Ron Paul vs Bob Barr : A grand canyon size difference
Posted July 21st, 2008 by Treg
output
While Ron Paul goes on TV to say NO to tax payer bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Bob Borring looks for "temporary" hand outs.
In Peace & Liberty,
Treg
Bookmark/Search this post with:
No Obama. No McCain. No Way. No How.
That was the last line from an article about the Presidential campaign in Nevada: http://www.rockymountainn...
Today on 5 August there is a money bomb for Bob Barr. Please donate here: https://www.bobbarr2008.c...
Thank you all for helping the Libertarian Party bring Liberty to America.
WOW...
what planet did you come from? These Bob Barr conspiracy theories keep getting more and more ridiculous. Has it ever crossed anyone's mind that....hey maybe the guy just wants to be the next president???? Huh...there's a concept
Misleading article.
Barr is for full privatization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
He says "Government must get out of the mortgage business, but must do so in a way that least harms taxpayers and the economy. In the short-term, government has little choice but to provide an explicit but limited loan guarantee, thereby capping the public’s liability, now widely assumed to be without limit...However, the ultimate objective must be full privatization—with both organizations turned into private companies, responsible for their loan portfolios, and without access to government guarantees or other forms of support." http://www.bobbarr2008.co...
Libertarians need to be incrementalists or they're not going to get anything done.
Consider Ron Paul's position on the Federal Reserve. He is against immediate elimination of the Federal Reserve. He's for an incrementalist approach there as well, as immediate abolition would cause massive economic chaos as he has said.
Perferred, you write:
"Libertarians need to be incrementalists or they're not going to get anything done."
You mean like Bob Barr conservatives did, comprimising thier Republican party over to NeoCons.... gee that worked out well didn't it?
No my fellow RP patriot, libertarians need to BE libertarians, period.
Libertarian arguments need to made at the University Level, and to the educated, and to the elites, and to the politically influentially involved....the rest will take care of itself.
Case in Point, see Dr. Friedman's book, "Free to Choose". Look on page 311, its there for guys just like you. There he reprints the American Socialist Platform of 1928. He wants you to read 1 thru 14 planks, and he asks you, where they successful?
Answer, YES!
Did the Socialist Party of America win an election?
Answer, Hell no.
Does that matter one bit?
Answer, Sadly NO!
You see, by sticking hard an fast to their egalitarian principles and their collectivist solutions, they changed American political history. Note: this was just one year before the tragic Black Monday in 1929 on Wall Street and the beginning of the Great Depression, Notice what happened politically. Americans looked for real answers and real changes when disaster struck.
In much the same way, Americans could look to Bob Barr and to libertarians and us inside the Revolution.
So my fellow RP Patriots, we must stick HARD and FAST to our radical vision. Leave it to others who are not as "convinced" as you and I to "compromise" our positions for us. There is no reason for us to compromise ourselves.
Let me make this 100% clear. We are NOT about "winning elections", we are ALL about the FREEDOM MESSAGE and getting America and Americans BACK onto a Constitutional Basis, a Small Government Free Trading Republic.
What do we want? What is our Radical Vision?
We want a moral and just and very small but very effective State & Federal Government that focuses only upon its 3 basic functions, ie,
Police,
Courts, and
Military DEFENSE.
These 3 basic and moral functions of Government are moral if and ONLY IF, they are based upon our inalienable Individual Rights to
Life,
Liberty and
Property.
The Government's power to govern is "good" as long as this Individual Rights Principle is honored, respected, and followed.
Government's power is "bad" the farther it deviates from this governing principle. Indeed, its 3 functions are based upon this principle of Individual Rights, that is to stop violence = Police,
to arbitrate disputes = Courts,
and to protect from invaders = Military Defense.
There will be a millions of people telling us during a crises, "yea but, shouldn't government do also this & that?" And we must answer back, NO, FOLLOW the CONSTITUTION! 3 Functions, LOW cost of Government, Free Markets, Free Trade, No Taxes, Free Market Money.
Dr Paul's answer is both in the long and Short term, we must always move towards shrinking the size and cost and power of government, as quickly as we can.
