These quotes from Bob Barr suggest he wants U.S. troops out of the Middle East – and into Latin America. This seems to me yet further evidence for my claim that if Barr wins the nomination, the LP’s soul is irretrievably lost.
In related news, anybody notice a glaring omission in this story about the LP nomination?
And my understanding is that Barr has Paul’s blessing. The omission of Ruwart: Yes, I noticed that, too.
Surprised by either?
I hear Noam Chomsky says that the US will no longer be able to boss around the latino countries now that Chavez and Morales are around. 🙂
It seems like the Souls aof the Republican and Democrat PArties are trying to merge to the Libertarian Party.
Seeing as the souls of these 2 parties are much more statist then the LP’s, while being more libertarian then what we have now, this will morph the LP into the “Party of limited statism” from the party of principle.
We’ll see what happens.
Tracy
I just saw Bob Barr a few minutes ago on Hannity & appendage. Barr said he favoured abolishing drug laws at the federal level, but that he was against legalising drugs at the state level.
Now don’t get me wrong, that would be way better than what we’ve got now. But it’s not a position that an LP presidential candidate should be taking.
Barr has always been and will always be a Drug Warrior. The LP can not and never will run a legitimate race. L. Neil Smith’s “put up or shut up” petition challenge is still operating. Only Ron Paul has hit the outer edge. Debate-clubbers continue to whine.
“Only Ron Paul has hit the outer edge.”
Barr allegedly has Paul’s “full support”:
http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=12640
“Hit the outer edge” as in gaining practical support. Read: $30,000,000 in put up or shut up money. Barr aint Paul. Maybe we need Jesse The Body to threaten armed revolt.
The Libertarian Party seems to have achieved a kind of success, in electoral terms: It’s now well enough established as a third party with a continuing presence on the electoral scene so that two politicians from the established parties, Barr and Gravel, are thinking of using it as a vehicle for their personal campaigns, instead of just running as themselves or inventing a new party as a personal vehicle the way Perot did. Inevitably, in the process, the core ideology gets diluted, to the point where both a pro-life Republican and a New Deal Democrat think “Libertarian” is just a party label that they can attach to themselves. But given the way American electoral politics works, that sort of ideological dilution is inevitable in any party’s actually having a meaningful share of the electorate supporting it; if you gaze into the abyss too long, the abyss gazes into you, as Nietzsche said. What’s surprising is only that so small a percentage of voter support has been sufficient to start the process.
Ruwart has to start getting content online, but I think she is the favorite to get the nomination, especially with Barr having put six different feet in his mouth already (Gravel has the single payer health care wing of the LP sewn up, but hasn’t got a chance). She is VERY popular among the longer term members, and kicks butt in debates because of her comfort with libertarian persuasion and sound bites. The only thing more startling than a former Congressman and former Senator vying for the LP nomination will be when neither gets it.
By the way, Ron Paul might be supportive of Barr running, but like Barr’s supposed conversion to a consistent libertarian position on drugs, rumors of an endorsement may be premature.
The only thing more startling than a former Congressman and former Senator vying for the LP nomination will be when neither gets it.
That would be a relief, to be sure. Three decades ago, now, we saw what’s called the “religious Right” move into the Republican Party in large numbers, essentially capturing it from the older Chamber of Commerce Republicans; in the aftermath, the Republican Party has become solidly anti-abortion (for me, personally, this makes voting for any Republican nearly impossible), but also has moved to big government, denial of Constitutional rights by presidential fit, unbalanced budgets, fiscal irresponsibility generally, and in Huckabee’s case, full-blown socialism in the name of populism. So parties can be captured by new groups of voters, as well as capturing them. I would hate to see the Libertarians captured in that way.
I read the platforms of the dozen Libertarian candidates who got onto the California ballot (not including Paul, Barr, Gravel, or Ruwart) and I only thought three of them were remotely credible as libertarians; the rest included some conservative Republicans trying to claim the libertarian label, and some people trying for general third party support without specifically libertarian positions—there was one guy who wanted a Libertarian/Green fusion, which is an interesting idea but probably impossible to implement given the clash in actual positions of the two groups. I thought most of them were, to borrow a phrase from the Republicans I know, LINOs (Libertarian In Name Only). So I think the corruption of the LP is already fairly far advanced.
Yesterday was the most recent straw poll to gauge the sentiment of party activists. It took place at the LP convention in North Carolina.
Ruwart 17
Phillies 3
Root 2
Kubby 1
Gravel 1
Barr 1
The LP is not quite as far along in corruption as some might fear.
I am in total agreement that the nomination of Barr would indicate the LP was no longer going to be an effective feeder organization for the movement. I do not believe that point has been reached.
William H. Stoddard:
Well, you know, all that’s not really anything new for Republicans.
Indeed. As much as I despise Bob Barr, I actually have to say that he’s not the biggest tool in the LP race. Unfortunately, I can only say that because his competition happens to be Wayne Allyn Root.