Now what? Bob Barr or write-in?

[Kludge]

Bob Barr is a turncoat who would take more than 4 years to gain my trust, probably closer to 15. Eitherway I'm sure he's a secret neocon whop lans to rip the libertarian party apart.

As opposed to the person propping up Obama in nearly every thread he's in while ripping on the LP nominee without any specific citations.

 

[electronicmaji]

As opposed to the person propping up Obama in nearly every thread he's in while ripping on the LP nominee without any specific citations.

Well Obama is closer to my ideals then this neocon bastard. If we're voting for lesser evils here, Obama deffinetly gets my vote. Especially since Kucinich endorsed him.

 

[WRellim]

You might want to make a note that he also has quite a few anti-liberty votes.

But he has completely and totally apologized for and renounced all of those bad, naughty votes.



Just like he completely and totally apologized to his first wife and renounced the fact that he was seeing another woman... before he got divorced and married the "other woman" that is.

And a few years later, he completely and totally apologized to his second wife and renounced the fact that he was sleeping with yet another woman... before he got divorced again, and then married the third woman that is.


He's actually very good at sincerely apologizing and renouncing and all that there kind of stuff. He's the kind of politician we need... he's got himself some experience!

I mean what is most important is to TRUST IN BOB BARR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QrPWQF1414

 

[electronicmaji]

But he has completely and totally apologized for and renounced all of those bad, naught votes.



Just like he completely and totally apologized to his first wife and renounced the fact that he was seeing another woman... before he got divorced and married the "other woman" that is.


And a few years later, he completely and totally apologized to his second wife and renounced the fact that he was sleeping with yet another woman... before he got divorced again, and then married the third woman that is.


He's actually very good at sincerely apologizing and renouncing and all that there kind of stuff.

I mean what is most important is to TRUST IN BOB BARR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QrPWQF1414

Doesn't change the fact that he made them; he apologized and renounced them out of ease. I've seen no evidence that anything he says is true and I have n oreason to trust him.

 

[familydog]

But he has completely and totally apologized for and renounced all of those bad, naught votes.



Just like he completely and totally apologized to his first wife and renounced the fact that he was seeing another woman... before he got divorced and married the "other woman" that is.

And a few years later, he completely and totally apologized to his second wife and renounced the fact that he was sleeping with yet another woman... before he got divorced again, and then married the third woman that is.


He's actually very good at sincerely apologizing and renouncing and all that there kind of stuff. He's the kind of politician we need... he's got himself some experience!

I mean what is most important is to TRUST IN BOB BARR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QrPWQF1414

Theoretically libertarians shouldn't be making value judgements on what another does with their life.

 

[Theocrat]

Clarification of Terms

Theoretically libertarians shouldn't be making value judgements on what another does with their life.

You're confusing libertarians with libertines, which is a common mistake amongst neo-libertarians today.

 

[Alex Libman]

Writing in a candidate who isn't running doesn't even get counted in many states. Baldwin is a theocrat. Unless someone else jumps in at the last minute, Bob Barr is the only way to go...

 

[familydog]

You're confusing libertarians with libertines, which is a common mistake amongst neo-libertarians today.

I'm pretty sure that applies to libertarians as well. I don't consider myself a libertarian so maybe one will have to come and correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[WRellim]

Theoretically libertarians shouldn't be making value judgements on what another does with their life.

Whose talking about "value judgements: or "lifestyle" -- I'm talking about breach of contract, infidelity and a character that apparently has no problem with insincerity (saying something without meaning it), hypocrisy (saying one thing and doing another), or even outright lying (denying what you are doing while you are doing it) ... not to mention "flip-flopping" whenever it is convenient. In short, a man with no concept of what scruples or ethics really mean (or perhaps he knows what they mean, but simply feels they do not apply to him).

Hey if Bob Barr wants to sleep around it really doesn't affect me personally (although if he's too promiscuous, it could be a public health issue) -- but I think the fact that he willing, voluntarily entered into specific contracts with people and then violated both the spirit AND the letter of those contracts (before legally nullifying them) tells me a tremendous amount about his character (or lack thereof).

And if YOU want to bring in "value judgments" -- that he then proceeded to later on grandstand on that very issue -- and write and pass legislation to enforce HIS "value judgments" onto others across our entire society... well, enuff said.

 

[priest_of_syrinx]

I can't legally vote due to my age, but I am a Barr guy myself.

 

[Nathan Hale]

While voting for Bob Barr is practically quixotic, writing-in Ron Paul is a total waste of time. Remember people - if this is a true movement, a true revolution, we need to use our heads before we spend a dollar, cast a vote, or devote a minute of our time to anything related to it.

 

[familydog]

Whose talking about "value judgements: or "lifestyle" -- I'm talking about breach of contract, infidelity and a character that apparently has no problem with insincerity (saying something without meaning it), hypocrisy (saying one thing and doing another), or even outright lying (denying what you are doing while you are doing it) ... not to mention "flip-flopping" whenever it is convenient. In short, a man with no concept of what scruples or ethics really mean (or perhaps he knows what they mean, but simply feels they do not apply to him).

Hey if Bob Barr wants to sleep around it really doesn't affect me personally (although if he's too promiscuous, it could be a public health issue) -- but I think the fact that he willing, voluntarily entered into specific contracts with people and then violated both the spirit AND the letter of those contracts (before legally nullifying them) tells me a tremendous amount about his character (or lack thereof).

And if YOU want to bring in "value judgments" -- that he then proceeded to later on grandstand on that very issue -- and write and pass legislation to enforce HIS "value judgments" onto others across our entire society... well, enuff said.

I agree. I was being facetious in that post

 

[WRellim]

I agree. I was being facetious in that post

And I knew it...

But you can't expect me to pass up a sweet-spot opportunity for a tag-team play like that one can you?



The point is to get the info to the eyes of the lurkers & listeners... not to convince your opponent!

 

[Lisa S]

Now that good Dr. dropped out, I think I will have to throw my support behind Baldwin. There something about Barr I don't trust and Baldwin has shown alot of support for our man. I think we need to return the favor. It would be good if we could all decide on either Baldwin or Barr and not divide our votes up. I'll support Barr if that's who the most are supporting. he is definitely better than the rest. I love Ron Paul, but I think a write in at this point would do nothing except help my own conscious maybe.

 

[The Machine]

I think I'll sit this one out and focus on more tangible things like debt reduction, producing food, and becoming more energy independent.

 

[mrchubbs]

And Barr wins another one.

 

[WRellim]

And Barr wins another one.

Only because the poll was very biased to begin with -- half of the votes were in before the other options were added to the list (like NOTA which was added before Baldwin, etc).

In other words, the numbers are distorted because the thing was essentially rigged in a fashion that created the distortion.

Besides, much like the LNC, the population here is not representative of either the movement as a whole.

 

[Kludge]

Only because the poll was very biased to begin with -- half of the votes were in before the other options were added to the list (like NOTA which was added before Baldwin, etc).

In other words, the numbers are distorted because the thing was essentially rigged in a fashion that created the distortion.

Besides, much like the LNC, the population here is not representative of either the movement as a whole.

10 + 5 = 15

15 < 41

Wait... Let's take it a step further.

15 +24 = 39

39 < 41

Your logic fails.