Bob Barr on NBC... he's kind of a hypocrite....
Submitted by aVoiceof Reason. on Tue, 10/28/2008 - 16:49
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/vp/27420168#27420168
I support the LP and 3rd party politics, but man, the LP picked a pretty bad candidate.... the only reason they went with Barr was because of name recognition/his former career in Congress which was supposed to turn into support, money, and media attention, which it didn't.
»
Ya Think?
Bob Barr = CIA = Hypocrite, and a whole lot worse. He is sent to distract from actual candidates that could and would make a change, and to ruin the Libertarian party. We've covered this many many times before. Welcome aboard! :O)
He's just a distraction and neo-con thorn in McLame's side
The powers that be feel it's time for a Dem president this time around...
Freedom Isn't Free... Freedom costs a buck 'o five - Trey Parker
R3VOLUTION - Secret Crowds
Bar...
Barr and put him and his sidekick in the "ROOT" cellar!!!!!!
Not true.
The reason the LP went with him was because the 11 delegates that were the margin of majority on the sixth ballot in Denver were stupid, and they bought into the Aaron Starr-brokered deal of Root throwing to Barr to create that joke of a ticket.
We shoulda had Ruwart-Kubby...
Like it or not...
it's too bad he couldn't make it into the debates...that would have been interesting to say the least...
Bob Barr--The Candidacy Full of FAIL.
Barr is an inept campaigner. I recall you guys saying the opposite back in summer; the truth is the man is a narcissistic incompetent and he has made himself into a laughingstock.
Had he been smart, Barr could have mended fences with Libertarians, despite his historic vote for the 'USA Treason Act'.
He could have groomed his neoconservative embarrassment of a VP to sound libertarian, or at the very least, like a Ronald Reagan conservative.
He could have tried harder to mea culpa over the Patriot Act and his support for the War On Drugs. I find it mind-boggling that the Libertarian Party chose a drug warrior as its presidential candidate, in complete refutation to what has arguably been the party's only historic Signature Issue.
He could have treated Dr. Paul with a bit more respect. This is his only blunder, of many, that has been fully addressed by bloggers.
He could have shown up for Third Party presidential debates with Nader and Baldwin.
It remains to be seen if Barr's failure to capture the spirit of the Ron Paul revolution, or appeal to bona-fide Libertarians, results in a mass defection to the Constitution Party--in spite of its evangelical platform.
Barr's candidacy has done unquestionable damage to the Libertarian Party's credibility, and if anyone there has any common sense, it should drive home an important lesson: A political resume is far less important, with a third party candidate, than a firm set of principles.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Kind of?
Kind of?
Seriously, there is nothing "kind of" about his hypocrisy, it's 100% pure undiluted hypocrisy.
well - i dont know if he's a hypocrite
a liar, a traitor, a narscicist, a weasely no-show maybe. But most Americans dont know that- they just think hes some 3rd party hack who got owned by Borat- so Id rather see his supporters vote for him than a dem or a repub . The American people wont see what a putz he is- theyll just see that 3rd parties did pretty good in '08.
Live Free or Diebold
what I learned recently
Is that if a party candidate gets a certain percent of your states votes then that party is on the ballot in that state and that party is recognized as being official. 3rd party is the way to go, and while Bob Barr stinks I'd rather the libertarians get a slate on the ballot then the lesser of 2 evils. Chuck Baldwin isn't on the ballot in my state.
http://killfiat.blogspot.com/
http://killfiat.blogspot.com/
Yes, yes, yes
You are so very right. So in a slam-dunk state like, say, Illinois, votes cast for ANY third-party candidate are definitely the way to go. The Green Party, love 'em or hate 'em, is now on every ballot here after a great showing in the last gubernatorial election. Never let anyone tell you it's a wasted vote.
lesser of 3 evils?
Someone answer this question:
Would Barr be running against Paul if he had won the Nomination?
I agree we should not be calling people hypocritical who have a genuine belief system change. We do however need to have some kind of action to support that self proclaimed change of mind. So far Barr has failed miserably. If he wants to prove himself as a true patriot he would concede and support Ron Paul's choice! I will be writing in Chuck Baldwin. Is the same not true for the Constitution Party? "recognized as being official" for getting more votes?
No, he wouldn't
And the reason he wouldn't is that had Dr. Paul gotten the GOP nomination the LP would simply have cross-endorsed or ran NOTA.
Shoot, had Dr. Paul simply showed up in Denver and walked in the door he would have won the LP nod going away!
I prefer gigantic flaming douche bag
VOTE CHUCK BALDWIN
A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.
Wait a minute
If you prefer Barr, why vote Baldwin? LOL!
lol .....was it your
lol .....was it your grandmothers?? :)~~~~~
"When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny."
-Thomas Jefferson
I am more concerned about the return of my money than the return on my money. --Mark Twain
“A prudent man foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself: but the simple pass on, and are punished.” (Prov. 22:3; 27:12 KJV)
Hey McCain-----┌П┐(◣_◢)┌П┐
Butler Shaffer speaking on the LP:
- http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/022817.html
Bob Barr Speaks Out for Small Government
Listen to what Bob Barr says in the video and I don't think there is anything hypocritical about him unless you think that his joining our movement is wrong for him to do. How will we ever grow if we call people hyprocritcal who change their minds and become libertarians? He is campaigning hard and helping grow our party. I am proud that he is our candidate. We formally asked Ron Paul to be our Presidential nominee but he declined.
Would Barr be running against Paul if he had won the Nomination?
I agree we should not be calling people hypocritical who have a genuine belief system change. We do however need to have some kind of action to support that self proclaimed change of mind. So far Barr has failed miserably. If he wants to prove himself as a true patriot he would concede and support Ron Paul's choice!
See above.
(nt)
callin barr kind of a hypocrite
is like calling the eight ball kind of like the cue ball, or salt kind of like sugar, or hot kind of like cold. He was a plant to subvert the momentum that the libertarian party would have had this year against the weakest republican candidate since Bob Dole possibly ever, and a complete unabashed socialist democrat candidate (at least McCain denies being one).
Thank you Dr. Paul for making my act on what I already knew was right.
*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*