Travis Pahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked: >> >You are correct that the rank-and-file is unhappy about the growing size >> of >> >government and some of the reasons for the bloat. But I suspect that >> there >> >was a similar discontent regarding FDR's flip but that some Dems at that >> >time stayed with FDR out of party loyalty. There could be some of the >> same >> >dynamic occurring with the Reps now. >> Could be (both cases), and that would be interesting. It would demonstra>te >> the efficacy of political activity -- that it's possible to get into >> positions of trust and then use that trust to produce a lasting change in >> direction. (It'll take a few more years to see if that's the case with >> Republicans.) That would be all the more reason to encourage libertarian>s >> to get involved in conventional politics.
>Can I get an exact number of years you are willing to give them before >you will admit they are not going to get us any closer to a >libertarian ideal? The answer's probably no, but you'll need to specify what you mean by "they". Do you mean libertarians in general? Libertarians involved in conventional politics? Politics (taken as a plural noun)? Republicans in general? The current Republican leadership? The Republican rank-and-file? In Your Sly Tribe, Robert _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list Libnw@immosys.com List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
