Bob Barr on FoxNews, Critical of Republicans/Democrats, Supportive of Third Parties

[Shotdown1027]

http://www.independentpoliticalrepo...to-appear-on-cavuto-and-at-atlanta-tea-party/

 

[JK/SEA]

Who's bob barr. Is this a new lounge or tavern? do they have a pool table?


oh wait...silly me..Bob Barr..as in go fuck yourself Ron Paul? is that the one?

 

[not.your.average.joe]

Who's bob barr. Is this a new lounge or tavern? do they have a pool table?


oh wait...silly me..Bob Barr..as in go fuck yourself Ron Paul? is that the one?

LOL

Hey Bob;

...........(\`¯\.......................
.............\..¯\......................
..............\....\..............
.......¸•´¯¯`\'...'\¯`\......
...../¯¨\.......\....\...\'\....
....('...'\~¯....`...`...)')...
.....\.....'...FUCK......./....
......`•._ ....YOU..../...'......
..........)............../........
........./............../.........

 

[Sarge]

Why yes, I do believe that is the same one.

 

[Shotdown1027]

That's an awfully visceral reaction for someone whose views so closely mirror ours, don't you think?

 

[moostraks]

That's an awfully visceral reaction for someone whose views so closely mirror ours, don't you think?

no it's not...and no his views don't mirror "ours".

http://www.religioustolerance.org/burn_aw2.htm

"Barr stated that allowing Wiccans to follow their religion on base: "...sets a dangerous precedent that could easily result in the practice of all sorts of bizarre practices being supported by the military under the rubric of 'religion.' "

He rejects Wicca (a.k.a. Witchcraft) as a legitimate religion, even though:

It meets the criteria for a religious belief specified in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
It has been recognized as a valid religion by at least two U.S. district courts.
It has hundreds of thousands of followers in the U.S.

Rep Barr continues: "What's next? Will armored divisions be forced to travel with sacrificial animals for Satanic rituals? Will Rastafarians demand the inclusion of ritualistic marijuana cigarettes in their rations?..."

Religious Satanists do not engage in the ritual sacrifice of animals. Teenage dabblers in Satanism sometimes have been known to kill a dog or cat or small animal; but this is quite rare. Whether Rastafarians should be allowed exemption from drug laws is a matter for the courts to decide. Some Native Americans have been allowed to consume peyote as part of their religious services -- they follow a tradition which dates back millennia. Roman Catholics are permitted to consume wine during Mass. Allowing Rastafarians to use marijuana in their religious rituals may be similarly guaranteed by the 1st Amendment to the U.S. constitution. Only a court case would tell for certain.

He ended his press release with the following: A print of the painting, 'The Prayer At Valley Forge,' depicting George Washington on bended knee, praying in the hard snow at Valley Forge, hangs over the desk in my office. If the practice of witchcraft, such as is allowed now at Fort Hood, is permitted to stand, one wonders what paintings will grace the walls of future generations.'"

He is not trustworthy as recent behavior during the last election proved and he is an intolerant individual more suitable to the neo-con agenda than a libertarian one.

 

[RonPaulwillWin]

Fuck Bob Barr, I feel so stupid for voting for him.

 

[Captain Bryan]

Fuck Bob Barr, I feel so stupid for voting for him.

Same here.

 

[mczerone]

I also feel that Barr was a horrible choice for the LP nomination - and he hasn't done anything to advance Liberty since.

Though I wouldn't hold his old views over his head. If we want to accept new recruits, we need to accept that people used to be totalitarians of one form or another.

Barr was a total douche for blowing off Ron's "4 planks" Press Conference, and didn't fare any better than the Greens, Constitution Party or any other outsider party despite his insistence that he couldn't associate with those "lowly" candidates. It just shows that Barr is still just a politician seeking power - even if his views of how he'd use that power have changed.

 

[Shotdown1027]

no it's not...and no his views don't mirror "ours".

http://www.religioustolerance.org/burn_aw2.htm

"Barr stated that allowing Wiccans to follow their religion on base: "...sets a dangerous precedent that could easily result in the practice of all sorts of bizarre practices being supported by the military under the rubric of 'religion.' "

He rejects Wicca (a.k.a. Witchcraft) as a legitimate religion, even though:

It meets the criteria for a religious belief specified in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
It has been recognized as a valid religion by at least two U.S. district courts.
It has hundreds of thousands of followers in the U.S.

Rep Barr continues: "What's next? Will armored divisions be forced to travel with sacrificial animals for Satanic rituals? Will Rastafarians demand the inclusion of ritualistic marijuana cigarettes in their rations?..."

