. 

Now we know what is required from the GOP US Senate candidate - being dynamic (see skiing), wants to get involved (see running for the US Senate), without the political baggage (see unknown candidates), must know how to make phone calls (see political donations).

Let me get it straight: A guy named David Von Savage endorses unknown candidate, he e-mails 16 other guys in his county announcing his decision and 13 of them gets back with unanimous support of his decision no questions asked. Can you belive this s---?

The Cape May County Republican Party needs a serious reform now! Are there any brave souls there? I bet they are going to wait until June primaries to have their say. Let's all wait until June primaries and kick this s--- away.

Who is with me? 

"How can anyone who believes in a strong national defense be a timeline advocate?"

If that person understands that having the majority of our troops overseas does not protect America.  

"This guy is a surrenderista."

Remember President Bush's infamous victory banner on the aircraft carrier? We won the war back then. The President was right. This is an occupation, and we ought to have a plan to end the occupation. There is nothing left to win. 

"ANd where do they get off saying "30 Years of Conservative Leadership."  He was Libertarian until 2000!"

The Libertarian Party has been invited to participate in CPAC for quite a while. And Reagan referred to his political philosophy as both "libertarian" and "libertarian-conservative." The terms are in no way mutually exclusive. Barry Goldwater, sometimes referred to as "Mr. Conservative," held views that lined up well with a libertarian viewpoint. 

Evanlazer: You simplify this too much. Buckley, who you cite in your third paragraph was not only a conservative, but also an ardent critic of the war on drugs. He even described himself, much like Sabrin and Ron Paul alternately as both a conservative and a libertarian. (Proof: http://www.amazon.com/Happy-Days-Were-Here-Again/dp/0679403981/ref=sr_11_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1206510191&sr=11-1 )

While most libertarians are non-interventionist, there is a faction among the libertarians that does approve of interventionism. Further, the far-right-wing paleo-conservatives like Pat Buchannan are also non-interventionists (although paleo-conservatism's non-interventionism stems from an isolationist tendency, as it is combined with a protectionist economic policy).

We can argue over how it is best to promote liberty for weeks, but I will quickly note that no intervention was required for America to influence democratic revolutions in Europe and in the Americas in the early days of this country. Furthermore, opening trade with China did more to peel back the grip of Communism there than economic isolation and the threat of armed conflict has done to promote freedom in Cuba or North Korea.

Oh, and we won the Cold War because the Soviet economy collapsed, while our comparatively-free market remained strong.

One last slip back to Buckley again (on Iraq): "The reality of the situation is that missions abroad to effect regime change in countries without a bill of rights or democratic tradition are terribly arduous. . .  conservatism implies a certain submission to reality; and this war has an unrealistic frank and is being conscripted by events." 

Buckley may have been an interventionist, but he was a rational interventionist. He once stated that the problem with neoconservatives was that they "overrate the reach of U.S. power and influence." His view on foreign policy was not "intervention for the sake of intervention" but rather, "intervention when there is a high probability of achieving a worthwhile benefit."

REASON: Governor Reagan, you have been quoted in the press as saying that you’re doing a lot of speaking now on behalf of the philosophy of conservatism and libertarianism. Is there a difference between the two?

REAGAN: 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.

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.

 

__________________________

 

The reason why the libertarians have surfced is because the current GOP is just another version of socialism.

8 years of federal GOP rule and they repeated the Johnson Administration, with war, and debt.  

The libs are the only right wing left.