seretogis

Agreed. "Fiscal responsibility" to a Libertarian means the government not taking money from people in order to provide for others. Nationalized healthcare is not fiscally responsible from a Libertarian's point of view, and neither is welfare or publicly funded transportation. Neither Democrats or Republicans, to a Libertarian -- someone who wants government involvement to be at a minimum -- appear to be fiscally responsible, or have been for decades. So, to cast a vote for either would be to cast a vote against our ideology. It is not morally responsible for a Libertarian to vote either Democrat or Republican.

I strongly disagree. Libertarians (and Libertarian-minded people who don't necessarily belong to the LP) have a chief philosophical difference with most Americans -- we believe that a man's property should not be taken for the benefit of another. To be a fiscally irresponsible Libertarian, one would have to betray their most core beliefs on every level.

As far as "defensively" voting, the same as I said above applies. The only "defensive" vote a Libertarian in good conscience can cast is for a Libertarian or equally Libertarian-minded candidate. Neo-con Republicans and Democrats do not fit the bill. If you want to rail about Libertarian and Libertarian-minded people "letting Republicans win" by not voting Democrat, you need to start a dime-a-dozen "vote-wasting" thread which seems to always pop up at around this time. In my opinion, voting for the candidate who best fits your ideology is never a wasted vote, even if he has a miniscule chance of winning. If Republicans (or Democrats) want to burn the house down around us, so be it. I and other Libertarian-minded people will be here to help rebuild it with the principles and values that we never sold out.

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames