Liberty Maven

I wish I had paid more attention to politics in High School. I didn’t come to libertarianism until I was in my early twenties. A mock debate in a Michigan high school played out a bit like what the real debates could have been. Along with McCain and Obama, the mock debate included a student representing the views of Libertarian candidate Bob Barr. The student had never heard of Barr nor the Libertarian Party prior to planning for the debate.

Matt Tanyi, who played Barr, said it was important that students heard a different set of views.

“All you ever hear about is Democrats and Republicans. This opened my eyes to the need for an opposing view point,” said Tanyi, who’d never heard of Barr before the mock debate.

As Barr, Matt criticized government spending habits and talks of going to war with Iran.

“The government is money hungry. It’s going to spend as much money as it can get out of you,” Tanyi said. “Just because a country may have weapons of mass destruction is no reason to go to war. America is not the world’s police.”

The debate was put on by the school’s advance placement U.S. government and politics class.

Teacher Andy Nester said the debate helps students better understand the candidates.

“They learn the passion behind how these different groups believe the government should operate,” Nester said. “And when the students hear these things coming from their peers, it’s believable to them.”

The teacher, Andy Nester, deserves praise for including at least one of the third party candidates in the mock debate. That is more than can be said of the debates sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates, which strictly limits the participation of third party candidates with thoroughly un-American and unfair requirements.

At least one student came away impressed with libertarian positions.

Jenny Clark, a senior at the school, she said learned a lot by listening to the debate.

“It helped me learn more about the Libertarian Party,” said Clark, 17. “You don’t see Bob Barr out there, but after listening today, I realize I agree more with him than the other candidates.”

This one comment gives me hope for the future of our country, but it also demonstrates the very real problems of excluding other voices in the heavily watched debates.

The single most beneficial element of Ron Paul’s primary campaign was his ability to participate in the debates alongside the other GOP candidates. All of the primary debates were sponsored on a single channel, usually a cable news channel which limited viewership. Paul’s debate excerpt videos went up on YouTube in mere minutes following the debates giving millions of Internet political junkies freedom food for their brains. In turn, Ron Paul’s Internet assisted grassroots viral campaign allowed him to earn millions of donation dollars during the now famous (and widely imitated) supporter-initiated “money bomb” single-day fundraising events.

Now imagine if Barr were allowed to participate in those horribly boring debates between Obama and McCain. Those debates were watched by millions more than the primary debates. It’s hard to imagine Barr not winning over a significant number of closet libertarians like Jenny Clark. One wonders how many more Jenny Clarks are out there in the shadows merely accepting the status quo two of choices, neither of which come close to representing their views.

It may be anecdotal, but I feel this mock debate strongly illustrates that debate access is the key to third party growth. Ron Paul’s decision to not run as a third party or independent candidate killed my first hope of hearing a libertarian voice in the general election debates. Bob Barr’s failures in campaign strategy murdered my second hope for the same.

I may be dead and gone before it happens, but I will continue to hold hope that someday that beautiful message of liberty will thoroughly wash over the masses compelling them to restore the Founding Father’s version of America. A version where the Constitution once again becomes the supreme law of the land.