Followed Logan here from Kos. He looks like a bird of a feather, so thought this might be a site to flock around with when I am not posting on my blog or being abused at Red State or Kos. I comment on the Cato Unbound Kos essay in my blog post A Marriage of Convenience. After updating that post today with my reaction to Gillespie's "reaction essay", and then reading Logan's post, decided to initiate things here with a complimentary cross-post. FWIW ...

===========

Nick Gillespie compares a libertarian/dem marriage with non-existent "couples porn" in the final reaction essay "Libertarian Democrats: The Titillating Myth". He takes his turn at the fish-barrel, shooting at the Democratic hacks trotted out to respond to Kos' lead essay. Frankly, I expected more. We are a few short weeks away from the mid-term elections. As Gillespie states, libertarians have been on the forefront of documenting the erosion of liberty and the advance of the state under the mantle of these big spending, big deficit, big government Republicans. He also explicitly acknowledges the benefits that could be derived from divided government:

"Reed is surely correct that many things went well during the Clinton years, yet the Man from Hope's biggest accomplishments — pushing NAFTA through, reforming welfare, balancing the budget, and electing a Republican Congress (miracle of miracles) — are inextricably linked to divided government, not longstanding Democratic aims."

Yet when it is time to connect the dots with the obvious conclusion, we get this limp summary:

"... Pew Research said that 9 percent of the electorate is libertarian — a bloc of voters big enough to swing any election these days. Pew also reported the libertarians went heavy for Bush over Kerry, 57 percent to 40 percent ... Based on conversations with ideological confreres these days, the GOP won't be getting anything like that kind of support come this November or in November 2008. But it's far from clear that many disgruntled libertarians will — or should be — moving to the Dem column in any straight-ticket way, especially if it means signing on to Meyerson's "New Dealish," Scandanavian social democracy (currently being rethought by its practitioners). Until Democratic partisans such as Moulitsas and Reed make a convincing — or maybe even a half-hearted — case for laying in with the party of Robert Byrd and Henry Waxman, they're just peddling the political equivalent of couples porn."

Kind of soft and flaccid, Nick. The country is on a highway to statist hell, and libertarians are supposed to wait for Moulitsas and Reed to "make a convincing case"??? What are you thinking? The case is closed and the verdict is in. Two more years of single party Republican control takes us two more years slipping and sliding down the wrong road. For libertarians, this was never about "signing on to Meyerson's "New Dealish," Scandinavian social democracy". This is all about securing the documented benefits of restrained spending growth, and the oversight, checks and balances that are only available through a partisan divided government.

That libertarian 9% could be the difference in November. That libertarian 9% could become a meaningful political force, and get the attention of both parties. But it only happens if libertarians stop playing with themselves. Libertarians don't need to be looking for "couples porn" right now. Take my word for it, it is a lot more fun with a partner. Libertarians need to pop some viagra, and take a chance on romance with the Dems for the just next four weeks. Then we'll see how they behave. Sure, the marriage probably won't last. Who cares? It does not need to last longer than November, and who knows? - maybe, just maybe, we might even give birth to something new and interesting - A potent libertarian political force.