Over at Cato, Brink Lindsey is giving some thought to "small L" libertarian fusion with liberal, rather than conservative, thought.
I'm slowly working on a book on politics, one point of which would be that both liberal and conservative movements involve fusions of several different groups, whose views are based more upon emotion and world-view than upon cold reason and political philosophy. The conservative fusion is more obvious, since it involves an alliance between what are commonly referred to as libertarian conservatives and social conservatives, I'd call the latter rules conservatives, since the emotional underpinning is that the world properly consists of rules and people to enforce them. The libertarian conservatives pretty much believe the opposite. Jefferson vs. John Adams. The alliance is, I think, based simply on the fact that the liberal alliance hacks both off. The liberal approach tends to believe that (a) government should keep out of matters of morality and social norms (and in its more extreme version, so should everybody else, too -- there is no morality or social norm except that one must believe there is no morality or social norm) and (b) the government should most decidedly become involved in everything else. The first hacks off social conservatives, the second hacks off libertarian conservatives.