This is why Barr chooses the wrong direction, a non radical direction, from continuing the Drug War to continuing Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac. He is a typical Conservative who loves to compromise with the progressives and socialists. And he is a typical conservative who does not believe we as a people can Cure Ourselves of social ills, thus "feels the need for a law" on our personal freedoms. This is why conservatives HAVE FAILED each and every time to "preserve" Freedom remaining in this country. Since FDR nothing has been preserved and with this Bob Barr-like "temporary compromise", nothing will be either. A TRUE libertarian candidate would take the news of Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac going under as a GOOD THING. The sooner the feds are OUT of the Mortgage business, the better. We wanted it privatized, well, there you go.
No, I think Dr Paul points the right way on the Freddie mae & Freddie Mac problem, hence both Dr. Paul and Bob Barr are miles apart.
Dr Paul and the Revolution calls radical solution, and radical solution is THE SOLUTION. Compromise will kill the Freedom we want "conserved". Dr Paul was a huge fan of Dr. Milton Friedman, and especially loved his Free to Choose 10 part PBS series, first broadcast in 1980.
This country is now coming quickly to a "Crises Point". If history is any guide, its the RADICAL VISION that the public will turn too. The conservative "Herbert Hoover Compromiser" gets swept aside. To combat that from happening again and history "repeating itself", we libertarians and everyone inside the R3VOLution MUST Be RADICALS for the CONSTITUTION, RADICALS for PURE FREE TRADE, and RADICALS for HUMAN INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.
Maybe Americans will get it right this time during our Second Great Depression. So far, Woodrow Wilson's idea to save the world for democracy is today playing itself out for the Muslim world, and World War I is about to begin with Obama playing the Wilsonian "caring democrat" that will lead this nation to a World War.
In Peace & Liberty,
Treg
I wasn't talking about
an incrementalist MESSAGE, as in promoting partial liberty or something liek that. I'm talking about incrementalist actions. Imagine if we abolished the Federal Reserve tommorow. There would be massive chaos and destroyed economies and mass starvation.
We need to eliminate the Federal Reserve incrementally, to avoid as much human suffering as possible. Dr. Paul proposes we do this by starting to introduce competing currencies.
Or imagine if we abolished all welfare payments tommorow. It would be chaos. Here again, Dr. Paul is an incrementalist, by wanting to save money to save the programs by cutting back military spending overseas, then gradually working to phase them out.
The same for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It needs to be gradually phased over to true privatization.
and one more thing about
and one more thing about that...
the rest will take care of itself - this means you think that only the educated elite need to be trained and taught our philosophy - that the masses will buy into it after we train the elites... you are so wrong... and your thoughts are the ones that are socialists. what you are saying is basically what Leo Strauss, the father of Neoconservatives argument, said. That only the strong and elite should know the TRUTH, the common people are too weak to understand it.
Trotskyite.
The Producer says I am wrong... but how?
So you disagree with Ayn Rand and Milton Friedman then? She and he both argued the same point I believe. That it is the intellectuals who make the dinner that the rest feed on. You point out socialists and neocons also thought this. Gee, it HAS worked out WELL for them, has it not? And on to Leo Strauss, which i hear is the father of NeoCons, but as I understood it, he was for deception, or the White Lie. That part I am not for.
Now back to winning over the intellectuals. I am of the conviction that Sociobiology, neurobiology, evolutionary economics, and other Consilient Sciences will narrow down the parameters of what it means to say, Human Nature, thus various socialist & conservative political options will be described scientifically as recommending something out of the bounds of what Human Nature IS. Notice i said, "IS" as opposed to what Human Nature "ought" to be. Within this narrowing range of what Human Nature is, the political sciences will find the liberatian option with the most merrit while at the same time offering up Counter Intuitive solutions to political delemas. Further, libertarianism 2.0, that is Libertarianism based upon Evolutionary sciences, will look and feel a lot different than Libertarianism 1.0 that is the 19th & 20 century versions which held to the simplistic formula, Life, Liberty, and Property.
Indeed, getting a Doctorite in Evolutionary Politicial Economy may become the same thing as getting a Doctorate in Libertarian Political Economy. I for one, welcome the day. Several new books are the first to champion Libertarianism 2.0, and place Libertarianism squarely BACK upon sciences shoulders, specifically the biological evolutionary tie in. These books are Darwinian Politics written by Dr Paul Rubin, an Economist and a libertarian who first saw the new meanings from science and traced out its implications to libertarianism. The other book, Michael Shermer wrote Mind of the Market. I recommend everyone start there. THE MIND OF THE MARKET is simply brilliant. It says more that you think at first glance. Next, there is a third book that touches on this implication, though the author himself, like many in the neurobiology and evolutionary fields, does not like the implications of their work, are at least HONEST to point out that the direction in fully Libertarian in nature. That last book was written by MIT professor Steven Pinker, THE Blank Slate.
