Simplistic nonsense.

This isn't a "right vs left" debate, its a "reality vs unreality" debate.

Libertarians lose me when they advacate the legalization of drugs, and their forigen policy hasn't evolved into the 21st century. Having said that, I hold other Libertarian beliefs, like free market capitalism, maybe not in the complete Laissez-faire concept, but in the ball park. I also share the view of Limited government. Haven't we learned that our government isn't capable of doing much without screwing it up.

A great idea if all human beings came from essentially the same socio-ethnic group.  A wonderful collection of precepts for engineers and other linear thinkers, and it IS possible, yet the people who pull the strings, who like to tinker with and control outcomes for the rest of us, would never let a "free market" philosophy serve as an obstacle to economic and resource domination worldwide.

Great for the preserverance of freedom but too harsh at limiting government or helping out those who need help via the social net.

Libertarians are, for the most part, Constitutional purists. It is a shame that we don't have more of that- from the school house to the White House. Abiding as such however, they serve to rile both sides. Religious conservatives don't want the legalization of drugs. "Progessives" don't want the abortion issue to be a states rights issue, etc (just a couple of examples). Hence, in this incredibly polarized society , I cannot see them taking real power any time soon.

Mount Old Paint, and ride into the sunset.
This group is all done. Libertarianism is just flat silly.

Probably the cause of more internet flame wars than any other single group.  Unrealistic and muddle-headed, and anarchy always sounds good after five or six beers in the middle of the desert.  Don't get me wrong:  I'm a happy capitalist:  but you need the right amount of government to get things to work.  We don't need another 19th century.

Taxes are what gives us stop lights, fire departments, police force, veteran & senior citizen benefits, many things we take for granted.
Want to see a society with low taxes and low regulation? Just look south, to Latin America. Then come back and preach how bad taxes and regulations is.

Doesn't seem so good to me.

I believe that a free market capitalism that the libertarian party supports wold work out better than the system that we have today only if it was a completely free market capitalism and not mixed with any communistic/socialistic things such as public education and public utilities for example. The my 2 main concerns with the libertarian party are 1) its support of free trade and 2) their view on rights. I am against free trade because it makes our country loose jobs and, much more importantly, causes there to be unfair working conditions in other countries like sweatshops. I do not like their view on rights because I feel that giving people many of the rights that they support will bring down the country and lower the standard of living for the future even if it makes life more fun now. Of all the libertarian parties that exist (Constitutionalist, Commonwealth, Personal choice party, and libertarian party) I would have to say that I like the personal choice party the best because their 2004 candidate was against free trade while all other libertarian parties supported it. This parties beliefs would run this country well if they are followed almost exactly without any corporatism or socialism added.

Not so fond of their economic views, but the GOP without the corruption and the religious lunacy wouldn't be a terrible thing to have, given that the right-wing does need representation in a republic with democratically elected politicians. America would probably stop sucking if the Dums and the Thugs were replaced by the Greens and the Libertarians.

The Libertarians are a little too radical to get anywhere in America these days. It will be a long time if ever that they gain much ground.

they support my rights to do what i want and not let the government to take over my life --lower taxes and allow guns!

Opposition to the Patriot act, Freeing 60% of the encarcerated by legalizing drugs, Keeping religion out of goverment, Letting grown ups do what they want by legalizing prostitution; These guys aint all that bad. If only I had the lack of a conscience that Republicans have, I could vote this way. Let poor children starve, Let the elderly die, Let the corperations spew crap into our water and air, and then let the free market sort it out if it isn't too late. If we join together we can do so much more than this.

I'd always vote libertarian if they weren't isolationists - If only smart people were allowed to vote, this would be the second largest party after the moderate Republican party, with the socialist Democratic party coming in a relevent but distant third.

Some great ideas (like legalizing pot) and reducing govt. in general, but taken to its extreme it is silly. This is the modern world, some govt. is necessary.

They get an extra star because of their stance on individual rights. Other than that they are too rigid and extreme to be taken seriously. They wanna legalize all drugs! Actually I'm more for it than I am against it, but really? ALL OF THEM? Yeah, let's run down to the Wal-Mart/Nations Capitol, pick up some toothpaste, some raman noodles, some drapes for the baby's room, Oh, and I can't forget that shiny little $100 double-up I've had my eye on since payday!! C'mon get real. And their immigration policy, when read aloud, would drive Pat Buchanan into cardiac arrest. They also embraces the concept of Communism through Super Capitalism, only they call it the Free and Open Market. Only a moderate within the party itself could ever achieve any kind of credibility with the average voter, and maybe ONLY at the local level.

