Libertarianism “Dangerous”? Christie May Be the One Who’s Dangerous.

If you think the above headline is inspired by the paranoid imaginations of EXTREMISTS like myself, think again.  The very button-down George Will said it in response to Chris Christie’s attacks on Rand Paul and libertarian-minded Republicans.

“Well, actually there is a rising libertarian stream that Chris Christie has said is ‘a very dangerous thought,’” Will said. “So let’s be clear about what libertarianism is and what it isn’t. It is not anarchism. It has a role in government. What libertarianism says — it comes in many flavors and many degrees of severity, and it basically says before the government abridges the freedom of an individual or the freedom of several individuals contracting together, that government ought to have, A) a compelling reason and B) a constitutional warrant for doing so. Now, if Mr. Christie thinks that’s a dangerous thought, a number of people are going to say that Mr. Christie himself may be dangerous.”

Exactly.  If Christie doesn’t see the need for robust downright libertarian resistance to federal government overreach, then he is a “dangerous” part of the problem.

By the way, he is dangerous to the Republicans’ prospects of regaining the presidency as well.  He now seems the Republican establishment’s favorite potential candidate at the moment.  But if he gains the nomination, it will practically hand the presidency back to the Democrats.  Especially after his attacks on Rand Paul, many conservatives will refuse to vote for him.  The turnout for Romney was shockingly low, and nominating Christie will ensure a repeat.

FWIW, I actually did vote for Romney in November 2012.  But I can’t see myself voting for Christie in November 2016.  I would almost certainly go third party.  By enabling and putting a Republican face on fed tyranny, an establishment Republican like Christie can do every bit as much damage to this county as a Hillary Clinton.  He is indeed “dangerous.”  And he has already alienated me.