Will the future of the rEVOLution now move to Barr/Root?

[OptionsTrader]

December 2008?

 

[Perry]

There is a case to be made that today we witnessed the birth of a viable third party - the pragmatic LP! If and when Ron Paul gets snubbed by the Republicans by not allowing him to be nominated or speak at the convention, what are you gonna do? And what if Ron Paul then implicitly or explicitly endorses Barr/Root?

The rEVOLution needs a future. Ron Paul was the founder, but he's 72 years old. We need to look past our next web posting folks. Think about what will be going on 3 months from now, 3 years from now. Don't let the rEVOLution die, regardless of what political party its associated with.

The revolution will support any candidates who follow the constitution and uphold their oath. The Ron Paul revolution will never get behind anyone like they got behind Ron Paul. Either they are like Barr and only partially follow the constitution or they are like Baldwin and wear their religion on their sleeve. Ron Paul followed the constitution to the -T- and although he is very religous he did not bring that into the political arena in an overt way.

 

[Working Poor]

I ain't voting for him...

 

[Bradley in DC]

Same here. I am going to be in Ohio come November and I've checked & neither the LP or CP is on the ballot in Ohio. What does it take to get ballot access in a state? If worse comes to worse, can't I just write in Barr's name on the ballot?

If I read this table right (not necessarily true), then both the LP and the CP have finished their ballot petitioning in Ohio but that there is a court dispute. That's all I got.

 

[WRellim]

"Saul"s record on christians wasn't that great either until 'he saw the light'.
People still see his letters as credible.
I believe people can genuinely change their positions, and will give them that benefit until they prove otherwise.
Imagine, you vote for the patriot act because you were caught up in the fear of that moment, and later, you see how the government is abusing people with it.... would that not change your mind?
Then after that change.. you start to look around you at the other deceitful things the government is doing to people...
I can see how the guy could change... and he isn't totally a johnny-come lately like Gravel was...
Plus, he surrounds himself, with long time libertarians, some i personally know and trust.

Saul also spent several years completely OUT of the "spotlight" (in Damascus) and then a significant amount of time doing rather "lowly" menial missionary work in Arabia, etc.

It was only several YEARS later that he returned to Jerusalem and Judea, and then he did NOT assume to make himself "king" over the entire church. In addition, the church elders were careful to NOT have him perform his main ministry in Jerusalem, in part because even after the previously stated number of years in service they feared for his life -- so he was sent as a missionary to Antioch, and later to the Gentiles.

Regarding Mr. Barr, I think this (ridiculous) comparison to Paul (Saul of Tarsus) is completely inane:

1) To begin with exactly what and when did this supposed "Damascus" event actually occur? Was there in fact some "literal event" and what was it's cause? (RP saw a baby cast aside during his internship that established HIS view on abortion.) Did Mr. Barr see dead bodies of soldiers? Or perhaps meet with families of people convicted of drug offenses? Or is this meant merely in a "proverbial" sense... (in which case is it anything more than BS and "spin"?)

2) What exactly constitutes his real "repentance"? What REAL penitence has he undertaken -- what actions (torn clothing? ashes? self-flagellation?) -- is there ANYTHING that shows TRUE sorrow for the lives he has ruined with his previous actions? If not, then how does this differ from "Theater of the Absurd"?

3) Why is he expected to be crowned HERE... why not send him as a "missionary" to some OTHER country's "libertarian" party and let him perform his penitence there! After several years, THEN... perhaps... he can return.



Because absent THOSE THINGS... there is no real "repentance" here -- no true "conversion" -- and thus there is NOTHING of similarity to Paul or Luther or anyone else who has had a TRUE "Damascus" road conversion... (so quit with the fallacious "Damascus" road BS already.)


