barr is PRO-Interventionist Foreign Policy

Good point.
I was hoping for a the third party candidates combined to get over 15% which would be a strong vote of no confidence and would set up a better environment for a Paul2012.

Some people can't see beyond their computer monitor.

If your vote is counted, regardless of who it is for, and it is not one of the leading two... that is a vote of no-confidence.

I am going to petition my state to allow voting for "no confidence" electors.
 
Leave them alone. I made fun of the truthers for a long time... but you know what... I'm only going after ignorant people from now... Truthers don't hurt us, they believe the government engineered the 9-11 disaster...

With the stuff that I believe caused by the Bush Administration, giving him credit for 9-11 is chump change.

That was actually a reference to sidsters remarks in another concurrent thread about how any Barr supporter is a traitor, and how he is keeping a list of names of barr supporters as future threats to "liberty".
 
Odd to see you use religious references in the context of describing yourself.
We should all be fishers of men. That is how we build a coalition to overcome government tyranny.

I may despise the faith personally, but my second degree is in Systematic Theology. I know the Christian faith very well... I study vigorously all enemies of freedom.
 
That was actually a reference to sidsters remarks in another concurrent thread about how any Barr supporter is a traitor, and how he is keeping a list of names of barr supporters as future threats to "liberty".

Well now, that is remarkably stupid. Barr is a toolshed, but I'm not going to stop others from voting for him now... I just don't care.
 
If your vote is counted, regardless of who it is for, and it is not one of the leading two... that is a vote of no-confidence.

I am going to petition my state to allow voting for "no confidence" electors.

That is an awesome idea!
But you have to that ASAP.
Qualifying ends in just a couple of days.
You can really do this if you really wanted to..

here is a good place to start on the qualifications and cost: http://www.sos.louisiana.gov/tabid/164/Default.aspx

download the pdf, it should have qualifications for electors.
basically, have to be a resident of the state and can't hold public office.
I think you will need seven people total to go and file a slate of electors for the candidate "Vote of No Confidence" which will appear on the ballot as such.
I think its relatively cheap too, around $300 to qualify.

Just go to the sec. of state office in baton rouge to file the paper work, they do most of the technical stuff for you.
 
That is an awesome idea!
But you have to that ASAP.
Qualifying ends in just a couple of days.
You can really do this if you really wanted to..

here is a good place to start on the qualifications and cost: http://www.sos.louisiana.gov/tabid/164/Default.aspx

download the pdf, it should have qualifications for electors.
basically, have to be a resident of the state and can't hold public office.
I think you will need seven people total to go and file a slate of electors for the candidate "Vote of No Confidence" which will appear on the ballot as such.
I think its relatively cheap too, around $300 to qualify.

Just go to the sec. of state office in baton rouge to file the paper work, they do most of the technical stuff for you.


http://www.sec.state.ri.us/elections/rulesandregulations/acceptance_of_electors.html


Seeing what I can do...

I have a good handful of people that would go and file.
 
I may despise the faith personally, but my second degree is in Systematic Theology. I know the Christian faith very well... I study vigorously all enemies of freedom.

We may have more in common than we would want to know(studies systemic religions and theology for 14 years, 2 years collegiate).... i think the only small difference is.. i don't see the people who follow the silly myths and traditions as enemies, but as a sociologist, i understand why they think that way, and i don't see it as harmful if the want to congregate and perform rituals (minus human sacrifices).
The enemies are the politicians and the church leaders who use peoples want and desire for a divine to manipulate them into supporting dangerous policies.
 
We may have more in common than we would want to know(studies systemic religions and theology for 14 years, 2 years collegiate).... i think the only small difference is.. i don't see the people who follow the silly myths and traditions as enemies, but as a sociologist, i understand why they think that way, and i don't see it as harmful if the want to congregate and perform rituals (minus human sacrifices).
The enemies are the politicians and the church leaders who use peoples want and desire for a divine to manipulate them into supporting dangerous policies.

the problem is modern theology was crafted by the power brokers as a useful tool.
 
Are you fucking kidding me? You think it is OK to support such a
policy? To intervene in other country's political business whenever
someone in our government finds it justified?

If the answer to that is yes, I think you are also a neocon and
should be banished from all political arena.

why don't you mind your own business? You are a theocrat supporting the theocratic party, no libertarian wants you in the LP. ciao
 
"No Confidence" is not recognized as a party in Rhode Island, so is not qualified...

Last Wednesday in June.

You know what... we do have this crazy libertarian guy here in the State... maybe I can hijack his party and place myself as an elector.

(He sued the RI Supreme Court to be recognized)
 
the problem is modern theology was crafted by the power brokers as a useful tool.

that was basically what i was saying... but theology throughout history has been used in the same manner.
Its an abuse of peoples want and desire to be close to their creator.
 
