Libertarianism, or classic liberalism, is simply putting the rights of the individuals above the group. So even though some might argue that America in general is better off if the government can make warrant-less wiretaps because it helps national security, a Libertarian would say that does not matter. You cannot infringe on the rights of the people being wiretapped.

Similarly, many argue that public education helps America in general because we are better off if more people are educated. A Libertarian would say that does not matter. You cannot infringe on the rights of the people who have to be taxed to pay for public education.

Those are the two “poles” of Libertarians, personal liberties and property rights. Historically Republicans respected one pole (personal liberty) but not the other. Democrats did the opposite. These days, Republicans respect neither.

But Libertarian? Puh-leez. And Ben Franklin also? That’s exactly the ex-post-facto bullshit I’m talking about. Let us make absolutely clear the difference in valuing personal liberty (which every American does) and Libertarianism (the party and the political view) which, last I checked, Goldwater was a progenitor of but never supported.

Goldwater retired a Republican and considered himself part of the Republican Party, and, while the Libertarian party existed in 1998, I don’t remember him ever endorsing a Libertarian.

Please read and listen to the full text of the speech for the quoted section I took and honestly tell me that if you think in 1964 Goldwater is talking about the excesses and avarice of his own party after three decades of dominance, or the dangers of “conformity of equality” implied by Civil Rights movement of the time and, far more obviously… Communism (big duh!).

You can see why he so respected Eisenhower, as he echos this speech, which is is now attributed by Democrats as a liberal!

Both of the last two guys you quote would be considered Libertarians. Not because of some ex post facto opinion or by how they or anyone else classified them. Libertarian just means putting the rights of the individual above all. It is negative rights over positive rights, unless the positive rights are created via contract (such as The Constitution.)

Unwarranted wire taps is a clear violation of negative rights. As citizens, we have the right to NOT have our privacy arbitrarily violated. Being against wiretaps is an easy call for a Libertarian.

Both political parties in America have some facets of their platform that favor collective rights over individual rights. Thus Libertarians are usually forced to pick between two evils. There are definitely those that think the protection of their property rights is more important than protecting their civil liberties, and they wind up voting Republican. Of course the Republicans just turn around and pass No Child Left Behind, Medicare Prescription Drug Plan, etc.

One aspect I detest about libertarianism is their predilection to “ex post facto” claim some as libertarians and deny others as not. So would be the same of conservatism and liberalisms.

I do not err at all. For are we to claim that the distinction between “Republicanism” and “Conservatism” is not a wholly recent thing? Both banners were waived as one during its height with nary an objection! Nor the distancing from McCain and Bush by these so called “conservatives” simply because they don’t wish to hitch their train to a loser and can propagate a meme later that they found McCain lacking and not themselves wanting? 9 in 10 supported the war at one point, I highly doubt the 1 that didn’t would have labeled themselves “Republican” or “Conservative.”

And since the Right Wing has turned “liberalism” into an epithet, I think it only fitting I see “conservatism” as deserving the same, at least for this article.

Our admonishment against Communism is that it is too idealistic and not wise to the practical consideration of the individual. My admonishment about Conservatism is that it too idealistic and not wise to the practical result of the collection of power.

I imply that Barry Goldwater was right with these words, though today, not in the way he meant then:
“Now, those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth, and let me remind you they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrrany. Absolute power does corrupt, and those who seek it must be suspect and must be opposed.”

Yes, the GOP is on the ropes (and rightly so for picking candidates like McCain and Bush), but don’t make the mistake of seeing the death of the GOP as the death of Conservative thought.