The only thing keeping the Libertarian Party from becoming the top party (aside from $$$) is their insistance on pushing their extreme views. A lot of people, like myself, are more Conservative when it comes to economic policies, but a little more Liberal when it comes to social issues. This makes the Libertarian Party appealing, and if they would ever push a candidate that was against things like across the board drug legalization, there's no telling what might happen.

The LP has some great ideas about limited govt. However, without govt. regulations our lives would change drastically, and not neccessarily for the positive. Unregulated business would lead to the demise of unions. Unregulated education would leave the poor and middle class without. Unregulated healthcare would leave millions of veterans without any VA benefits. No taxes? Taxes pay for roads, education, police, health care, sewage, national parks, and many other things. The LP philosophy is a great theory, but in pratice it fails. Also, if the LP really want to become a valid national party that affects national policies then they will have to start from the ground up. As RAIDER DUCK said the LP has had poor management. The LP has been around for over 30 years now and has yet to elect a significant number of candidates to state and federal congressional offices. The LP should start small with city and county offices. Once they have established that then they can move on to state level and then after years of consistency and building a national base they can start sending representative and senators to the U.S. Congress. Then after they have a significant amount of Congressman and have shown they are a national party with national appeal then it is possible to enter the presidential ring. The LP should invest in its roots and enjoy the ride from a small party to one that has a strong national voice. Right now they don't and with the extremist types that have been in the LP it will take a long time, if ever. It's time to start from the drawing board and take another chance. I am registered Republican and am a strong supporter of third parties. I could become a Libertarian if only they were a cohesive group that wasn't bound in inner turmoil. GOD bless the LP's tenacity though. I look forward to their future success, hopefully.

let It ring

I am a card-carrying Libertarian. The only political party that actually took the time to read the Constitution and understands what the role of government should be.

Raider Duck pretty much hit the nail on the head. 5 stars for the philosophy, 1 star for the execution. But I'm willing to grade on a curve; compared to the other parties in America, I have to give them a 4.

Being a libertarian myself, I give the Libertarian Party 5 stars for their ideas, but 1 star for execution: hence a rating of 3 stars. We do need to get government out of people's lives, and that's not something the Democrats (who want to tax you to death) or Republicans (want to regulate your personal life to death) stand for. Unfortunately, the Libertarian Party has shown a history of poor leadership and mass infighting. Also, like many third parties, they seem to attract the lunatic fringe in far greater numbers than either of the two big parties. Another problem: even though most people would be better off in a Jeffersonian republic with a truly limited government (unlike the bloated mess we have now), the vast majority of the populace has fallen in love with the concept of a kind, benevolent government that takes care of us all, even though that's not even remotely the case. SO, it looks like it's Republicrat rule forever. Oh well.

the party of no responsibility.

You're kidding me, right? This party wishes to abolish all taxes. Who will pay for the services? User fees? I didn't know that the government that was meant to be protecting us and letting us persue our individual freedoms was supposd to be run like a bussiness. Basically the more power you take out of the government, the more power you concentrate in the hands of the extremely wealthy few. Would you trust Rupert Murdoc or Bill Gates to provide you with first rate civil services? Apparently Libertarians don't like a government that protects someone from themselves, thus allowing people to buy as many guns as they want (and considering we now will be having private police bought by insurance the poor won't recieve good protection). We're looking at mass prostitution, kidnapping, drug use and virtual mob rule here. Sorry but this government is just nuts.

I like that they are for the idea of acting in everyone's best interests, not just one group. But they are a little too far on the political spectrum for me to give them more far than a three.

This party is more patriotic & based on the doctrine of this nation than GW Bush is!

They are ok but they aren't Republicans!!!!

An interesting idea, but this country has way too many people for this idea to actually work. Plus there's no way I want to go back to the days of unregulated business (read The Jungle by Upton Sinclair if you think this is a good idea).

Has some good ideas for limiting government, but I feel they go too far. They do inject lively debate, but not yet ready for prime time.

The Libertarians are just a front for the gun freak consitutency. And that constituency is not only preverse, subversive and anti-American, but downright dangerous, as well. Libertarianism is a good idea in theory, but breaks down in practice because citizens have to adhere to a social contract of rights and responsibilities, freedoms and obligations. Libertarians tend to think only about rights and freedoms, and rank responsibilities and obligations further down the food chain.

