Bob Barr on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos"
Posted July 6th, 2008 by tajitj
output
From this morning Sunday, July 6th. Sorry Bob haters. Thought some on here would like to see it.
Video from "This Week"
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
He was also on CNN Newsroom Sunday evening.
http://blog.bobbarr2008.c...
Here are the Diggs for the two interviews.
Digg This Week! Over 450, he has a good following on Digg now.
http://digg.com/2008_us_e...
Digg CNN Newsroom!
http://digg.com/2008_us_e...
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Ron Paul's Quotes on Bob Barr
In late June 2008, Ron Paul was interviewed by Wolf Blitzer on CNN News and was asked what he thought of Bob Barr. Here is Ron Paul's reply:
"Well I think he's running a very important race, and I'm encouraging him. I haven't endorsed him, but he's saying the kind of things I like to be heard and said. I hope he does real well. But, we also have Chuck Baldwin who runs on the Constitutional Party. His views are very very close to mine, and he worked very hard in my campaign. So for me to pick one over the other is not easy. I hope they both together get a lot of votes."
On June 12, 2008 on CNN News, Congressman Paul was interviewed by Reporter John Roberts: Congressman, what do you think of Bob Barr? Does he faithfully represent the values of the Libertarian Party?
Ron Paul: I think so. It doesn’t mean that you can look at his voting record like you look at mine and say there was never any infraction. That doesn’t mean that he can’t represent these values. He’s saying the things he should be saying. He’s joined the Libertarian Party and he presents these views and he talks our language. So I do really believe that he can have a very positive effect in this campaign and let the people know that limited government is a very, very important message and that people will have a chance. That gives everybody a choice in the matter.
You can see the video here: http://politicalticker.bl...
If Bob Barr is good enough for Ron Paul to encourage him, he is good enough for me to encourage, also. If Ron Paul was going to be on the General Election ballot, I would vote for him. Since he is not, I will gladly vote for Bob Barr. Compared to Obama and McCain, Bob Barr is much preferable.
If Ron Paul thinks that Bob Barr has changed his views for the better and is encouraging Bob Barr's campaign, why should we try to put Barr down and oppose his campaign? Haven't all of us become more libertarian over time? Bob Barr has, too, and is standing up to Obama and McCain. I supported Ron Paul as far as he could go in the Republican nomination race. Now is the time to encourage Bob Barr like Ron Paul told Wolf Blitzer that he is doing. See www.bobbarr2008.com
Go Bob Barr!
George Whitfield
Organizer, Seoul Ron Paul and Bob Barr Meetup Groups
Some are not rational
Some are very serious and can't vote for him becuase of his record, I understand.
But people who just curse and call him a names are not people who we need. Remember they were the ones who killed Pauls campaign. We all got looked at as kooks because a vocal few were absolutely blind to other opinions. Seeing him poll at 6% is very encouraging.
To me if a guy is running for president saying things like that, whether he truely believes it, excites me.
Funny Thing
The funny thing about this is George Stephanopoulos is/was a CFR member and is very accepting of Mr. Barr vs. when Ron Paul was on his program he was very condescending towards Dr. Paul.I think it's very telling of Mr. Barr's sudden change from Neo-Con Republican to Pro-Constitution Liberterian.....
a Leopard doesn't change his spots.
Fortunately he's a man which
Fortunately he's a man which unlike the leopard is capable of redemption.
Anyway, it doesn't sound like he expects to win anyway. Only try to break the 2 party system. I think the issue that stands before the GOP is do they cave into letting 3rd parties have a voice or do they back peddle and nominate Paul.
Which do they fear the most? I'd argue controlling the duopoly. If they back peddle and nominate Paul they could salvage their lock on the system. At least for a little while. If they do not then they get Ofisa. Which might matter to the GOP but certainly does not matter to the puppet masters.
Commission on Presidential Debates - http://www.debates.org/pa...
National Ballot Access - http://www.directdemocrac...
Voters for none of the above - http://nota.org/
Black Box Voting - http://www.blackboxvoting...