All that has happened is a shyster who has slapped on a few elements of new color "camoflage" in order to TRY to continue his career (hey, big fish in small ponds at least they get to FEEL they are important, and with pols, EGO and FAME is often as important as money). All we have here is a *politician* who lost his job, found nowhere in his old party to go, and has decided to change to another party (jeepers, it's NOT unheard of Strom Thurmond, Joe Liberman and a host of others) and in this case Barr is really simply working as a TOOL for Viguerie in an opportunistic con-game to the Libertarian Party as a means of "milking" the RP movement.

I predict that in the end, the LP (if it even continues to exist) will very much regret that they came within 10 miles of either of those people. The LP has just committed suicide in a WORSE way with Barr, than the GOP did with McCain.

 

[Athan]

I'm not voting for Barr. I'd rather vote Nader (former Nader Raider here).

I would definitely vote for Badnarik.

 

[bobdobbs]

Lp Rip

Libertarian Party:

Baked. Done, take out of oven and let cool.

It's finished.

denounce, renounce: http://www.nostate.com

 

[bobdobbs]

I'm not voting for Barr. I'd rather vote Nader (former Nader Raider here).

I would definitely vote for Badnarik.

Does he still have a party? *confused*...

 

[mediahasyou]

I could see the conservative population rallying around this barr guy. Especially considering mccain is the other option. Talk radio is disgusted with mccain. The right will go for barr because he supports protecting America. Barr can win, if the cards are played right.

 

[Meatwasp]

Nope. As much as I like sound money, to me the war is my number one issue. The iraq war vote and patriot act vote are enough to make him unsupportable in my eyes and in the eyes of a large percentage of the movement IMO. Barr is no Paul and anything less than Paul cannot beat Obama anyway. Support him if you like, but don't expect me to or anyone else whose main issue is the anti-war anti-patriot act stance of Paul.

Ditto Kiddo

 

[brianewart]

The problem with Bob Barr is the ridiculous smears against him being perpetuated here. People believe the smears, rather than the truth.

 

[maeqFREEDOMfree]

Nope. As much as I like sound money, to me the war is my number one issue. The iraq war vote and patriot act vote are enough to make him unsupportable in my eyes and in the eyes of a large percentage of the movement IMO. Barr is no Paul and anything less than Paul cannot beat Obama anyway. Support him if you like, but don't expect me to or anyone else whose main issue is the anti-war anti-patriot act stance of Paul.

+1 OptionsTrader, as usual, you're right on.

 

[american.swan]

Will the revolution now move.....?

I sure hope not. That would be a HUGE mistake.

 

[Don Wills]

Will the revolution now move.....?
I sure hope not. That would be a HUGE mistake.

Then it will die.

 

[WRellim]

The problem with Bob Barr is the ridiculous smears against him being perpetuated here. People believe the smears, rather than the truth.

What smears exactly?

The years purportedly "working" for the CIA while procuring a MA (in 2 years) and a JD law degree (in 5 years).

The three marriages?

The dating of the (to be) second wife prior to the divorce from the first wife?
The affair with the (to be) third wife before divorcing the second wife (with two preschool children).
The lawsuit from the second wife in order to get her kids medical bills paid?

The change from Republican (via parents) to Democrat (in college) to Republican (to get a salaried job in the Reagan era) to Libertarian (after losing his seat to a pro-Marijuana candidate)?

The fact that he stayed as a US Attorney only long enough to get his name known and grab for a higher-paying job?

The complaints of grandstanding and using his position as a US Attorney to further his own career (first Fed Attorney EVER to send out Press Releases about cases -- BEFORE they reached trail?) -- the statements from the Federal Judges about way he "handled" his office?

The hypocrisy of a two-timing, twice divorced, 3 times married man authoring a "Defense of Marriage Act"?

The putting the country through the whole Clinton "impeachment" thing and the dress junk -- making "impeachment" an impossibility for Bush?

THOSE "smears"?

But they're not really smears... that's just the early factual part of his life BIO. You bought into it, you live with it... Deal.

