Libertarian party files motions to remove Bob Barr as their nominee

The reason should be that his handlers praised W for his "leadership" on 9/11 - and i am assuming that this would have been done w/Barrs approval.

above all else, the one commonality that we libertarians share is a high regard for civil liberties.

my .02

and fire Ty Willingham
 
but not every party official. what about other states?

How would I know what others do in their individual states? It was shown to the party officials in my state that could have had a direct impact and the response was quite simple. You're voting for the party, not the man.
 
How would I know what others do in their individual states? It was shown to the party officials in my state that could have had a direct impact and the response was quite simple. You're voting for the party, not the man.

Was it sent to the national GOP?
 
I dont' like Barr but I'm not so sure about pissing off the Libertarian party this much.

I just hope theres a good nominee in 2012 that we can all unite behind instead of another Bob Barr fiasco
 
Last edited:
I dont' like Barr but I'm not so sure about pissing off the Libertarian party this much.

I just hope theres a good nominee in 2012 that we can all unite behind instead of another Bob Barr fiasco.

Obviously if they have filed a motion to remove him, they shouldn't get pissed off about it. They could remove him and donate the electors to a more qualified candidate. Nobody will miss Bob Barr. It was rather naive to trust him enough with the nomination. Even Gravel has supported freedom more in the past than Barr.
 
I dont' like Barr but I'm not so sure about pissing off the Libertarian party this much.

I just hope theres a good nominee in 2012 that we can all unite behind instead of another Bob Barr fiasco.

As a Republican, The LP has pissed ME off by letting down the only REAL Libertarian leaning Republican in Congress, and by letting down their own party by nominating a fascist who promotes both George Bush and Al Gore.

I am impressed that the LP is actually trying to hold their people accountable. I have hope for the LP yet. :)
 
Who are you referring to?
Bob Barr and Ron Paul of course.
It's actually Ironic, BB has shown his neocon colors and RP his Libertarian colors over the last coupla days. RP embraced and BB shunned. Oh, and BB refused to endorse the 4 planks we should ALL agree upon. Not very Libertarian of BB, was it?
 
Last edited:
You do know that both the LP and the CP offered RP the nomination, right? He declined both. He would not have qualified for the ballot in many states, anyway.
 
You do know that both the LP and the CP offered RP the nomination, right? He declined both. He would not have qualified for the ballot in many states, anyway.

Yes, I am well aware, and understand that accepting the nomination for the LP would have most likely signed away his 20 PLUS YEAR REPUBLICAN seat in the House as his constituents are mostly REPUBLICAN in the great Redstate of Texas.
The CP, now correct me if I am wrong, offered him the nom in the state of MT, which is UNAFILLIATED with the National Party.
I understand that PUBLICLY offering him the Veep slot was not only a slap in the face it was a stab in the back, for the second time.
try again?
 
Last edited:
Yes, I am well aware, and understand that accepting the nomination for the LP would have most likely signed away his 20 PLUS YEAR REPUBLICAN seat in the House as his constituents are mostly REPUBLICAN in the great Redstate of Texas.

I think I must have misunderstood what you wrote, I thought you were saying that the LP let down Ron Paul by not nominating him. Upon reading your post again, I realized that probably wasn't what you were saying.

Just in case you've got the wrong idea, I'm not a Barr supporter... I was planning on voting for him, but something pretty dramatic would have to happen to cause me to cast my vote for him now.
 
Back
Top