B-Daddy had a great post, here, on why it is that libertarians need conservatives and visa-versa. Here's the money paragraph on why it is that conservatives need libertarians:
It is less obvious that conservatives need libertarians, but they do. First, their votes and energy are necessary to do battle with the forces of statism. On any individual issue, the pressure for government to "do something" often seems compelling. Only a firm adherence to principles, which libertarians seem better equipped to do, can beat back these impulses. Second, conservatives forget at their peril that the use of government to achieve their desired social ends usually ends badly for them. From the death of the church because it was identified with the monarchy in old Europe to Republicans becoming identified as the party of big government before the 2006 elections, marrying conservative social ends to the coercion of big government has been a loser. Further, funding big government conservative programs undermines the principled arguments for limited government.
What B-Daddy speaks of is the "compassionate conservatism" that was peddled by the Bush administration for the entirety of its two terms and which led to the Democratic take-over of both houses of Congress in '06 as the Democrats were successful in both their "culture of corruption" and "corporatism" lines of attack.
We hated the term "compassionate conservatism" and its practical application being completely oxymoronic as there is nothing "conservative", i.e., "limited government" about a hyper-active government attempting to achieve limited government.
If you believe the narrative that the tea party came into existence solely because of the policies of President Obama, you have been mislead as the seeds of the groundswell of frustration were planted during the Bush administration and what was viewed as a pissing away of a golden opportunity from 2001-2008. Remember, it wasn't Obama that signed the $700 billion TARP (Wall Street bailout) into law but it was Obama who used that same money for programs of his own like the Chrysler and GM bailouts.
It was as if Bush was playing the role of John the Baptist hailing the arrival of the statist deity in Obama to complete what had been started, otherwise known as in '08 campaign-speak, the "transformation of America as we know it".
And, boy, don't we know it.
Go ahead and link to the article - we think you will enjoy it.