I would say that the Intellect Elites MUST BE WON over before the masses can be offered what to eat and drink. History seems repleat with examples of this fact. The only other fact from history that has a DEEP influence over man's economy, social structure, and so forth, is THE COST OF POWER. As in, is it expensive or is it cheap. Is it getting more expensive or getting cheaper. Whole societies can be viewed through this one lens and its explainitive power is very good. The USA and other Nation States are being eaten alive as the COST of Power decreases to the level of the individual. Indeed, today a person could possible down load from the net a rocket specs, build it, arm it, and ready a dozen or so all over the country inside of ministorages. Then, from a remote location and via the internet and GPS, launch his own private war on the IRS for example. How can a nation state defend against that? Answer, by what it is trying to do now. Real ID, full information awareness, total loss of 4th amendment rights, etc.
In short, "the common people" are too weak to understand Libertarianism. There is over 40 years of..." libertarianism to the masses".. campaigns to PROVE that point. AND JUST WHY IS THAT?
Answer: Libertarianism is 100% counter-intuitive. Thus, just like asking the COMMON PEOPLE to add a negative 9 plus a negative 3, equals a blank stare or a guess, the COMMON PEOPLE have blank stares and bad gut reactions to all libertarian positions. Why is this so? Evolutionary Economics and neurobiology leads us to a good explaination as to why this is the case. It seems a millions years of life on the Pleacene lead to "Common Sense Economics" which does not tell that Common Man why Getting Rid of the Min Wage is a GOOD thing to do for the Poor and Unemployed. These million years lead to our natural Moral Sense, for good or for bad, --- see Marc Hausers book MORAL MINDS.
So my dear THe Producer, I am a libertarian, not a Trotskyite
In Peace & Liberty,
Treg
Treg, you've now been called
Treg, you've now been called a "Trotskyite".
I'm now waiting for Parkman, arbiter of Internet goodness and hater of name calling, to swoop in and demand that The_Producer apologize to you.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
SSHHH!!!! Don't even THINK that Kevin!!
INSPIRE OTHERS! www.dvds4delegates.com
Want to know more about dvds4delegates?? http://www.youtube.com/wa...
Historic moment at WA State Convention at minute 4 here!!
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
You say "the rest will take
You say "the rest will take care of itself"
Obviously not, because the Libertarians, even the OLD GUARD, are here trying to tell you that we should vote for Barr.
You are all doing what Ron warned us against. The cult of personality.
This is a shame to see the movement go like this.
Its funny because whenever I meet baldwin supporters face to face they are usually pretty reasonable and by the end of the conversation they admit it's illogical to vote for Baldwin. But on the internet, all I can picture is this... http://www.robertmilnes.n...
tilting at windmills... please stop and think people....
Allow me to translate...
You are saying that Bob Borring is ok with socialism first BEFORE going back to Capitalism. And that we should trust him when he sides with the globalist because he promises he will be a Libertarian at a later time...
Kinda like his vote for the patriot act.
No thanks. No koolaid for me.
Aku Soku Zan
That's like saying
Paul is for a centrally planned economy before going back to capitalism, because Paul is for continued existence of the Federal Reserve in the short term while allowing competing currencies.
Ok, fine, but that's better than eternal central planning or socialism. You have to be an incrementalist in politics or nothing is going to get done.
So far, no Libertarian candidate has done better than
Ed Clark in 1980 (recall the economic and foreign [Iran] situations during that period) and he received just a hair over 1% of the vote. (1.06%)
Source: http://uselectionatlas.or...
_________________________________________
"An economy built on fiat money is a society on its way to ashes."
a little perspective...
I don't think any of us is under the illusion that either Barr or Baldwin can win in November. At best, a strong showing (above 1% would break the record for either of their parties) may help us with the fight against the neo-cons for 2012. I'm becoming increasingly convinced that a reasonably high vote total for EITHER or BOTH of these guys (flaws and all) will be noted by the media and the GOP as part of the "Ron Paul Effect". McCain will lose horribly, and we'll be off to a strong start on a FOUR YEAR LONG Ron Paul 2012 campaign. The economy is playing right into our hands, and Obama will only screw things up worse. We will win this in the end, but there will be a lot of pain in the meantime.
