All governments are socialistic. That is to say that all governments take money from the general populace, generally by means of taxation, and use it to finance programs they claim are for the "general welfare." Even the most minarchist (minimum government) regimes have a socially-financed police system, and usually have some sort of roads-and-bridges program as well.
Libertarians hold that there are better ways to finance general welfare programs, such as defense, roads, and a justice system, than by holding guns to folks' heads and taking their money through some "evenly-distributed" forceful contribution scheme. That said, we also realize that these are hard sells and have resigned ourselves to being robbed for the purpose of distributing the fruits of our labors to others to "educate" their children, deliver their mail, pave their streets, and jail their kids.
We figure that the best we can do these days is to provide some resistance to the wholesale plundering of our paychecks to benefit multi-national corporations by securing the resources of third-world nations by slaughtering their populace and building military bases on their oil and diamond fields. We also think that the evidence supports our arguments that a nationalized health care system in the USA will be a disaster of proportions as yet unseen in human society.
What annoys me, among other things, is that some (on what is described as "the left") argue that our resistance to an already-proven disaster-in-the-making is "racist," because a president of the US (who happens to be black) promotes it. That, in itself, is racist.
I have no love, in general, for the congressional faction that most vociferously opposes socializing health care. On the local level, Gordon Howie aligns himself with that faction. The problem is that Howie, along with the rest all the way up to, say, John Thune (and higher, if there is such a position among the Repubs), has no consistent political philosophy by which (t)he(y) can defend his/their positions. Resultantly, they come across as obstructionist, because they have, on other issues, so consistently been inconsistent.
No one, neither a mugger in an alley nor a group of suits in some capitol building, has the right to initiate force or commit fraud in pursuit of personal or political goals. The only such right is stolen with the business end of a gun, and rights such taken imprison those who exercise them as much as they do those from whom they are taken.