We may have more in common than we would want to know(studies systemic religions and theology for 14 years, 2 years collegiate).... i think the only small difference is.. i don't see the people who follow the silly myths and traditions as enemies, but as a sociologist, i understand why they think that way, and i don't see it as harmful if the want to congregate and perform rituals (minus human sacrifices).
The enemies are the politicians and the church leaders who use peoples want and desire for a divine to manipulate them into supporting dangerous policies.

I agree. However, those leaders are in charge now, which makes the entire institution of Christianity in America a dangerous weapon.
 
"No Confidence" is not recognized as a party in Rhode Island, so is not qualified...

Last Wednesday in June.

You know what... we do have this crazy libertarian guy here in the State... maybe I can hijack his party and place myself as an elector.

(He sued the RI Supreme Court to be recognized)

oh- i thought you were in louisiana. this whole time I thought you were apart of the Baton Rouge meetup. :rolleyes:
So- it may not be that easy for you to become an elector.
I "may" be an elector for Barr, but probably not.
I'm registered republican now, even though I was still voted onto the LP central committee..... I'm kind of a hybrid in the context of party rules.
 
Last edited:
sidster said:
I wonder when will fools, who are supporting barr unconditionally,
and refuse to face facts that barr is not the the liberty candidate,
wake up and realize barr for the scum he really is!?

You are justified in being suspicious of Barr, but, respectfully,
I don't think it matters in 2008. No third party is going to win the Presidency. It doesn't matter if Barr is a phoney. What matters is if the Libertarian gets a substantial chunk of the freedom vote. This will lay the groundwork for the upcoming elections. Candidates will begin to adjust their platforms accordingly. Our Revolution will begin to get a real foothold. Barr articulates a relatively good platform, and one that is dramatically different from the 2 party elite. We can sort out the phonies when the time comes.

Also. Barr may very well be a growing, evolving, human being. He's putting so many things on the record, now, that it would be difficult for him to reverse course back to his neocon ways, if he were to become hypothetically electable or influential.

Barr sounds a little sketchy on his economics, but that's par for the course for politicians. I think the powers that be will look at the combined tally of Bar and Baldwin to see just how many RP votes they lost, so I doubt if it matters if we vote for Barr or Baldwin, in terms of demonstrating how many votes they are losing by not adopting freedom causes into their platforms.
 
Last edited:
I Don't Think Bob Barr is a Conspirator in the LP

I was pointed the page on barr's own site, dated October 10, 2007:



In this writing barr calls for clandestine operations within another
country's borders to force regime change.



That is no doubt from his CIA ties... covertly intervening with
Iran's (sovereign nation's) political system.

I wonder when will fools, who are supporting barr unconditionally,
and refuse to face facts that barr is not the the liberty candidate,
wake up and realize barr for the scum he really is!?

I keep seeing the argument that barr is at least "spreading the message"
over and over again. But I am pressed to ask what fucking message?
This seems nothing more than the neocon message. So am I to believe
that those on this site, supposed enlightened Ron Paul supporters are
blind to see through this farce? Or is it really that those on this site
calling for support for barr are in fact nothing more than insurgents into
our movement by the neocons to increase "efforts to quietly but actively
build on the deep base of political" support for barr and move us away
from Ron Paul movement?

Wake the fcuk up people!

Are you implying that Bob Barr is really a neoconservative trying to infiltrate the Libertarian Party? Why not just conclude that he is a Republican-turned-Libertarian, but still has some positions which need to be sorted out and reevaluated?
 
What will it take for the LP to receive some electoral votes?

Winning a state.
That is part of Barr's strategy is to focus on the states he polls highest in..like
Georgia, Colorado, Alaska.
With more funding, his numbers show he could do well in those states.
 
Winning a state.
That is part of Barr's strategy is to focus on the states he polls highest in..like
Georgia, Colorado, Alaska.
With more funding, his numbers show he could do well in those states.

A libertarian VP candidate did recieve an electoral college vote many years ago, but it was an elector who was protesting Nixon.
First woman to recieve an electoral college vote was a Libertarian.
 
I was pointed the page on barr's own site, dated October 10, 2007:



In this writing barr calls for clandestine operations within another
country's borders to force regime change.



That is no doubt from his CIA ties... covertly intervening with
Iran's (sovereign nation's) political system.

I wonder when will fools, who are supporting barr unconditionally,
and refuse to face facts that barr is not the the liberty candidate,
wake up and realize barr for the scum he really is!?

I keep seeing the argument that barr is at least "spreading the message"
over and over again. But I am pressed to ask what fucking message?
This seems nothing more than the neocon message. So am I to believe
that those on this site, supposed enlightened Ron Paul supporters are
blind to see through this farce? Or is it really that those on this site
calling for support for barr are in fact nothing more than insurgents into
our movement by the neocons to increase "efforts to quietly but actively
build on the deep base of political" support for barr and move us away
from Ron Paul movement?

Wake the fcuk up people!
+1000
Wake up people!!!
 
Back
Top