Sam Marsh
Musician
http://www.myspace.com/sc...
I like the idea of a four
I like the idea of a four year long campaign.
I don't like the idea of our candidate being 76 years of age in 2012. The media would have a field day with that. Look for them to blame McCain's defeat this November on his age (instead of warmongering and horrible ideas).
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Maybe we'll get lucky!!
...and Obama-lama-ding-dong's chopper will meet an unfortunate accident? As many people as the Clintons had killed, I'm surprised Obama hasnt met an untimely demise yet... Barr is a shill. Ignore him, and maybe he'll just go away. I will be writing-in Ron Paul come November. I'm almost 50 and this will be my first time voting...I never felt compelled before. Apathy cured, thank you! Although, like others here, I wonder if the votes are even counted....I remember the famous Stalin quote about counting votes....but,, I'm excited to cast mine none-the-less.
------------------
BC
If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention!
Don't be fooled...
Bob Barr is a TOOL of the globalist elites, expressly designed to guarantee an adequate number of votes get siphoned from McCain to ensure an Obama presidency. Obama is the "chosen one" of the CFR. Barr is simply a pawn with two very specific assignments from his Masters: Be a "spoiler" to ensure a success for the Democrats and give those who're involved in this whole pesky "freedom movement thing" the illusion that they have a voice (that's purposely designed to accomplish nothing).
Bob Barr is the very essence of a red-herring.
this is crazy talk...
so you really believe this or do you type these things to get reactions out of level headed intelligent people?
I disagree; I think what
I disagree; I think what Barr is, beyond question, is a mainstream Republican pretending to be a Libertarian. Everything else is speculation.
It's debatable whether it's a conspiracy from global elites, an attempt by the neo-con conservatoids to transfer their flag to the Libertarian Party--or just another sad decision from a political party with weak, clueless leadership. (My money is on the latter.)
They could have had Aaron Russo in 2004 and they gave the nomination to an unknown candidate whose last name is hard to remember.
It's a party full of political incompetents, who have now established that they lack principles as well.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Evidence, please
Is this speculation on your part?
If you have evidence to support this statement, I'd like to see it.
Here's my problem:
"Ron Paul is a TOOL of the globalist elites, expressly designed to guarantee an adequate number of votes get siphoned from McCain to ensure an Obama presidency. Obama is the "chosen one" of the CFR. Paul is simply a pawn with two very specific assignments from his Masters: Be a "spoiler" to ensure a success for the Democrats and give those who're involved in this whole pesky "freedom movement thing" the illusion that they have a voice (that's purposely designed to accomplish nothing).
Ron Paul is the very essence of a red-herring."
Makes as much sense or more, especially prior to the GOP convention and the nomination. It may be true that the "globalist elites" are using our candidates and ourselves, but that doesn't mean the "tool" is complicit.
IMissLiberty
Doesn't matter
Barr is no Ron Paul. Go ahead, vote for him and while we're at it-vote for Chuck Baldwin, Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney, and WRITE IN RON PAUL-as long as no one from the Ron Paul movement votes for any Democrat or Republican then we're all good.
Barr won't win, just like any other third party candidate won't win. The object, as I see it, is to cripple the people's belief there only is and ever will be just two parties and getting enough delegates for Ron Paul as possible.
I would like to remind you...
Before Lincoln the Republican party was a minor third party - The Democrats and the Whigs ran the show - Nothing lasts forever.
The Combination of
Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, and Write in Ron Paul will elect Obama. Too many conservatives are pissed off about having a Liberal Republican nominee. The only hope to stop it would be a) Make Ron Paul the nominee in Sept. b) an Obama spoiler. It doesn't appear that b) is gonna happen
Welcome to my world
No one I have ever voted for has become president.
Decade after decade I live under a president trying to steal my rights.
One learns to comfort oneself this way: If Obama inherits this mess, he and the Democrats will get the blame. If McCain wins, he'll make things worse, too.
Sooner or later it will get so bad that the tide will turn. I think we're there, which is why I'm pushing so hard for Ron Paul and/or the Libertarian candidate. It isn't really the president we need to change. It's Congress. The handwriting on the wall needs to be big and clear: voters want more freedom.
To further mix metaphors, it's a big ship to turn, and you have the tide, the wind and all us little paddlers doing our best to turn it. I'm more optimistic, now.
