what use to libertarians?

Jim Henley, libertarian stalwart, writes of the libertarian fear that a vote for Dean is a vote for higher taxes and a bigger federal government:

Of course, a vote for Bush is also a vote for greater federal spending and a bigger federal government. Taxes are, for the moment, lower. How long will that continue with a budget deficit approaching half a trillion dollars? Not long, I think, which is why I opposed so many of the Bush policies (and non-policies) that have contributed to the deficit. A vainglorious war, a complete lack of spending restraint, the elimination of not a single substantial federal program in three years, expansion of existing entitlements - well, it adds up.

And steel tariffs. And catfish import bans. And yadda yadda yadda. Two factors are at work here: the issues on which conservatives and libertarians have never agreed have become more salient, and on the issues where conservatives and libertarians traditionally have agreed - taxes, trade, federalism - conservatives increasingly suck. Having abandoned the substance of limited government since early in the Gingrich "revolution," conservatives increasingly eschew even the rhetoric of limited government. Animosity aside, they're just no use to libertarians any more.

All this will change again six months into the Dean administration.

It's a good day for Dean in the Blogsphere - righty-OxBlog blogger David Adesnik also has a spirited defense of Dean from the "birkenstock liberal" typing of the NYT. So-Called Liberal Media indeed!