Barr Bashes Ron Paul on ReasonTV

[Omphfullas Zamboni]

Thank you for at least being open and not simply flaming me like the others have done. Although I obviously don't agree with you, I can at least respect your opinion.

Hi,

Cheers. I'm going to go Internet fax one of my representatives another NO BAILOUT flier.

Be well.

Regards,
Omphfullas Zamboni

 

[Flash]

Heres the thing about the Libertarians and Bob Barr. They would like to be in the national debates yet not have someone like Nader in there aswell. Why would anyone agree to that? It would directly be costing the Republican Party the elections. If you do want in on the debates then you need a Leftist like Nader there beside you to show you're not just doing it to screw over the Republicans.

Ditto on #1. Not a good way to get LP ballot access for 2010 or 2012.

What is the point if they are going to nominate people like Barr for now on? Remember when Barr said he wanted no 'racists' to donate to his campaign? I can't ever support someone that criticizes their supporters' views like that. How Libertarian is that?

...yet the Green, Constitution, and Independent party candidates were not too lofty to appear on the same stage with each other...

There was a 0% chance that ANY of those candidates would've stolen votes away from Bob barr. The way I see it, we'll always have a Two-Party system unless someone like Bloomberg comes in and changes that. Thats how it'll always be, end of story. The point of Barr's campaign was, I thought, to wake people up. But apparently it was just about to get votes for easier ballot access for Barr 2.0 in 2012.

 

[Brassmouth]

There was a 0% chance that ANY of those candidates would've stolen votes away from Bob barr.

As I already pointed out a few posts ago, Barr was not worried about losing voters to the likes of Nader and McKinny, he was concerned with sheeple seeing that press conference and lumping him in with all the other "nuts with no chance of winning," as they would have thought.

Again, it is to Barr's credit that he is trying to make Libertarian views mainstream. We should be helping him. But too many people here are too blinded to see that.

 

[tonesforjonesbones]

WHAT the hey??? The C4L people most CERTAINLY DID put the word out in the news that BOB BARR was dropping his CAMPAIGN! They told the LP "it's good for press coverage" That is what started the angst. The LP retaliated by doing what they did...how did you FORGET this information? tones

 

[Brassmouth]

what the hey??? The c4l people most certainly did put the word out in the news that bob barr was dropping his campaign! They told the lp "it's good for press coverage" that is what started the angst. The lp retaliated by doing what they did...how did you forget this information? Tones

qft

 

[mellamojuana]

I doubt that Bob Barr is the most arrogant person on the planet, as Alawn claimed in opening this thread.

I further doubt that he is a douche bag, as Berrybunches said. Is such a label rather misogynous? Barr has manure for brains? Which physician made such a ho-hum diagnosis?

I joined the Libertarian Party this year. On this forum that applauds Ron Paul, other Libertarians and I have been cursed and verbally abused. I have read some posts (2 pages worth) that I deem to be very low class and knee-jerk reactions by people who avow they are behind Dr. Paul. They ruined their credibility with me by their failure to adhere to Paul's advice (I've heard it in two of his speeches) to speak and act with "Respect."

My reading of three pages of numerous 4-letter words and putdowns and name-calling that remind me of four-year-olds did me in. My disappointment is in Ron Paul devotees, not in Paul, not in Barr, not in Libertarians, Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Greens, or Socialists.

 

[H Roark]

Notice in the video that Barr completely ignores the fact that all the candidates on stage were there to embrace the four plank platform; the reason for the press-conference in the first place.

If he's so high and mighty that he can't even publicly stand with fellow presidential candidates that support liberty minded positions on key issues, how does he expect to stand behind average Americans who share these same views.

Barf is doing a spectacular job of making himself irrelevant.

 

[jmdrake]

It seems to me that there is far far more Barr bashing going on here then there is Baldwin bashing.

There is now because Bob Barr has been acting like a total prick.

 

[Alawn]

WHAT the hey??? The C4L people most CERTAINLY DID put the word out in the news that BOB BARR was dropping his CAMPAIGN! They told the LP "it's good for press coverage" That is what started the angst. The LP retaliated by doing what they did...how did you FORGET this information? tones

You are wrong and you have absolutely no proof of them starting a rumor. Nobody had even heard of that rumor until the Barr people accused them of it. They never ever started any rumors. All they ever did was not say anything about what the event was about. Some nutjob may have speculated but that has nothing to do with the cfl. Ron Paul said hundreds of times he wasn't going to run. Why would anyone think otherwise. He couldn't even get on the ballots that late anyway. The Barr people are making up any stupid excuse they can so they don't look like jerks.

The whole point of the event was to say that the debates should be opened up to allow 3rd parties in. It was also to point out how the 2 major parties aren't really different and the lesser of 2 evils argument is stupid. Barr wants to be let into the debates but he doesn't want any other 3rd party to be let in. He thinks he deserves Paul's endorsement and nobody else does. Well he doesn't. Had he shown up Paul would not have endorsed Baldwin. CNN would have probably invited Barr to come on with Paul to talk about it instead of Nader. Paul was going to keep quite because in reality Baldwin is more libertarian/small government but Barr is in the better party and has more chance of doing well. In that situation it is a tough call and either way you might piss someone off so he wasn't going to pick. Barr could have tried to make peace over the situation but instead he has repeatedly made things worse. Whether you like Barr or not he definitely is arrogant and totally full of himself. The guy only speaks in 3rd person. He is just mad that people keep comparing him to Ron Paul and that most people think of him as a 2nd choice.

 

[jmdrake]

That's what passes as bashing in your book? As a solid Ron Paul supporter over the past year, I agree with Barr. I am extremely disappointed that Paul endorsed Baldwin. Barr point was that he thinks its wrong to equate the Libertarian party with the Greens and Nader. Once Paul did what he did though he should has stayed on that course, and not endorsed any one.

