My Last thread about "Freedom Fighter" Bob Barr

http://www.time.com/time/...

Great read...I posted a topic on this just now!

Thats right people of the DP, vote for Bob Barr! He'll fight freedom every chance he gets! Him and his good buddy Wayne Root (better known as WAR to his good buds) will see to it that no freedom goes unopposed! He's just the guy to rubber stamp any unconstitutional act thrown before him so he can boldly apologize and vote for a compromise after the fact.

/end sarcasm

Everytime I mention my concern about Barr's votes for the Iraq war, the Patriot Act and No Child left behind I get brushed by his employees and given 2 contradictory answers.
1 Some say he voted for them to weaken them and to make them better.
2 Others say he now regrets voting for them

I’ve actually only heard 1 said about Barr’s Patriot Act vote, so I’ll stick to that.

“So which one is it? Is he proud of voting for these things and "promoting liberty" or does he regret it?”

He’s publicly stated, several times, that he regrets the vote. That doesn’t make 1 false, BTW; your two alternatives aren’t contradictories.

“is there any proof he became anti war and anti Patriot Act while he was still in Congress. Or is it after he lost his seat in Congress. Pls any proof Bob Barr was a freedom fighter while in Congress?”

Barr began denouncing the Patriot Act from the minute it was introduced. Read my article, ‘Ron Paul's former aide reveals: "We needed" Barr to vote for the PATRIOT Act’:
http://www.nolanchart.com...

As for his pro-freedom record in Congress, look at my articles “Bob Barr’s Real Record (II)”:
http://www.nolanchart.com...
and “Bob Barr’s Gun Record”:
http://www.nolanchart.com...

-------------------
George Dance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Dance_(Ontario_politician)

"Well, if crime fighters fight crime and fire fighters fight fire, what do freedom fighters fight?"

Thats why I'm a tyrannt fighter and a fear fighter.

"Well, if crime fighters fight crime and fire fighters fight fire, what do freedom fighters fight?"
-George Carlin

I think we should all be very wary of the LPs johnny-come-lately nominee. Maybe he's sincere, or maybe he is just an opportunist. I don't think any of us know where he truly stands.

for one, I am not a Barr employee in any way.
Why can't one compare Walter Jones's votes on the war with Bob Barr's? You just say we should not compare, but does not provide a reason why one can't.
As far as I know he lost the primary shortly after the votes on the war and Patriot Acts, so it is not that he had much time to vote against them and also: once there war a vote for the war, there was not another vote on the war a few months after that to demonstrate his change in mind. The vote on the continued funding of the war only came a year after that and Patriot Act 2 came in 2005.
In 2004 Barr rooted AND voted for Badnarik of the LP, without being a LP member at that stage. Should this not tell you something and provide some proof for an anti-war vote?
The two options are not really so contradictory, the Patriot Act was a bad vote and situation, so Barr did the best in the bad situation and negotiated the restrictions. So he has done "the best" in this situation, but realised later the law was not the ceiling, but rather the floor and the administration promised it would only be used for potential terrorists, so he took them at their word. He realized later, he should not have trusted the Bush administration and that it was a bad vote.
If Barr would have voted against the Patriot Act, the Act would still have gone through. Have you asked yourself why is Barr known as "Mr. Privacy", just like Dr. Paul, Dr. No. He was also active with the Waco investigation and has done good work. He was always strong on the 2nd Amendment, and against the IRS and against illegal immigration. Why don't you mention these issues?
These are all pro-liberty votes. Also, he has actively lobbied against the Patriot Act for the past 4,5 years, e.g. not only spoken out against it but also acted. Barr also worked with the ACLU on civil liberty issues and is being criticized by a number of conservatives about this, you too?

He has already been asked on his voting record countless times and I think his answer is known to the media, apparently not to you. BTW: Obama flip-flopped on FISA< and voted for the funding of the war countless times, so there is a lot Barr can argue against Obama. Barr also worked.

Yes, his voting record on certain issues are not perfect, but think about the flip-side of it. He would be much more likely to persuade a conservative who was for the Patriot Act, the war etc. than a radical Libertarian like Steve Kubby or George Phillies for instance. Barr is a conservative as most know, which means he has trust with conservatives (unlike Kubby etc.) and his change of opinion will also lead them to reconsider the validity of laws like the Patriot Act.

You forget to mention that congress were only given a few hours to vote on the final draft of the Patriot Act in 2003, a document of 315 pages, they could not even read through it. Dr. Paul's instincts told him this was not believable, the same with the war. Bush and Powell suggested that there could be an immediate danger, in that case, of course the president can act without approval by congress.