Government should only exsist to protect individual freedoms. Anything else is intrusive! This is the only political party that comes close to that idea.

The Cheapstakes.

I see the Liberatarians as a group incredibly out of touch with reality. They want to basically give everyone freedom, while only giving the rich the ability to take advantage of the freedoms. I respect their Liberal views, except the views regarding the NRA (who are nothing more then whacko, gun-nuts whos only agenda is to propogate the culture of guns and fear. Remember the Second amendment only refers to the rights of states to operate militias and not the rights of individuals to own handguns.) But, I can't understand their far right economic views.

A very underrated political party. Much better than either of the major two parties.

Now here's a party who subscribes to the notion of freedom in the true Lockean sense. Lockean refers to the English political philosopher John Locke who lived during the 18th Century. His ideas, along with free market capitalist Adam Smith, revolutionized the way the Western world viewed government. They basically advocated the decentralization of government power and the the advent of an international business community. To do this, the state would have to stop intervening in business (e.g. lower tarriffs etc.). Today, most hard-right conservatives are disciples of Locke and Smith. The Libertarians, in my estimation, put out good rhetoric, but in reality their policies should not be put into practice. The government should act as a counterbalance to the excessive power of big business, and big business, since for the most part they control the currency of this country and therefore the functioning of the government, should serve as a check to excessive governmental powers. That is my view of the government in a nutshell. The Libertarians are way too relaxed with big business power. Business can abuse it's power just like government can. Environmental standards, financial rules and working conditions need to be controlled by the government; they are the only ones who can act as a referee because for the most part, business has a hard time regulating itself. I am not a liberal, but I think it is simply common sense to regulate certain things. I don't agree that the government should play a role as to who is hired and who is not. Affirmative action should be gotten rid of, I agree with the Libertarians on that one. There should be selective governmental intervention. The Liberatarians take a far too extremist view concerning the legalization of drugs. The problem with that is that the government needs to focus on rehabilitation, not incarceration of drug users. The drug pushers should also be put in jail and the drug laws should be enforced as well...Libertarianism sounds idealistic, but when put into practice, it may be disasterous.

Now here's a party that believes in strict interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, often to the detriment of other belief/value systems around them. America is, by and large, a nation that subscribes to the myth of "rugged individualism" and that, somehow, despite all formidable odds, the individual will triumph over all odds and will succeed beyond their wildest expectations. Americans understandably value and cherish their freedoms that, according to tradition, were earned through the shedding of blood and the kicking of George III's proverbial ass. For the past 225 years, Americans have placed a premium on these values (the right to bear arms, the right against self-incrimination, the right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the right of free speech, etc.) and have agitated to defend those rights. Now along comes a political party that has taken their zeal for these values too far. Granted, most Libertarians are not representative of the few that give this well-meaning party a sordid name. But what about militias that bear such unmitigated hatred for our federal government and use the Constitution to defend their violent, sometimes racist agenda? Witness the Montana Militia in Jordan, Montana, a few years ago. Or the Michigan Militia and the Posse Comitatus. Or right-wing wackos such as Bo Gritz and the "Reverend" Richard Butler. Or the NRA and Charlton Heston. For these fervent Americans who believe in the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of their happiness, the Constitution is their Bible. That's very noble and deserving. But their increasingly strident mantra of intolerance for dissenting opinion and their wanton disregard of other people's beliefs can be disconcerting and downright fascist. The Constituion is a wonderful document and has served as an example of individual freedom and representative government. It will be interpreted for years to come. But who is to say which interpretation is right? Truth is relative, and certain Libertarians want to impose their version of truth upon the rest of the American people. Is that the American way?

Freedom!! - thanks TJ

I'm registered as a Libertarian b/c the idea sounds good, but I'm tremendously skeptical about whether the LP actually is adding value for the movement for liberty. To be a viable party, you need to be running Congressional candidates across the nation. With the campaign finance laws as they are now (way too restrictive! the opposite of what stupid John McCain thinks!), there is no way the LP will be able to come up with funds to run credible campaigns. Moreover, the LP seems to focus on issues that just are not central to the future of the country (i.e., legalizing pot), that align them with college wierdos, and that confuse average voters into thinking libertarians must be "libertines". Of course, the opposite is typically the case, but you wouldn't know that from the LP. People serious about advocating liberty should be advised that the work of market-oriented think tanks and the handful of courageous liberty-oriented academicians out there are having a much bigger effect on the public understanding of the free society than Harry Browne and the LP crew.