Appreciate the post
thanks! i will definitely check it out.
affirmation: President Paul
affirmation: President Paul 2008
Jeez.. what does it take to STOP POSTING BARR on this site???? He's not the real deal; go to his site and post until your little heart is content.
Supply and demand. As long
Supply and demand. As long as you keep posting you represent a demand even though you are against. The best thing you can do is boycott the thread if you disagree with what's being broadcast.
Commission on Presidential Debates - http://www.debates.org/pa...
National Ballot Access - http://www.directdemocrac...
Voters for none of the above - http://nota.org/
Black Box Voting - http://www.blackboxvoting...
Send Email to Debate Org
To qualify for 1st debate:
A candidate for president of the United States will qualify for participation in the debate if, as of September 4, 2008, in the sole judgment of the Greater New Orleans Foundation, he or she:
1.Meets the constitutional qualifications for the office (Article II, sec. 1, U.S.Constitution);
2.Qualifies for the ballot in a sufficient number of states with a sufficient number of electoral college votes to be elected president;
3.Has national popular support of no less than 10 percent of the voting age population intending to vote, as measured by at least three nationally-recognized public opinion surveys; and
4.Maintains an active national campaign with the stated purpose to be elected and to serve if elected.
http://www.neworleansdeba...
So he needs 10% in polls they deem nationally recognized. I asked them to reconsider that.
If he keeps polling at 5%
If he keeps polling at 5%, his polling might be enough to sink McCain which will make me quite happy....although then we get Obama so maybe happy is not the right word...
There are no acceptable options - they are all unacceptable.
Aren't all these polls..Zogby, et al TOOLS of the...
MSM!
6% Nationally from Zogby
It is a very new poll. That is encouraging. I think the talk show machine is having an impact on conservative image of McCain.
Honest Question
Is it possible for one to change his views or is one not allowed to review his past philosophy, realize it's shortcomings, and change his opinions? I myself voted for Bush twice and agreed with the original premise of the invasion of Iraq and the Patriot Act. I then re-thought about my positions in lieu of new information, subsequently refined and changed my positions and will forever be a Revolutionary. Am I tied down forever because of my past opinions?
If he runs in 2012 on this same platform and there's no other viable option, are you still going to call the man unworthy of the position?
My Honest Answer
Provided Bob Barr is sincere in his claim that 'he's sorry' I am willing to forgive him personally. However, as a politician entrusted with defending the US Constitution and representing his constituency, he failed. So, given that failure I would not be willing to cast a vote for him now or in the future.
Think of it like this....If the guy changing your oil uses 5W-30 instead of 10W-40, you would probably forgive him and go there again. Or if he fills your tank with premium instead of economy, you might be willing to trust him again, right? But what if he were to fill your crankcase with gas instead of oil, what are the odds you'll be back to that shop?
Bob Barr didn't goof up on some appropriations bill...he didn't make a mathmatical error...he didn't vote 'Yes' to some meaningless waste of time legislation. He voted YES to strip away the protections of our rights that form the very framework of our country and government.
Not an oops. No excuses can make it better. I'm glad he's sorry, if he is. I'm glad he's willing to support the cause of liberty, if he is. But I'm not willing to vote for a the guy as he F'd up in the most major way possible in his job, and that is to defend the Constitution of the United States of America from ALL enemies, foreign and domestic.
"But what if he were to fill your crankcase with gas instead...
"...of oil, what are the odds you'll be back to that shop?"
Sounds like a McCain owned shop...
While we can and should hold
While we can and should hold people up to standards, the one bantered about on here, is unfair.
The simple claim when it comes to his bad votes is what he did was wrong. That is a valid comment, and he will be the first to admit he was wrong.and the votes were mistakes. But the claim of what he did violated his oath, or was even treasonous is so far over the top its laughable.
As a President you have no peers, so yo can and should be held to a higher standard. As a congressman, you have many peers, hundreds of them. To say that you voting the same way as hundreds of them and that they all committed treason is just stupid and counterproductive as most people will disagree with you and your point of view makes you a oddball But before yo say, "So what", is that smart? We continue to lose liberty and you say "so what??!!" (and you criticize Barr????).
