You know what,billT-
I really don't see much difference between Goldwater Republicans and Libertarians.
And what I DO see,is more and more libertarian leaning,TEA Party republicans taking office,and more Barry Goldwater then George W.
Because of Reagan and Barry Goldwater,the strain of Republicanism that is more Libertarian is quite real and alive today.
Just look at the TEA Party.
It was a thrill and a great pleasure to see Rand Paul,among other candidates that espouse limited by Constitutional law government as well as those supporting fiscal conservatism, join congress.(Not to mention seeing The Wicked Socialist Witch of The West,Nancy Pigloosie,get FIRED from her throne in the House
The real difference,and the difference I might add that democrats are hoping for- is the fracture lines of the Republican party between NeoCons and Goldwater folks.
And while I don't refer to all republicans as "sheep" as you mention in your obtuse generalization,I don't believe that NeoCon republicans are aware of the fact that THEIR policy is HELPING the socialist progressives to enlarge the big government to the degree where it becomes easier for them to implement their grand agendas,so YES,I find moral majority Neo conservatism to be a bit ignorant,to put it mildly.
I'm having a real problem with your generalizations,speaking of which.
Ron Paul supporters do not "lump" all candidates that are NOT Ron Paul "in one basket".
But what I see,is that the problem of big government will not be solved by pro-big government supporters of either party.
Just as you said that you can't change the content of a can by changing the label,big government is big government whether its got an "R" or a "D" in front of its name.
AND like I said,I'd -begrudgingly,of course- vote for a million Mitt Romneys or Michelle Bachmanns' before Obuttburglar,or before just sitting at home discontent with the vote because Ron Paul isn't on the ticket.
Unfortunately for the democrats,and something you can take heart in,is that the majority of Libertarians I've talked to are of the same mind- its more important to get that Marxist douche out of the Oval Office then to act like scorned lovers and bicker over the particulars of conservativeness.
But allow me to make my own generalization here-We will show up to vote,and we will vote to get Obuttboy out,period.
Besides,as I've said before,Perhaps what it will take to get Goldwater libertarian principles back in the forefront of Republican ideology is another NeoCon or Big Government Republican.
But thats not the point.
Your thread here,as you started it,was about how Paul "went off the deep end",and not about Paul's candidacy in the coming election.
Paul did not "go off the deep end",as I pointed out,however,I think YOU might be doing a little diving off the high platform yourself with all the generalizations of people and,frankly,the goofy attempt at placing Republican ideology so far from Goldwater and libertarian philosophy its almost like you think Ronald Regan didn't exist.
Fine,you don't agree with or like Ron Paul.
But its not like libertarians and Republicans are so different from each other that we should inhabit different parties.
Lets refrain from outright slandering a guy,calling him "off the deep end" and such with no actual merit to such an accusation,just to incite an argument.
In the end,were gonna have to learn to hang together,or as Franklin said- we shall for sure hang separately.