Brain Fertilizer

This article considers it an interesting development that Montana, supposedly a "Red" (or Republican) state, is electing Democrats and passing referendums that aren't typically Republican.

False dichotomy.

Medical marijuana legality is a libertarian issue as much as a Democrat one. While making money is a Republican issue, not being willing to turn your backyard into a cesspool while sending money out of state is a libertarian attitude.

As Americans grow disenchanted with what Republicans have become in the wake of the Democrat implosion, Neo-libertarianism will grow in importance.

In this issue, I'm a follower. I'm not going to sign on to neo-libertarianism, because I don't see how it can work as a political movement. There are too many differing ideas on libertarianism is and should be (which the boys at Q and O Blog are addressing in ongoing discussions), and I just can't get over two basic issues:
1) libertarians and neo-libertarians are both for "maximizing personal freedom", but who can decide when personal freedom begins to impinge on others' freedom except for a large government bureaucracy?
2) Absent the large government bureaucracy, it still seems to me that the logical end of libertarianism is anarchy and 'might makes right'. I can't support that.

However, I support neo-libertarianism as a crucible of excellent ideas and political campaigns. For example, I support the legalization of medical marijuana. I don't support the legalization of drugs in general...but I certainly would support a general govt moratorium on enforcing laws against recreational use (retaining the illegality as an additional charge that can be brought against people who commit crimes while high). Those things aren't going to come about, or be a priority, under Republican leadership.

I think the impetus for sticking to literal interpretations of the US Constitution and a more traditional separation of powers (not allowing legislation from the bench as Democrats currently favor) is going to come from neo-libertarians, as well; not Republicans, because GOP leadership is too accustomed to dealing with and appeasing Democrats and their domesticated MSM attack dog, rather than challenging them.

Here's another discussion of a political development that is probably best viewed as an advancement of neo-libertarianism.

Bonus Extra Point That Probably Deservest To Be A Post Of Its Own So The Point Doesn't Get Buried:
Along with the rise of neo-libertarianism, I have to say that I'm actually glad the issue of Ms. Schiavo came up and was debated. As a society, we learned that not every issue can be easily divided into Left/Right, GOP/Democrat, Liberal/Conservative pairs. The number of traditional alliances that were ruptured over the Schiavo issue is staggering. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton came down on different sides! We saw which liberals truly are compassionate, and which are truly cold-hearted and cold-blooded. We saw different groups gaining a new respect for each other. We learned that you cannot take for granted what someone's socio-political opinion will be on an issue.

Bottom line: as divisive and heated as the arguments were, I think the erasure/redrawing of battle-lines will be good for the future of politics and political parties in the US. Ms. Schiavo is a martyr, but her death will not be in vain.