The fact is, most people do NOT view this as even close to treason, not even close to being close! What it is to most people is a policy disagreement. Now before you say, "they are wrong" (which is a valid point, but it still doesn't change anything), remind yourself that you do not live in a bubble. whether you want to admit it or not, politically speaking, your opinion means nothing more than that of some average Bush supporter!
What this all means is that we should be principled and do want we can to get a real gem like Dr Paul elected when we can, but at the same time, we need to work in the real world of politics as they are. I hate it as much as the next guy and wish it were all different, but wishing it doesn't make it so.
Fucking apologists!
Go shit all over some other discussion forum, you fucking Bob Barr apologist!
You kiss you mother with
You kiss you mother with that mouth?
Commission on Presidential Debates - http://www.debates.org/pa...
National Ballot Access - http://www.directdemocrac...
Voters for none of the above - http://nota.org/
Black Box Voting - http://www.blackboxvoting...
Wow Gil!
Look at you go! I think I'm gonna have to take back what I said last night!
Appears you'd survive in my house just fine..:)
___________________________________
http://forums.libertylove...
"I have once heard that the ability to resist temptation is the truest measure of a mans character."
Dustin Hoffman to Steve McQueen
"Papillion"
Most people, most people, most people
Lotsa "most peoples" in there.
Most people are liberals or neocons.
So much for "most people".
I don't vote for "most people".
I vote for my choice in a candidate.
Frankly, I don't care if you approve, or if "most people" approve.
If you think Barr's extremely troubling Patriot Act vote criticisms are "laughable", then that tells me all I need to know.
Asking us to vote for somebody else we don't even like, that isn't going to win, just so we can be compromised AND lose anyway, is insulting.
Of course I used the term,
Of course I used the term, "most people" a lot in my post - that was my whole point! Unless you are some sort of crazed conspiracy nut who think EVERYTHING is a conspiracy, you will have to agree that "most people" think in terms of us living in a "two party" system, and that "most people" think that there choice is limited to McSame and Obama. In addition, More people voted for McSame than RP. You can blame that all you want on everything from a biased media to sun spots and it does not change the FACT that more people voted for McSame than our guy.
That is the world we live in, we might not like it, but it does not change what it is. Nominating Barr was a strategic move based on the REAL World. No, he is no Ron Paul but in some ways he is better. For example, he is better in interviews, just as Obama is better than everyone in that area. Again, that is a real world fact.
I only feel compelled to post messages on these threads as I think you guys who bash Barr area being detrimental to the overall cause. Barr is one part of this, and if you want to support other parts, here's a clue...DO IT!! But the endless bashing on how he's not pure enough is silly. No one is going to make you vote for him or donate money to him. No one is going to stop you if you vote for Baldwin over him. So why bash him. Support a local candidate or Baldwin, but please stop bashing people who just disagree on strategy - its just plain stupid.
Respectfully disagree
Well, I guess me and you don't see eye to eye and that's fine. I'm willing to forgive a man that has made a "mistake" and is willing to go on the record for the past several years talking about the problems of the Act and his wish to get rid of it in such a manner as running for president on such a platform (can't get much more clear to me). All I know is that Barr is our best shot of getting in the debates and acquiring large sums of votes and I would rather swear him in the office than Mccain or Obama. I won't write Paul in because i want to know my vote is recorded and counted, and I don't want to vote for Baldwin because no one is going to be talking to him or about him in the media. I want the media talking about our principles because in our stage in the movement all we are looking for is exposure and trying to get the word out. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with your strict interpretation and inability to forgive a man because I believe his current actions are speaking louder than his past.
You are as entitled to your opinion as I am to mine.
And I find it interesting that you'd discount Chuck Baldwin, to quote you, because "...I don't want to vote for Baldwin because no one is going to be talking to him or about him in the media." That was the very same fate the powers that be decided was appropriate for Dr. Paul.
