A couple things my liberty minded friends.
If you find logical inconsistencies or contradictions within the platform of the party that has assumed the name of the philosophy that you choose the describe yourself by, then I would hope that you at least take the time to write them a letter....or maybe it would just be easier to call yourself something other than a libertarian...or define it more closely and maybe write your own platform?? Noam Chomsky for example constantly points out that the American Libertarian party is at the complete opposite end of the spectrum from him in terms of libertarianism. The American Libertarian party for example supports the government sponsored corporate model of capitalism whereas he thinks that model should be abolished in favor of worker directed production. (By the way, when I say government sponsored corporate capitalism I simply mean that the government grants rights to an entity other than an individual human, not that it involves itself in the marketplace)
The problem with debating a libertarian it seems is that it is impossible to get them to agree to a definition or description of how society should be organized. It is very vague to just say, "I believe in liberty!"
Moda and I have pointed out what we see as many logical inconsistencies of some of the philosophical underpinnings of libertarianism throughout this thread as well as in many others, but when push comes to shove I don't think that any of you support the outcomes that result when you follow those philosophies through a process of reductio ad absurdam.
That being the case, you are then not liberty minded at all. While you give lip service to liberty, you actually just seek to redefine liberty in a fashion where it is most beneficial to yourselves. The liberties that you find most attractive you exalt and the liberties that you don't care for you trample on...
All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone. - Blaise Pascal