Check down a couple of posts - those links are operable. I also strolled past some posts at Vox Popoli, a fellow Blogspotter. Interesting.
I have ambivalence toward libertarianism. In general, the less say a government has over your everyday life, the better. We ought to be suspicious whenever we surrender something of ours to the state.
On the other hand, the suspicion seems to get out of hand sometimes. Libertarians often think that government is at heart a criminal enterprise instead of a necessary safeguard against anarchy and mob rule. We could do with less of it, but would suffer grievously with none of it; that's why we had Founding Fathers instead of Kings. Rule of law is the thing.
Problem is, once you give the beast a lead, you tend to be dragged along in its wake. A government of law is one thing; a government of some persons over the rest is trouble. Such an arrangement, by its nature, attracts the busiest bodies in the citizenry - it is the natural home of (at best) well-meaning folk who'd like to help; at worst it's the refuge of bullies. The people most inclined to live and let live are exactly the ones who aren't running for council or school board or Congress. Why would they?
Galadriel said it best. Samwise told her that if she wished, she could put things to rights, and put a stop to a lot of bossing and bullying. "That's how it would start, alas," she replied sadly. In short, government is not inherently the problem. Any system of rule is flawed because the people who make it are fallen creatures.
Convinced yet? If so, I'm surprised. This isn't an argument, nor meant to be. Just sharing my misgivings. However, I'll make you one last promise - I won't ever run for anything more than a bus.