Posted on 05/25/2008 6:17:46 PM PDT by guyshomenet
I’m sipping whiskey for the fourth straight night in Denver, while I and the Libertarians sit in stunned amazement.
The Libertarian party (LP) has gone mainstream. They have developed creeping respectability. They may soon risk becoming boring.
Not that their convention was boring. Far from it. Being the completely anal retentive ideological purists they are, the seeming invasion from ex-Republicans (Bob Barr) and ex-Democrats (Mike Gravel) made for tense conversations, endless hand wringing, and a lot of late night power drinking as many LP members came to terms with the Gawd awful decision they faced.
....
52% of Republicans and Democrats think the LP should be in the presidential debate.
...
I spoke with many new LP members over the weekend and all came from either the Republican or Democrat camps. They all felt abandoned by their parties.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at guysmith.org ...
Now, now, Keyeslostin2008! Let’s not bring the good Rev. Chuck into the equation! We’re talking about Bob Barr and the Libertarians...
Where are true apolitical individuals and true anarchists on this chart?
Looks to me like “the Diamond of Doom”! You could make that the basis for another Star Wars sequel!
Too funny!!! But...Eva Braun? I thought she went out (died) with Hitler!
It's true! Eva was resurrected at the Libertarian convention. I saw her on C-Span. She appeared to be, you know, the *caring* Libertarian.
Eva Braun?
a very angry female who lost to Barr named Mary Ruwart who according to the Lib website got 94 “tokens” - sadly, these are funny weird people...she was fuming and looked about to chop him into pieces.
The problem is McCain is not pushing a constitutional amendment either. If that’s going to be a litmus test, you’ve got no candidate.
That’s the problem: we have no candidate and haven’t had for too long!
Sorry—I missed that convention. Never heard of her...
Regarding immigration, Barr is weak, but better than McCain. While strong on the enforcement side, he is in favor of increasing legal immigration in general. I do not see why this is advertised by some detractors as an "open borders" policy.
As someone mentioned, his real break with conservative Republicans is on a handful of WOT-related issues. While he supported the Patriot Act, he was instrumental in incorporating sunset clauses which we will all appreciate when a rat is president. And, likely in part due to his 8 year stint with the CIA, Barr is a vocal opponent of the Patriot Act being applied in cases not remotely involving terrorism (which I thought would be seen as common sense, but some folks object, and endorse "if ya ain't dun nuttin' wrong" fishing expeditions). He is currently fighting against the renewal of two minor parts of the Patriot Act (while supporting the rest).
He does work with the ACLU on privacy issues and second Amendment issues (the latter is an uphill battle with that group, as they have a rotted-brain fixation with the "militia" part of the 2A), but so far has not been involved in any actual tasks antithetical to conservative values (anymore than the NRA has by working with the ACLU to unban pro-2A websites from public libraries). Being on the Board of Directors of the NRA, with solid A+ ratings from GOA, should give you an idea where Barr stands on the 2A.
I searched, but found no significant comments from Barr on Guantanamo Bay or "torture", for which McCain's view is no different than Obama's (close gitmo, no waterboarding, bring in the free government defense lawyers). So while Barr is concerned with the government spying on Americans (how unAmerican!), McCain and Obama are concerned with the government interrogating al Qaeda.
On Iraq, Barr does not have the Ron Paul stance. Earlier this year, he praised the success of the surge:
...the performance of our armed forces in Iraq improved dramatically this past year, especially in the last half of the year. Whether this was the result of increasing the number of troops or the consequence of a shift in tactical decision-making by their commanders — or both — the drop in combat casualties and the significance decrease in Iraqi civilian deaths, has been pronounced. To be sure, the underlying problems in Iraq remain unresolved, and the enhanced stability manifesting itself in the past several months may prove temporary; but a significant decrease in military and civilian casualties is never a bad thing.
and last year called for rejecting proponents of communism (which I thought already was banned) and those without English-speaking ability from the US military, and blasted the "pervasive sense of political correctness" encroaching therein. He seems to be much less dogmatic on Iraq, and will likely heed the advice of the brass. His marching issue is the economy; getting rid of the 16th Amendment, entitlement reform, deregulation, federalism...all that stuff Ron Paul should have focused on instead of going apesh*t on the war in Iraq.
I mean, all of this is of course a flight of fancy. The LP has zero chance of winning - the sole reasons to vote for them are (1) as a protest against McCain, and (2) to better position them for future elections, FORCING the GOP to react by drifting back to the right, or hemorrhage just enough votes to keep losing. I'm undecided until McCain chooses a running mate. If it is someone I would want to win in 2012, I'll get the well-used giant clothespin out and support the VP (not McCain directly), and thus the GOP. Otherwise...it looks like the LP.
Jeez!! What an essay on the inimitable Bob Barr! Who would have thunk?
Well, I’m not convinced on his tougher stand on the Invasion. If you can produce youtubes of his talking tough on the 40 million here and what he’d do about it, I’d give Barr some consideration. He was, after all, my favorite on the Impeachment Committee! I’m not so sure I agree with you that his warm and fuzzy relationship with the ACLU is only over the Second Ammendment.
Thanks for the tip on the NRA working with the ACLU—that’s a first, or so I thought...
Doesn't that speak for itself? They reject politics, hence they wouldn't be on a political chart.
Not I! You might have a go at it though.
On the other hand, M2, why would I leave The CP and Chuck Baldwin (who is right on every issue to me) for a Libertarian or quai-Libertarian whose party believes in legalizing illicit drugs and “laissez faire” of criminal behavior? I mean, the LP wants government COMPLETELY OUT of our lives, and that is not possible nor is it gonna happen anytime in our lives.
That many?
Dr. Mary J. Ruwart has been very prominent in Libertarian circles for fifteen years. Among other books, she wrote"Short Answers to the Tough Questions" in order to provide libertarians with explanations to give non-libertarians of how libertarian solutions will resolve complex conundrums of modern life. She writes a column in the Advocates for Self-Government's magazine, “The Liberator”,called "Ask Dr. Ruwart."
Thanks, higgy! I’ll check her writings out. I’m as open-minded as the next Indy con!
Regarding another post: "leaving it to the states" isn't necessarily pro-life, but it may be the best chance at overturning the judicial atrocity that is Roe v. Wade.
Sadly yes, when the people were applauding the potential nominees it sounded like a reaction from a half-empty karaoke bar.
One would hope for abortion to be redefined as murder, but don't we have to start somewhere? I'm still thinking McCain is the "most" pro-life of the current choices, but of course he is not the ideal candidate by any stretch of the imagination.
Love your name by the way! Both my dad (RIP) and my 6 month old son share your name. "Gift of God!"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.