Paul wasn't "equating" the third parties. He was pointing out the common ground. All of the people on that stage had agreed to the most important principles, foreign policy, the national debt, privacy and the federal reserve. That conference was before the bailout but Paul, Nader, McKinney and Baldwin have all come out against that too. Bob Barr doesn't get it. It's not about being "libertarian". This isn't the "libertarian movement". It's the freedom movement. Yes there is a difference. And Bob Barr is a hypocrite. On the one hand he talks about whether or not we are going to "follow one man" then demands that "one man" follow him as VP. Ron Paul is about building a broad coalition to address the most important issues. Unfortunately Bob Barr is too selfish or narrow minded to get it. We're better off without him.

Regards,

John M. Drake

 

[jmdrake]

WHAT the hey??? The C4L people most CERTAINLY DID put the word out in the news that BOB BARR was dropping his CAMPAIGN! They told the LP "it's good for press coverage" That is what started the angst. The LP retaliated by doing what they did...how did you FORGET this information? tones

Link please.

 

[pahs1994]

My reading of three pages of numerous 4-letter words and putdowns and name-calling that remind me of four-year-olds did me in. My disappointment is in Ron Paul devotees, not in Paul, not in Barr, not in Libertarians, Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Greens, or Socialists.

+1 i was just thinking about this the other day. I am all about Ron Paul and everything he stands for. But lately most of his supporters really really annoy the hell out of me.

 

[amy31416]

I'm just severely disappointed because I knew nothing about the Libertarian party prior to finding out about Ron Paul and really thought the LP was the way I'd go in the future. Barr is entitled to his own opinions and entitled to run his campaign however he sees fit. I'm entitled to think he's being a divisive jackass.

With that said, Barr has inspired me to not give a rat's ass about the presidential election, and maybe that's a good thing.

 

[revolutionary8]

Fubar

Fuckbar

 

[revolutionary8]

I'm just severely disappointed because I knew nothing about the Libertarian party prior to finding out about Ron Paul and really thought the LP was the way I'd go in the future. Barr is entitled to his own opinions and entitled to run his campaign however he sees fit. I'm entitled to think he's being a divisive jackass.

With that said, Barr has inspired me to not give a rat's ass about the presidential election, and maybe that's a good thing.

As far as I see it, Bob Barr is a NEOCON. Not Libertarian at all.
Don't believe the hype.
"what they ought to be disappointed in is Ron Paul's behavior"
-Bob Barr
FUCK BOB BARR
and FUCK you motherfucker!
YOU WERE NEVER A FRIEND, SO STOP PRETENDING.
bastard!!!

 

[Brassmouth]

As far as I see it, Bob Barr is a NEOCON. Not Libertarian at all.
Don't believe the hype.

I suppose it's too much for your mind to contemplate an epiphany. Before Dr. Paul came along, many of us were far from libertarians. How superficial of you to believe that Barr can't change his philosophy. He's been asked countless times, and he renounces his beliefs from when he was a congressman.

He's not a perfect libertarian, I'll admit. But the fact that he's not makes him seem all the more genuine to me. If he was simply trying to "ride RP's coattails to make a name for himself" like so many ignorant people suggest, when wouldn't it make sense for him to just parrot everything RP says? The fact that he doesn't makes him legit in my book, even if Dr. Paul would be a preferable candidate to endorse.

FUCK BOB BARR
and FUCK you motherfucker!
YOU WERE NEVER A FRIEND, SO STOP PRETENDING.
bastard!!!

Ahh the ad hominem, the last resort of the brainless fool who's been utterly destroyed in a fair debate.

 

[revolutionary8]

I suppose it's too much for your mind to contemplate an epiphany. Before Dr. Paul came along, many of us were far from libertarians. How superficial of you to believe that Barr can't change his philosophy. He's been asked countless times, and he renounces his beliefs from when he was a congressman.

He's not a perfect libertarian, I'll admit. But the fact that he's not makes him seem all the more genuine to me. If he was simply trying to "ride RP's coattails to make a name for himself" like so many ignorant people suggest, when wouldn't it make sense for him to just parrot everything RP says? The fact that he doesn't makes him legit in my book, even if Dr. Paul would be a preferable candidate to endorse.

OH PLEASE
"I suppose it's too much for your mind to contemplate an epiphany" on top of

"He's not a perfect libertarian, I'll admit"
lmao.
cute.
real cute.
You're super smart according to your own standards, aren't ya?
Why can't we all just get along.
I HATE BOB BARR.
DEAL WITH IT.

 

[Brassmouth]

OH PLEASE
"I suppose it's too much for your mind to contemplate an epiphany" on top of

"He's not a perfect libertarian, I'll admit"
lmao.
cute.
real cute.
You're super smart according to your own standards, aren't ya?

Again with the ad hominems eh? And ignoring the argument posed against you on top of that?

That's ok, there are plenty of people on these forums who are willing to have a civil debate.

 

[revolutionary8]

Again with the ad hominems eh? And ignoring the argument posed against you on top of that?

That's ok, there are plenty of people on these forums who are willing to have a civil debate.

Fine,
Bob Barr said:
"what they ought to be disappointed in is Ron Paul's behavior"
I totally disagree.
I will wait for your excuse to agree.
WHAT part of Ron Paul's "behavior" should we we be "disappointed with"???????????????

 

[revolutionary8]

Fine,
Bob Barr said:
"what they ought to be disappointed in is Ron Paul's behavior"
I totally disagree.
I will wait for your excuse to agree.
WHAT part of Ron Paul's "behavior" should we we be "disappointed with"???????????????

bump for egomanaical asswipes intent on furthering their own egomaniacle "investments".