What if he's the best candidate? Will you still not vote for him because the media (doesn't) say(s) so?
Let me ask you...would you sue a surgeon for malpractice if he removed a kidney when you were supposed to have your appendix removed, or would you simply forgive him because he realized he hadn't read your chart before the operation and he swore he'd never do it again?
I like Chuck...
But he was head of the florida Moral Majority.....and thats enough to scare me off.
If you read further, I
If you read further, I wouldn't have to be responding to this question. Like I said, our biggest goal at this early stage in the Revolution (think of it as a marketing plan) is to just get the word out to as many as people possible. The best way to do that is via TV. Baldwin hasn't even smelled any news networks, and his campaign is not as successful as Barr's in spreading the word of liberty. I want to spread the news of liberty as far and fast as possible, and a recognizable face is the best means to that end. (Barr and Baldwin have extremely similar platforms, and that cant be denied)
Based on your analogy, You don't specify what the doctor is offering you after the mistake. Barr is offering a presidential campaign which is in alignment with liberty. He has dropped his past positions and is offering restitution for his errors. It takes a real man to change his positions after he reflected and realized he was in the wrong.
Ask me in 2012. So far as I
Ask me in 2012. So far as I know, Bob Barr has only been a Libertarian for--what? Two years?
His 80% neo-con running mate Root has only been a libertarian for 16 months. This should cause Libertarians' jaws to drop in astonishment. But apparently the "barr" has been moved very low.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
?
I don't know much about Root, but I highly doubt he's "80% Neo-con" since he almost won the election of the Libertarian Party candidate. Can you offer me hard evidence that he's 80% neo-con, because I want to know the facts before I go accusing him of such a platform.
Why does
Why does bob barr have to come to a paul site to get support. How come he doesnt have his own? Its weird that he cant get support by himself. The Dr. is just going to tell us to support baldwin. Barr isnt at all the paul events its Baldwin being invited and showing up and speaking.
Bob Barr was here? When? Where? Did I miss him?
I don't think Bob Barr is coming here at all. Certainly not for support. He does have his own site. He is getting support for himself. I saw Barr introduce Ron Paul at more than one event.
Some of Barr's supporters come here, but blaming Barr for the actions of one of his supporters is no more fair than blaming Ron Paul because a member of the KKK donated to his campaign.
The reason Barr's name comes up all the time is because many of us who have been supporting Ron Paul are libertarians and, in my case, Libertarian Party members. That's why we're interested in Barr.
I love it that when Barr is interviewed, they drop Ron Paul's name. (Funny how the media consider Ron Paul and his supporters an asset, now.)
I love it that Barr is having to explain why he changed his positions. These are things that will make voters think. Face it, you don't really think he'll get elected, so what he says is far more important than what he would do if elected. A vote for Barr is a vote for freedom and small government.
Unless the GOP delegates pull off a miracle in September, the upcoming election results will not be pretty. It is critically important that McCain is seen to lose because of support for Ron Paul or the LP or Constitution Party candidates. It is critically important that the LP or Constution Party get as many Democrats to vote for them as possible. We must get the biggest vote of "no-confidence" in the establishment parties as we can.
Even if you are working within the GOP, you'll find them much more reasonable and open to Ron Paul's ideas in the next cycle if you can cost them votes this time.
We freedom activists are looking at the big picture, and Barr's candidacy and the Libertarian Party are a part of it. Don't regard talk about Barr as an attack on Ron Paul. It isn't.
IMissLiberty
Bob Barr voted for the "patriot act"
He is a traitor to liberty and the Constitution. FU#K Bob Barr!
"Doc" Holladay
Nashville, TN
What???
Barr isn't perfect???? *GASP*
He's the one that put the sunset clauses in it so that it wouldn't be permanent and that was the condition upon which he voted for it. And he's been criticizing the Patriot Act ever since. That's good for my vote.
Voting for the Patriot Act
Voting for the Patriot Act is not "imperfection".
It's abrogation and betrayal of his Oath of Office.
