Help me with Barr please

That is some good info you found. You left out one important part though. Barr's second wife aborted one of their babies, even though Barr claimed to be staunchly pro-life.

No that's in there, I just didn't make a major BOLDED point of it or anything, so you might have read right past it.

From:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=140847

He then moved to Washington D.C. and took a job with the CIA, who then apparently paid his salary while he pursued MA and law degrees (!) from the Beltway GW University. Met and began dating the woman (also on CIA payroll) who, immediately following his divorce, became his SECOND wife while going to school and collecting that CIA paycheck. Purportedly left the CIA almost immediately after finishing law school (?!?) and moved to Georgia where he had the second of his political "epiphanies" and joined the Republican Party... with the apparent goal of securing either election or appointment to a public salaried office (his private practice apparently NOT doing very well -- poorly enough, in fact that they had no health insurance when his wife became pregnant again in 1983). There are differing he-said, she-said accounts about what happened, but his wife aborted the pregnancy (valid mainly because of the discrepancies of the accounts versus his later positions and claims).

[NOTE: emphasis NOT in original post]
I don't know the truth of the matter and was doing my best to provide a fair depiction of the event as far as we can; and didn't want to hilight it too much because there ARE discrepancies.

The he-said/she-said parts are that he claims to have been completely unaware she was even pregnant until after she had already aborted the baby; conversely, she claims he not only knew about the situation, but that he made the decision to abort the child and was directly involved to the extent that he drove her to the clinic and back.

But I *do* think the fact that there are these discrepancies -- that his former second wife would TESTIFY to that, despite the fact that she is supportive of his career (indicating she doesn't HATE him so much to make up blatant "lies") -- and well, it is a puzzling incident from her statements. (And given his PUBLIC stance on pro-life issues, if he truly was "unaware" why would he not also have been "outraged" and have at some point in time USED that incident in a speech or two? It's puzzling from his side as well.)
 
Others are more reasonable and feel that someone can change their positions, but Barr hasnt held his current positions for long enough to be the Libertarian party's standard bearer.
Second!

I hope nobody was sad Gravel didn't get the nomination instead.
 
Barr is the ONLY chance the LP has to get more than the same old 360,000 votes that Browne/Badnarik got. Like it or not, NO ONE outside of our cozy little 360k-strong sewing circle is going to vote for a financial advisor/computer programmer/bio-medical researcher with ZERO political experience for the highest office in the land. I love Mary as a person, but let her get herself some political experience first by getting elected to the US House or Senate first, then I will support her whole-heartedly day and night. Barr and Gravel were the ONLY LP candidates who were qualified to run in the minds of most people, and elections are a popularity game.

Yes, Barr made some poor votes in Congress, but he realizes it now (he's called his PATRIOT Act vote 'the biggest mistake I made in Congress'), but without him, the Act would be non-ending - it was BARR who put in the sunset provisions.

And another way of thinking of this is to remember 'The Return of the Jedi.' You remember when the rebels went to destroy the second Death Star? Who did they let fly the Millenium Falcon, huh? Huh? That's right.... It was Lando Calressian - the same fellow who sold out Han Solo to Darth Vader in Cloud City. Why? Because people change, and sometimes the most worthy and powerful ally is a former enemy.

JM
 
Back
Top