No, but it is an argument that libertarianism is incidental to them holding a few views that happen to be popular.

Lots of people value freedom, and many of them are pro-pot and anti-war because they believe the alternative to be oppressive.

Libertarians are a narrow subset of this who subscribe to an absolutist philosophy that they believe will maximize freedom. Many people who value freedom strongly disagree with libertarianism as a means to achieving it, even though they sympathize with the desire.

Your characterization of libertarians as people with an absolutist philosophy that they believe will maximize freedom applies only to a subset of people who identify as libertarians.

If true, that supports my point further.

..and to reply to your later addition - there is no reason to celebrate libertarianism if you think it's a damaging philosophy just because libertarians agree with you on a few issues. Libertarianism isn't an arbitrary label.

I - for one - think that libertarianism is just as bad a problem as "the security state" (or whatever label you want to apply to a state-run security apparatus which appear to be beyond the rule of law).