Religious Satanists do not engage in the ritual sacrifice of animals. Teenage dabblers in Satanism sometimes have been known to kill a dog or cat or small animal; but this is quite rare. Whether Rastafarians should be allowed exemption from drug laws is a matter for the courts to decide. Some Native Americans have been allowed to consume peyote as part of their religious services -- they follow a tradition which dates back millennia. Roman Catholics are permitted to consume wine during Mass. Allowing Rastafarians to use marijuana in their religious rituals may be similarly guaranteed by the 1st Amendment to the U.S. constitution. Only a court case would tell for certain.

He ended his press release with the following: A print of the painting, 'The Prayer At Valley Forge,' depicting George Washington on bended knee, praying in the hard snow at Valley Forge, hangs over the desk in my office. If the practice of witchcraft, such as is allowed now at Fort Hood, is permitted to stand, one wonders what paintings will grace the walls of future generations.'"

He is not trustworthy as recent behavior during the last election proved and he is an intolerant individual more suitable to the neo-con agenda than a libertarian one.

Nice try--but that was in 1999.
http://www.independentpoliticalrepo...-recants-position-on-wiccans-in-the-military/

He has since recanted his positions. He held a lot of bad positions during his Congressional tenure, but he has since come out against the Drug War, for civil liberties, against pre-emptive war, against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, for the free market---he's an explicit libertarian.

 

[Shotdown1027]

I also feel that Barr was a horrible choice for the LP nomination - and he hasn't done anything to advance Liberty since.

Though I wouldn't hold his old views over his head. If we want to accept new recruits, we need to accept that people used to be totalitarians of one form or another.

Barr was a total douche for blowing off Ron's "4 planks" Press Conference, and didn't fare any better than the Greens, Constitution Party or any other outsider party despite his insistence that he couldn't associate with those "lowly" candidates. It just shows that Barr is still just a politician seeking power - even if his views of how he'd use that power have changed.

I'm no apologist for Barr, I wanted Steve Kubby to get the LP nomination, but a lot of what you have said here is inaccurate. Barr, since 2008, has been very active in pro-liberty causes. He has been writing columns for the Atlanta Journal Constitution which are, 99% of the time, reflective of a libertarian position. The calendar on his website is always chalked full of speech's he's making on libertarian issues, as well as running a blog, The Barr Code, that is similar in outlook. He has also started a new organization, Liberty Guard.
https://www.libertyguard.org/

While it was dumb of Barr to blow off Paul's press conference, and he acted like a child, it is not true that he didn't do any better than Cynthia McKinney of the Green Party or Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party--he scored 150,000 more votes than both of those candidates put together.

 

[Sentient Void]

I liked Mary Ruwart the best for the LP nomination in 2008.

Who knows if Bob Barr has really turned around or not... although I do know that I don't like his childish actions after his nomination.

 

[JK/SEA]

Bob Barr needs to SIT DOWN, HOLD ON, AND SHUT THE FUCK UP...until further notice.

 

[emazur]

I support Barr, though he acted like a Jackass towards Ron Paul in the 3rd party conference.

 

[moostraks]

Nice try--but that was in 1999.
http://www.independentpoliticalrepo...-recants-position-on-wiccans-in-the-military/

He has since recanted his positions. He held a lot of bad positions during his Congressional tenure, but he has since come out against the Drug War, for civil liberties, against pre-emptive war, against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, for the free market---he's an explicit libertarian.

Nice try since he showed he had not changed much with his attitude during the last election. He is an elitest jerk with a closed mind and yes his past still matters when his present indicates an unreformed spirit...

 

[silus]

I'm no apologist for Barr, I wanted Steve Kubby to get the LP nomination, but a lot of what you have said here is inaccurate. Barr, since 2008, has been very active in pro-liberty causes.

I've had t-shirts longer than he's been a libertarian. Its already hard enough to believe a 60 year old man can make this enormous shift in life/political philosophy. The libertarian party made itself a joke by nominating such a wrinkled newbie.

 

[moostraks]

I'm no apologist for Barr, I wanted Steve Kubby to get the LP nomination, but a lot of what you have said here is inaccurate. Barr, since 2008, has been very active in pro-liberty causes.

You're kidding, right? Since 2008? You sure are doing a good job at being an apologist since you can overlook his past and his present faults without any compunction just because he talks a good line of crap. Actions speak louder than words and Barr's have said a mouthful. Seems to me he is doing what he has always done as a politician, play the crowd by telling people what they want to hear but when the rubber meets the road he is only concerned with his own appearance.