 

[electronicmaji]

Barr is a slimebag, he has no chance, and I won't let him steal my vote away from the anti-iraq war candidate. Obama has some good ideas, and I don't have anything personal against him, he doesn't seem like a slimebag to me, and while he may be corrupt the amount of years in congress make him more likely to be less involved in the dirty dealings then others. He's a decent candidate with some good economic policies, especially the neo-liberal stuff. I have no true reason not to vote for him. There are things I disagree with him about, but they are not relevant in this elections. Only two things are, the economy and the war that directly affects it.

 

[svf]

The years purportedly "working" for the CIA while procuring a MA (in 2 years) and a JD law degree (in 5 years).

So... his employment history and educational background makes him unfit for the presidency? How exactly?

The three marriages?
The dating of the (to be) second wife prior to the divorce from the first wife?
The affair with the (to be) third wife before divorcing the second wife (with two preschool children).
The lawsuit from the second wife in order to get her kids medical bills paid?

And his personal life is relevant how exactly...?

The change from Republican (via parents) to Democrat (in college) to Republican (to get a salaried job in the Reagan era) to Libertarian (after losing his seat to a pro-Marijuana candidate)?

So... it's OK for Ron Paul to go from Republican to Libertarian and back to Republican, but not for Barr to change parites?

The fact that he stayed as a US Attorney only long enough to get his name known and grab for a higher-paying job? The complaints of grandstanding and using his position as a US Attorney to further his own career (first Fed Attorney EVER to send out Press Releases about cases -- BEFORE they reached trail?) -- the statements from the Federal Judges about way he "handled" his office?

Assuming this is true (questionable), so what? Shouldn't people be free to advance their careers?

The hypocrisy of a two-timing, twice divorced, 3 times married man authoring a "Defense of Marriage Act"?

DOMA's primary goal was to leave decisions about defining marriage to state, rather than federal, government (which happens to be Ron Paul's position also). It has nothing to do with divorce or "two timing". And Barr has publicly stated repeatedly that he will work to repeal the abused provisions of his own legislation.

The putting the country through the whole Clinton "impeachment" thing and the dress junk -- making "impeachment" an impossibility for Bush?

The Clinton impeachment had nothing at all to do with Monica-gate initially. And how did that make it "impossible" to impeach Bush?

But they're not really smears... that's just the early factual part of his life BIO. You bought into it, you live with it... Deal.

Kinda like the Ron Paul newsletter thing, huh. We can overlook and make excuses about that, but no way can we believe that Bob Barr made some mistakes and has seen the error of his ways.

You know, it's really disheartening how we supposedly tolerant, accepting, and open-minded Ron Paul supporters can be so judgemental and biased about Bob Barr.

 

[svf]

Barr is no Paul and anything less than Paul cannot beat Obama anyway. Support him if you like, but don't expect me to or anyone else whose main issue is the anti-war anti-patriot act stance of Paul.

Barr on the Iraq War...

John McCain and Barack Obama are playing a petty game of “gotcha” while Iraqis demonstrate against the Bush administration’s plan to create long-term, if not permanent, bases in Iraq. “The next president should commit to a speedy and complete withdrawal from Iraq,” argues Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president, “and tell the Iraqi people that the U.S. troops will be going home.”

Barr on the PATRIOT act...

“My vote in favor of the PATRIOT Act was probably the worst vote I cast in the Congress. Without going into the many reasons I did vote for it, I have spent the last 5 years since leaving Congress, working to undo the damage it has wrought. I believe it should be repealed and would work to that end as President.”

So... what is your problem with Bob Barr's stance on the Iraq War and the PATRIOT act exactly...?

 

[electronicmaji]

Barr on the Iraq War...



Barr on the PATRIOT act...




So... what is your problem with Bob Barr's stance on the Iraq War and the PATRIOT act exactly...?

He voted for them. He is a hypocryte, as much as he Claims to be against them the only thing I have to go by is his word. And I do not trust him one bit to beleive in his word.

 

[svf]

He voted for them. He is a hypocryte, as much as he Claims to be against them the only thing I have to go by is his word. And I do not trust him one bit to beleive in his word.

So since Ron Paul changed his position on the Death Penalty in 2007, you don't trust him anymore either, right?