IMissLiberty
The economy will start
The economy will start crashing before the inaugeration in January. No amount of news media sugar-gloss will help. Oil will hit $200/barrel before Christmas. Restaurant chains and major retail stores will start falling like dominoes. There will be panic on Wall Street.
I'm not sure Dr. Paul hasn't made the perfect decision returning to Congress. The voters vote their pocketbooks. Whichever party wins in November loses.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
There's a quote
There is a quote about conservative organizations which slide to the left which is something like "any organization not explicitly conservative over time becomes liberal" and it is true of all conservatives everywhere - they can't stay true - the quote should really be "any conservative who isn't explicitly *reactionary* over time becomes liberal".
And no I am not saying Dr. Paul is reactionary, just very 'radical' which politicians MUST be. Bob Barr is already turning into a statist by the sounds of it - and he is supposed to be running as a Libertarian. People are gonna start thinking Libertarians are about as principled as Republicans. I wish he would stop it. He is going to wreck the libertarian label (as Reason magazine and Cato often do). Stop it Bob Barr please!!!
The Libertarian label....
Was struggling to get 1% of the vote since its last best showing in 80' - Bob Barr is introducing liberty on an incremental scale that a majority of Americans will find acceptable - and the party will gain legitamacy in the eyes of many for the first time. Barr tried to convince Ron Paul to run on the LP ticket before he stared running himself - that should tell you something about the mans integrity right there. If Barr isnt in the debates, who will argue against FISA and so many other issues we care about in the presidential dabates?
I say we give liberty a voice.
Barr said
"and give the Fed more “oversight” over the housing industry." DON'T give the Feds any more or any type of control or authority. Get rid of them. So Barr seems to be playing some kind of game of "get rid of the Feds" but until we do, "let them do whatever they want."
Yeah, you're right,
if we can't have Ron Paul then let's settle for McCain or Obama...they're much better choices that Bob Barr...
Tex
Why settle? Here I go for the millonith time. UGGGGG> Bob Barr is NOT CONSTITUTIONALY FIT TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT. CCCKKKKHHH. YUK. Ok, Bob Barr voted YES to the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act killed this country as we know it. It destroyed many of our rights, mine and YOURS. Did Bob do this on purpose? It doesn't matter if it was intentional or not, the damage is done. If he did vote for it unintentionaly out of patriotism, in the heat of the moment, or whatever you want to call it, HE'S TOO STUPID TO BE PRESIDENT. If he voted for it intentionaly, well then... HE HAS NO UNDERSTANDING OR CARE OF THE VALUES OF OUR PRECIOUS CONSTITUTION. He is a TRAITOR AND A PHONY, NO MATTER WHAT. Don't do it man. LONG LIVE THE REVOLUTION.
I agree FULLY
so let's elect McBama!!! He's WAY better than Barr!!!
In one sense Obama IS
In one sense Obama IS better--he isn't lying to patriots and libertarians trying to pass himself off as one of their own.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
We dont
elect anyone, anymore. You cant elect someone if the controled media works against the peoples choice. Why vote for an lesser evil again? Why are we forced to keep voting these lesser evils or plain out evil? WHY? Ask yourselves.
You know,
you were only suppose to take ONE red pill, not 4 or 5...
Im not saying Ob-omba or McAmnesty are better than Barr
I believe theyre all the evils of 3 lessers
if you wont write him in or vote for the evil of 3 lessers then
Ever heard of this dude. He goes by the name of Charles(Chuck) Baldwin.
http://www.baldwin08.com
I heard he endorsed Ron Paul in November 2007 and was campaigning with the grassroots hard in the Southern States. heard he got nominated by the Constitution Party. Ima check him out tommorow. See if hes any good or if I have to settle for something else. good night
__________
Freedom. Watch this video
http://youtube.com/watch?...
Pls donate here Ron Paul can still win
http://www.dvds4delegates...
Ugh...Please report the facts...
Here is the full story...this post is only half truth of what Barr said. Can we please stop the half-truths and spinning of Barr's words, please? It's only the fair thing to do...
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
Barr and Baldwin are not the enemy as people time and time again forget...
Mixed messages from Barr
I watched the video. He said that he didn't want a government bail out- and goes on to explain that using tax payers money is a bail out, then goes on to say we need to bail these companies out..... and his reasoning is because the government helped create it so the tax payers should pay it. So he's against bailing out unless someone needs a bail out??
