Liberty MavenThe Paul/Barr Overreactions Continue
September 12th, 2008 11:46 pm | by Mike Miller | Published in Blowback, Bob Barr, campaign for liberty, Commentary, Election, Libertarianism, Liberty, Maven Commentary, Media, Politics, Ron Paul | 7 Responses
Ok, this is getting crazy.
Ron Paul, a Republican, had a press conference to which all the main 3rd Party Candidates were invited (and all agreed to attend). All show up except Bob Barr, whose campaign decided at the last minute (when they learned what it was all about) that it wasn’t right for them. Some defend this, and some (who are very loud) are pissed off about it. Whether or not it was the right move for Bob Barr, it’s really not that big of a deal. Of course, sensationalist sites like independentpoliticalreport.com are going way overboard with the topic, even pushing a petition to remove Barr/Root as the LP nominees. When will the madness end? Am I the only one who thinks that most of the press/bloggers are making a mountain out of a molehill here?
Loading ...
September 13th, 2008 at 12:52 am (#)
Whatever the merits of Bob Barr’s grievances against the Paul campaign, the political reality is that Bob Barr needs to make his peace with Paul and his people and join in the project that was declared and joined in by the other third party candidates. They are not being hampered in running their own campaigns on their own platforms, and neither will be Bob Barr. But they may gain the votes of the other candidate’s supporters in those states where those other candidates have been kept off the ballot. Perhaps I am missing something, but as far as I can tell, Bob Barr has everything to gain and nothing to lose by taking this course.
September 13th, 2008 at 4:20 am (#)
I thought this article addressed the whole situation quite nicely: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/hamilton4.html
It is another alternative. I cracked up reading it. I absolutely loved it.
I don’t think much about Barr not showing up, but I think it shows his true colors. From the reaction it seemed like a very dumb political move. Does he really think he is all that? Perhaps he thinks he has so many supporters he can afford to alienate a bunch of them?
In a world where making a standard comment like “putting lipstick on a pig” become front page news, what did he expect the reaction to be?
September 13th, 2008 at 11:23 am (#)
It is a big deal — to voters and to Barr. Voters pick a new candidate and Barr looses maybe a million votes from Ron Paul “liberty” voters. That’s a big deal.
September 13th, 2008 at 1:19 pm (#)
Dr. No need to be Dr. Yes on this one.
Our forefathers are rolling over in their graves. Dr. Paul made a huge mistake and needs to apologize and recant.
For Dr. Paul, an elected official, to tell people NOT TO VOTE is akin to telling people not to eat and go on a hunger strike. No Dr.Paul was wrong, wrong, wrong and he needs to reverse what he said. Its one thing for people not to vote, but its a whole other for an elected official to tell people to do such a thing. Its political assisted suicide. I spend everyday from the time Dr. Paul announced his campaign until our State Convention trying to convince people Dr. Paul was worth voting for and make sure you get registered, and now Dr. Paul comes out with this. How does he ever expect us to get people involved in the next election cycle – there will be people who will actually say they even heard its okay to protest and not vote because of Dr. Paul, and that is what they will do.
It one thing for Dr. Paul to not want to put himself on the line and not choose one of the alternative candidates over McCain and Obama, but he should have never told or encouraged people not to vote. Barr was correct to stay away from that line of thinking if thats what he saw in the official press release beforehand.
September 13th, 2008 at 3:48 pm (#)
Ron Paul acknowledged that many of his supporters simply won’t vote for a candidate for President, as a matter of principle, but he does not encourage them to do so. In fact, he specifically encourages them to vote for one of four third party candidates.
So what do you want him to apologize for?
Also, it is not irresponsible to encourage people not to vote. Unless a person is educated about the office and qualifications of those running for that office, unless they know at least that one person on that ballot is qualified and desirable to fill that office, they should NOT vote. While scrupulous to vote every time there is an election, I habitually don’t cast a vote in races (Soil and Water Conservation comes to mind) I know nothing about.
September 13th, 2008 at 4:04 pm (#)
It is definitely time to move on, IMO. This squabbling may be drawing some attention for third party candidates, but it is drawing attention to the wrong thing. As much as liberty lovers criticize the main stream to focus on the issues, now the focus of many Paul/Barr supporters has nothing to do with any issues.
It’s time for all freedom fighters to get back on message.
September 14th, 2008 at 3:25 am (#)
Sorry, gang, but this squabbling is what the third parties are all about.
If a candidate is not perfect, or nearly perfect, then the usual suspects move in to claim that the candidate was really a neocon or whatever–
The fact of Barr was because the Libertarian Party engaged in these squabbles and in doing so removed any hope of getting one of their own to be the LP nominee–so they had to import Barr, another ex-Republican, not unlike what happened with Paul’s LP run for President some time back.
But then the Greens did this in 2000 and imported Nader–this is a third party thing.
Sure, the more stable or sane members of the third parties (if anyone can find any sane or stable members of these parties) want to move past these squabbles, but I am reminded by Brian Wilson’s column posted at Lew Rockwell’s site, Wilson’s adventures with the LP conventions, where he described the several insanities that are practiced by the LP–and Wilson is a libertarian, but would not be caught dead or alive as a member of the Party because of its insane and unstable operations and practices.
One last observation: The third parties fight so much with themselves, within their parties, that there’s nothing left for the big parties or big media to actually target–the LP has done a wonderful job of destroying itself and the pummeling it gets from the big media, big money and the big parties is to simply pound the rubble—
But what does one expect from people who 1. think that they have a market or lock on the truth 2. are only interested in one issue, whatever that may be and 3, do not recognize that there are other people living around them that also have rights and needs. Madison described these types of persons as factions, adverse to the public good and to private rights. Now some factions are more amenable than others, how is it that the third parties are filled with the most obnoxious of these?