Why not a Libertarian?

There's a pretty good discussion over at Sebastians about why we don't see a good Libertarian running.

Part of the problem is that the Libertarians spend too much time worrying about just how rigidly the doctrine should be followed (and which version of it for that matter).   So they don't want to vote for someone who's only 80% - which leaves them stuck with someone who's generally between 0% and 40% of what they want.  

The other problem, as I see it, is that by nature, libertarians don't feel the need to tell others how to run their lives.  Since government has become a tool for doing exactly that - it's sort of repulsive to even thinking about participating - even if the goal is to make it stop (or at least reduce the onslaught).

I was waxing poetic at the gun shop the other day and one of the fellows said he'd vote for me if I ran - now I don't for a minute think I'm really qualified to run, but then I don't think any of the other bozo's are either.   Anyway my immediate reactions was "No way, you couldn't pay me enough to do that job."   It has sense occurred to me that perhaps that reaction is fairly common amongst the choir.   I've all but given up calling myself a Libertarian, I used to think of myself as a conservative but I'm not - at least by todays definition (as loose as that is).

So I'm thinking what I really am is a Contitutionalist