 

[Shotdown1027]

Nice try since he showed he had not changed much with his attitude during the last election. He is an elitest jerk with a closed mind and yes his past still matters when his present indicates an unreformed spirit...

I don't think he's an elitist jerk, running for the Libertarian Party nomination pretty much proves he isn't an elitist.

As for his past--we are supposed to convert people. Barr's campaign message should've reflected his past and his reformation, but his campaign staffers did not pick up on this. Can you imagine the headlines it would've created if Barr had campaigned against the Drug War "Former Drug Warrior Congressman Turns Argues for Legalization". Barr did turn on the drug war, he just didn't do so publicly enough to grab headlines or donations.

As for him indicating an "unreformed spirit"--that's a pretty subjective thing, I'd say. The only thing you have to attack him on is statements he made 8 years prior to the election--and he has since made statements to the contrary. So, for some reason you're trusting his statements he made 8 years ago, statements for which he had considerable incentives to make, over his statements he's made in the last 3 years, and those statements were NOT political advantageous for him to make.
Why would he lie about having a conversion--it wasn't politically advantageous for him to do so. He already had a career as a lawyer, author/columnist, and PAC leader. His conversion to Libertarianism and subsequent run for President actually cost him quite a bit of money, funds spent on his Presidential campaign, funds spent during his tenure on the LNC/donated to the LNC, and the subsequent loss of his PAC's fruitfulness (which was composed of Republican donors, who didn't really like being mined for money that would go to Libertarian candidates).

 

[Shotdown1027]

You're kidding, right? Since 2008? You sure are doing a good job at being an apologist since you can overlook his past and his present faults without any compunction just because he talks a good line of crap. Actions speak louder than words and Barr's have said a mouthful. Seems to me he is doing what he has always done as a politician, play the crowd by telling people what they want to hear but when the rubber meets the road he is only concerned with his own appearance.

Yes, since 2008, I was responding to the allegation that he has done nothing since the Presidential election. If you'd like me to get into everything he did for liberty before 2008 but after his Congressional career, I can and will. But I was responding to a very particular comment.

 

[moostraks]

I don't think he's an elitist jerk, running for the Libertarian Party nomination pretty much proves he isn't an elitist.

As for his past--we are supposed to convert people. Barr's campaign message should've reflected his past and his reformation, but his campaign staffers did not pick up on this. Can you imagine the headlines it would've created if Barr had campaigned against the Drug War "Former Drug Warrior Congressman Turns Argues for Legalization". Barr did turn on the drug war, he just didn't do so publicly enough to grab headlines or donations.

As for him indicating an "unreformed spirit"--that's a pretty subjective thing, I'd say. The only thing you have to attack him on is statements he made 8 years prior to the election--and he has since made statements to the contrary. So, for some reason you're trusting his statements he made 8 years ago, statements for which he had considerable incentives to make, over his statements he's made in the last 3 years, and those statements were NOT political advantageous for him to make.
Why would he lie about having a conversion--it wasn't politically advantageous for him to do so. He already had a career as a lawyer, author/columnist, and PAC leader. His conversion to Libertarianism and subsequent run for President actually cost him quite a bit of money, funds spent on his Presidential campaign, funds spent during his tenure on the LNC/donated to the LNC, and the subsequent loss of his PAC's fruitfulness (which was composed of Republican donors, who didn't really like being mined for money that would go to Libertarian candidates).

I am tired and I got to get up soon so I won't spend much time on this. I cited his recent behavior as being indicative of an unreformed nature. Not too many people change their stripes this late in life and his actions about not wanting to be in the company of the likes of the third party candidates spoke volumes as to just how highly he esteems his own self worth. As such he will be a poor representation of his constituency if it conflicts with said interest.

""I'm not interested in third parties getting the most possible votes," Barr told the cameras. "I'm interested in Bob Barr as the nominee for the Libertarian Party getting the most possible votes." In a further insult, Barr said he would permit the vastly more popular Paul to be his vice presidential running mate"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/10/AR2008091003463.html?hpid=topnews

Hey thanks for the bone Barr, Dr.Paul can run second to you!!! LOL!!!!

Bob Barr is interested in Bob Barr not liberty. He is a washed up has been desperately trying to reinvent himself. It is fine if someone points out the desperation when Romney pours tons of money to buy an election but somehow when Barr does it as a Libertarian we are supposed to believe he is somehow virtuous? Oh please!