What kind of logic is this. Are you all so flawed! Do you not see what you type? I support Ron Paul. In your eyes is this really support for McCain!? Answer me you pathetic excuses for freedom loving individuals! How dare you! Who are you and how much do you get paid to accuse those among us that will support Ron Paul as McCain supporters. Really is that how you are going to divide us. So be it. Anyone who falls for your divisional tactics deserves every bit of there freedoms to be taken away by this barr individual. I stand with and for Ron Paul! The original defender of the Constitution present!

To your question, yes Barr regrets voting for the Patriot Act because even though he weakened it, and put in sunset provisions in the compromise committee with the Senate, in the end he still signed the bill and says that he never thought they would use it like they are now. Just a note, Barr voted against the Patriot Act on the first vote in the house with Ron Paul.

Here are some links to some articles about Barr at the time he was still in office.

He is described as a Maverick and at odds with the Bush administation

from 2002

http://www.onlineathens.c...

From 2002

http://libertyunbound.com...

From 2003

http://www.globalsecurity...

From 1998 http://www.fff.org/freedo...

The committee Republicans, despite their criticism of federal abuses, concluded that one of the "lessons" of Waco was the need to increase the size of the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team. Republican Rep. Steven Schiff (N.M.), writing a dissent based in part on information provided by Rep. Bob Barr (R.-Ga.) (both Schiff and Barr are former federal prosecutors), declared that

"no rational person can conclude that the use of CS gas under any circumstances against children, would do anything other than cause extreme physical problems and possibly death.... I believe the deaths of dozens of men, women and children can be directly and indirectly attributable to the use of this gas in the way it was injected by the FBI."

Barr has called for Congress to reopen its investigation into what happened at Waco but as yet has received no support from senior House Republicans.

Waco is vitally important for understanding current political thinking because of the tacit acceptance and initial praise of the government's final assault on the part of most of the media and most of the American people — the willingness to unquestioningly accept the government version of events — regardless of how many times the government changed its story. The abject docility shown by both the national media and the public to a government assault would have been denounced to high heaven if a similar attack had been carried out during the Brezhnev era by the Soviet military against a group of Christian dissidents in Siberia.

Waco goes to the heart of the question about how much force government is permitted to use against its own people. Thus far, the answers provided both by the government and the majority are not encouraging.

Barr was President of the SE Legal Foundation in 1990 and 1991

http://southeasternlegal....

http://www.reason.com/new...

Bob Barr, former Republican member of Congress ("Unusual coalition of left and right says civil liberties under attack," Atlanta Journal Constitution, 5/11/2003)

"We ought to be concentrating on using existing authorities to build up our intelligence and law enforcement capabilities rather than compiling data bases on American citizens."

Barr has wised with age and realized the errors of his way. Yes, he had his voting guffaws in the past, but what is the man saying now? The only thing he is preaching on TV are our basic principles of liberty and limited government. If someone is listening to Barr speak for the first time what are they hearing? They are hearing nothing about is support for the Patriot Act or the Iraq War, in fact, they are hearing he wants to rid the country of the Patriot Act and the Iraq War. Is that so bad? If he is in the debates are you going to be upset with him saying he wants to get out of Iraq immediately, wants to drastically decrease the size of government, and wants to return fiscal sanity to our country? He is currently espousing our primary viewpoints, and I am no way going to fault the man for that. He is a friend in the movement of restoring liberty and fiscal sanity to this country, and we should all appreciate his service.

If our goal is to change people's minds, wouldn't it be a good idea to be able to show them examples of other prominent people who have changed their minds?

For example, when I talk to people who are pro-war and such, I can reflect with them that I used to feel the same way. Rather than telling them that I have ALWAYS been against interventionism, I can relate on a level that they can trust because I once felt how they did. Perhaps that gets me more credibility with them.

Since we know that neither of these guys is actually going to WIN, then does it really matter if you TRUST them to carry out what they say? Or is it more important that they can be a prominent figure that can help to convince others that it's OK to reconsider...

Well first to answer your second part. No. I don't think he came to until after he lost his seat and was in all likelihood what woke him up from his ideas about the drug war and marijuana reform.

And to your first part.

If he did what he thought necessary to put in sunset provisions only to have it haunt him forever and ever amen would you not regret it?

CommissiononPresidentialDebates
NationalBallotAccess
NOTA
BlackBoxVoting