Barr's statement is at war with itself. sad but true
__________
Freedom. Watch this video
http://youtube.com/watch?...
Pls donate here Ron Paul can still win
http://www.dvds4delegates...
We call that
A conflicted man. Was it conflicted or confused?
might be a both/and
he migh be both conflicted and confused.
Libera me, let the truth break, what my fears make--Leslie Phillips
Priceless comment from Freedoms Pheonix
So the Republican is following the libertarian line, and the Libertarian is following the republican line. Priceless.
__________
Freedom. Watch this video
http://youtube.com/watch?...
Pls donate here Ron Paul can still win
http://www.dvds4delegates...
Come on
if you want to contrast differences, one can stress differences between Paul and Baldwin with regard to the war on drugs: Baldwin is for an even more strict immigration control as well as war on drugs, e.g search for illegal drugs. How does he want to leave it up to the states to decide if him as president would also instruct border guards to confiscate medicinal marjuana at the border? No doubt there is no difference between Bush 1 &2 and Baldwin on this issue.
Also: Barr is not for the open border policy, he is for securing the border.
Baldwin says he is for the scrapping of the whole Patriot Act, not only the offense parts (Paul and Barr), so he also wants to scrap the part dealing with border security, yet Baldwin would need the border security part of the Patriot Act if he wants to prevent terrorists and drugs from entering the US! Has Baldwin read the through whole Patriot Act?
What If Barr
Is just telling us that he is going to do all of these things, like Obama is touting "CHANGE". Same difference.
cant reply? Do you want more?
So tell me how will Barr leave it to the States when he said to Hannity he dosent mean allowing other drugs. tell me
__________
Freedom. Watch this video
http://youtube.com/watch?...
Pls donate here Ron Paul can still win
http://www.dvds4delegates...
Barr has blood of 1 million innocent Iraqis & 3000 US soldiers
On his hands
Barr voted for the Patriot Act and has no excuse whatsoever
Barr voted for Bush's No child Left Behind
Barr is for foreign interventionism. Im yet to hear him talk about bringing the troops back from 130 countries
Barr changed
Barack Hussein and Hitlery Rodham also changed. They all regret their past.
But sadly none will go back to the house or senate to prove it.
you allege Baldwin is Bush. so be it. At least he endorsed, supported and campaigned for Ron Paul when it meant something. Actually Barr is yet to officially endorse Ron Paul.
Baldwin also wasnt legislating morality while paying for his wife's abortion. Hes pro life but he means it and hes been married for the same woman all his life and has no pictures of himself licking whipped cream of other women's breasts
I could go on and on
Barr needs to go back to Congress. Btw Barr's record on the drugwar dosent help him either. Barr also said on Fox to Hannity when talking about Drugs that he dosent mean heroin or other hardcore drugs.
So whats the difference
At least Baldwin is honest
What else. Do you want me to write a book on Barr?
__________
Freedom. Watch this video
http://youtube.com/watch?...
Pls donate here Ron Paul can still win
http://www.dvds4delegates...
Nobody
has said Barr is a perfect politician either.
So Walter Jones etc. - Dr. Paul's friend - also has has blood on his hands, in your argumentation? Barr was for the war only for 4 months based on the WMD issue, he turned against the war as soon it became clear there were no WMD, and at that time much less lives were lost, only a few people at max. If you want to go this totalitarian blame route, you have to blame all the US military soldiers, also those that voted and contributed to Dr. Paul. Funny thing, you know Victor Bugliosi's book does not include the military soldiers nor the congressmen/women and senators that voted for the war, but rather those that were responsible for the decision (and misinformation), e.g. Bush, Cheney, Rice etc.
You probably have not followed Barr's PR's, he is calling for the return of all military forces from 130 countries indeed. His foreign policy adviser is Doug Bandow, who is also one of Dr. Paul's foreign policy advisers. He posts at antiwar.com, amcon etc. and is a non-interventionalist.
Who is Baldwin's foreign policy adviser?
"What are your thoughts on libertarian-minded Rep. Ron Paul? Would you ever consider wooing him over into the Libertarian Party and would he be an asset? by poligirl
Answer: I would love to have Dr. Paul back in the LP. He was our 1988 presidential nominee. In December of last year as a member of the Libertarian National Committee, I proposed a resolution that passed unanimously that urged Dr. Paul to seek the nomination of the Libertarian Party. He respectfully passed on the request. It was several month after that when I decided to throw my hat into the ring at the urging of many libertarians and Americans. by Bob Barr".
http://www.washingtontime...