And since I respect Barr's intellect enough to know he was one of the few on Capitol Hill who voted for it after reading it, it was WILLFUL abrogation and betrayal of his Oath of Office. No way I am voting for that, for President.
Go ahead and mock me for expecting more. I'm the core demographic voter the Libertarian Party wants. They have FAILED this year.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
What makes you think
you think that he knew that there were unconstitutional elements in it?
Legislators are not always right when they judge whether something is unconstitutional or not.
I'm sure Dr. Paul has been wrong on a few occasions when he bases his votes on his own opinion on constitutionality.
Shit-eating troll! Go spew
Shit-eating troll! Go spew your pro-establishment whoring elsewhere!
"What makes you think that
"What makes you think that he knew that there were unconstitutional elements in it?"
Wow... if he couldn't tell what was unconstitutional about it (everything), then he has NO business running for the office of President, whose very oath of office is to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.
So, he's either a tratior to the Constitution, or a moron, neither of which qualifies him to hold a job as a peep show mop-boy, let alone the office of President.
Give it up you Barrbot douches. We don't want Barr.
That's not true at all
Constitutional lawyers advised the President that all of the Patriot Act could withstand Constitutional challenges. There is a lot of interpretation involved in whether something is unconstitutional or not.
The legislator should try to the best of his ability to determine whether what he's voting for is constitutional or not, but that's all you can expect. Of course they're going to be wrong from time to time. That's why we have the Judicial branch, who specialize in determining that.
The job of the president is even less demanding. He doesn't make or judge law. He just enforces it.
Oh Bullshit,,,,
An 8th grader could look at the 'patriot act' and tell that it's one of the most overt assults on our Constitutionally protected liberties that's every been put to a vote. I ask you then, WHY did Ron Paul vote against it...... he must be one of the few congressmen who can read....
The Good Dr.....
Ron Paul considers Bob Barr a friend of liberty - and thats good enough for me.
Up yours, "BillyDee"
Up yours, "BillyDee"
"Doc" Holladay
Nashville, TN
Actually, 'User' is
Actually, 'User' is BillyDee/JustCantGetEnough. I recognize his soundbites. I think 'Zak Carter' is someone else.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Thank you...
I am myself! Heres me doing what started a federal investigation as I support Ron Paul !
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
Yours in Liberty, Zak Carter
Fox News From Last Sunday
In case you missed it he was on FoxNewsSunday with Chris Wallace last Sunday.
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
He voted for the Patriot Act....once a neocon, always....
Deb
Neocon or well-intentioned
Neocon or well-intentioned conservative--the Patriot Act was Barr's chance to show judgement, take a stand, and be true to his oath of office. He failed.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
This interview from CNN tonight was better:
http://blog.bobbarr2008.c...
MUCH better.
Bob Barr on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos
If Ron Paul thinks that Bob Barr has changed his views for the better and is encouraging Bob Barr's campaign, why should we try to put Barr down and oppose his campaign? Haven't all of us become more libertarian over time? Bob Barr has, too, and is standing up to Obama and McCain. I supported Ron Paul as far as he could go in the Republican nomination race. Now is the time to encourage Bob Barr like Ron Paul told Wolf Blitzer that he is doing. See www.bobbarr2008.com
your wrong...
Ron Paul represents republicans!
Let this thread die. Die
Let this thread die. Die thread die!
What's the problem?
What's the problem? Barr is the Libertarian Party candidate (which I have called a monumental mistake) and his candidacy deserves to be debated. The fact that Georgie-Boy didn't rip him a new one is very, very telling considering his previous outrageous disrespect for Ron Paul. Very telling, indeed.
the reason why that little
the reason why that little faggot stephanpoulus ripped Ron Ron Paul was that Ron Paul is a threat.....bob on my knob barr is NOT!
He didn't rip Ron Paul
The interview was very civil. He just stated that it was unrealistic to think Dr. Paul to win the election. The way he said it seemed a bit disrespectful but so what? The rest of the interview was good. And no, Paul was NOT viewed as a threat.
He said the same thing for Barr in different words. Said it was unlikely for him to win.