“Posting below is getting tedious:

“As a “real” libertarian I share the distrust of both party’s, but as a right-wing version of a libertarian I believe in fusionism and the GOP is a better home for seekers of liberty as except for homosexual sex, it is hard to find a part of our lives that the Democrat party does not want to control.”

What is fusionism?  Seekers of liberty would be very uncomfortable advocating for a central authority’s control of individual freedoms that are “granted”by a religious entity, a national entity or a state/local entity.  It’s presumptuous to say that the DemocratIC Party’s proclivities for state control are somehow better or worse (as opposed to just different) than the Republican Party’s.  All you’re really saying is that you think their concerns are more important and in line with your values, which is fine, but there’s nothing inherently better or worse in defining a general concept of “liberty.”  When (if) you look at it from the perspective of a libertarian, right or left, you can see that both have the same aims from SLIGHTLY different authoritarian value systems, not radically different ones.  The central difference between right and left libertarians is essentially that the right focuses on personal economic freedom and the left focuses on personal social freedom.  One isn’t more important or more representative of “liberty” or what it means to be free.

“The Democrat party coddles black racism and (along with the media) overlooks white racists for the “good of the cause” or whatever delusion they are under.”

I don’t think white racism is overlooked at all, or that overlooking it serves political constituencies that are traditionally opposed to it.

“I believe in true equality before the law, something that neither party is very good at, but the Democrat party is openly opposed to. The choice is made for me.”

As are Republicans, it depends on the issue.  The choice is made for you because you are a self-professed conservative, not because you somehow have a better sense for what liberty means as a conservative.  Conservatives traditionally want to conserve traditional bases of power and culture, which do not tend to rest with the individual, but whatever group is focused on preserving these traditional collectivist values.  That aim categorically represses individual freedoms in the name of those values.  The moniker “conservative” should not be applied to libertarians, right or left, just like the moniker “liberal” should not be applied to libertarians either.  Both are very comfortable with their brand of collectivism or imposition of governmental control.  I don’t see any value in saying it’s okay for a city government to confiscate my property or tell me how to parent my children, but not a state or federal government.

“The only theocrats that I know of are Muslim, and because both Islamic politics and left politics have a deep strain of Anti-Americanism to them, not sure why you believe that is a GOP problem.”

It’s a GOP problem because of the pandering to the conservative, statist Christians who would like to use the power of government to impose their particular brand of Christianity on the rest of us, and probably the world.  These people simply aren’t courted by the Democratic Party because it has no current use for them.  A theocrat is not driven by a particular religion, and there are degrees of theocracy, but I’m not sure anyone could say with a straight face that there is not a very prominent and powerful strain of conservative authoritarians who’d impose the Christian version of Sharia law on the nation without hesitation.  Yes, the Western culture underpinning Christianity is much more modern and tolerant, but that’s not because of anything that traditional religious authorities in the West have done.  That’s all due to progressives (those dreaded liberals!) within who have dragged them (kicking and screaming) away from that pre-modern craziness. ”

OK guys have at it.