In January this year Barr also publicly protested on CNN against the exclusion of Ron Paul from the NH debate. Please acknowledge this FACT.
I understand Barr's ex-wife (not girlfriend as some falsely reported) was very sick at the time she had the pregnancy (do not know which stage) cancer or something like that) and was afraid for her life if she would continue with the pregnancy. Tell me, faced with such a difficult situation, would you rather have chosen to ensure the safety of your wife by paying for the abortion, or would you rather have risked the possibility of losing the life of your wife as well as the fetus???
Barr appeared on Baldwin's radio program in 2005 on the Patriot Act and they had a very fruitful and kind discussion and agreement.. You can check it out on Baldwin's website.
Barr is also a friend of Howard Phillips, just like Baldwin. Phillips has in fact stated this openly during the CP congress earlier this year.
So frankly, I find the Barr vs Baldwin issue to be totally nonproductive and not contributing to the struggle for liberty whatsoever. Libertymaven.com, pro-Paul website has given them both about a 88% rating compared to Dr. Paul (100%). I think one should rather let Barr and Baldwin work together after the election, possibly with forming a new party. Barr is much closer to Baldwin than some in the LP, on issues like "states rights" etc etc. and has to deal with a lot of criticism from certain radicals. Check out www.afr.com
You started it not me. I only stated my opinion on this certain
topic. Then you came to me as if you got dirt on Baldwin. You even went as far as calling Baldwin Bush. Something I dont dare say about Barr. Eventhough I am against him and his NeoCon Israel 1st America 2nd VP
sorry dude. Theres so much Ill write tommorow. Btw did Barr go against the war when he was still a Congressman? Or after he got the boot?
Oh yeah and btw dont compare Bob Barr to the good Ole Walter Jones. If you prove to me that Barr changed his positions when he was still in Congress then I will have nothing against Barr. Infact I will write an apology to Bob Barr for everything Ive said about him.
__________
Freedom. Watch this video
http://youtube.com/watch?...
Pls donate here Ron Paul can still win
http://www.dvds4delegates...
Where did I
try to "expose" dirt on Baldwin? Answer, nowhere as I really do like him. I am calling for cooperation, and you for contrast with Barr, even though Dr. Paul rooted for both of them. Did you listen to the interview of Baldwin with Barr in 2005???
Well, I was just stating the fact that Walter Jones not only voted for the war, but he was the one that was responsible for the renaming of "french freis" to "freedom fries". My argument is that you cannot make either Barr or Jones responsible for the dead in Iraq, it is the "neocons" that are to blame, not them.
Barr was voted out in 2003 and was described as the second most libertarian in congress and he worked with Dr. Paul on several issues, re. the UN, the anti-IRS, pro-gun, and yes he also lobbied against the Patriot Act, before and after he voted for it, so he had his skepticism. Also: while he had positions with Regan and Bush 1, have you ever asked yourself why did he not had any position with the Bush 2 administration? Hint: he was never part of the neocon. establishment that dominated with Bush 2.
Correction: the site I would like you and others to check out is:
www.afr.org
http://www.nolanchart.com...
http://www.nolanchart.com...
http://www.nolanchart.com...
Nelson Hultberg is publishing a book on
"The Case for Libertarian Politics and Conservative Values",
which is exactly the basis one can establish a third party, both the CP and LP has some deficits. He also delivered a speech ont he subject at the freedomfest last week, on the 12th, when Barr also attended the event in Nevada and could not attend the rally in DC.
Both Barr and Baldwin will be at Freedom 21 on the 24th.
Inappropriate
From the Forum Posting Guidelines:
I don't think attacking Bob Barr (and childishly calling him "Bob Borring") is appropriate. Bob Barr is not running against Ron Paul.
Treg, I usually find myself on the same side as you, so I'm sorry if this comes off as harsh. I just have to call 'em as I see 'em, especially considering the fact that some people are complaining that I'm not bringing up "the rules" consistently.
I agree, the name calling is imprudent.
Comparison and contrast I'm not opposed to , but we (and I admit, I may have been guilty of not always doing this) need to be courteous- after all it's not reflecting well on Ron Paul if we are rude.
Libera me, let the truth break, what my fears make--Leslie Phillips