Bob Barr Joins the LP

Big news for the LP. The National LP has officially announced that former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr has joined the Libertarian Party. Barr has also accepted the position of Region 4 representative to the Libertarian National Committee. LNC Chair Bill Redpath expressed the following:

Bob Barr’s willingness to serve as a leader of the Libertarian Party represents a significant and positive development for our organization. The Libertarian Party played a pivotal role in key races in 2006 and has emerged as a strong and principled political force… The antiquated two-party system was dealt a blow today as we have welcomed a patriotic statesman into our ranks with the intent of using his vast experience and widespread respect to help recruit and elect Libertarian candidates of his caliber.

188 Responses to “Bob Barr Joins the LP”

  1. Mike N. Says:

    I thought he was a member before today?

  2. Joe Magyer Says:

    Though he has contributed to the party in the past and spoken at several LP events, he just joined very recently. Today was just the official roll out, so to speak. If you look carefully, you’ll notice that he is listed as having joined as a life member in the latest issue of LP News. His acceptance of the LNC position also occurred within the last 24 hours, I believe.

  3. Mike N. Says:

    At any rate, congratulations to both Bob Barr and the LP!

  4. Stephen VanDyke Says:

    He’s expected to make a big announcement soon about his stance on the Drug War as well (a major reversal from his days as a congressman).

    Personally, I’m glad to have him aboard and look forward to the wave of disaffected fiscal conservative/libertarian Republicans who will take his lead and finally jump ship from the GOP. The cracks in the dam of the two-party system are forming folks, and we’re going to finally grow up as a party.

  5. NewFederalist Says:

    I thought he had views other than the drug issue that made him more of a fit with the Constitutionalists rather than the Libertarians.

  6. Richard Winger Says:

    People continue misusing the term “two-party system”. I have searched out every dictionary and every social science reference work that defines the term, and they are all unanimous that minor parties are PART of any “two-party system”. In fact, minor parties help two-party systems work better. We are just playing into the hands of people who want to outlaw minor party activity, when we go along with their misuse of that term. “Two-party system” was coined in 1911 to describe the British party system. It is a system in which two parties are much bigger than the others. If only two parties can have a realistic hope of controlling the government, than that country has a 2-party system. Canada, Great Britain, along with the U.S. have 2-party systems.

  7. Doug Craig Says:

    New federalist
    His stance against gay marriage. I believe he introduced the protection of marriage act.

  8. Joe Says:

    I saw Bob Barr speak at the Constitution Party national convention in Valley Forge in 2004. I do not know it for a fact, but I assumed that he did so more as a paid speaker intended to draw people to the convention rather than out of heart-felt support of the Constitution Party itself. I don’t remember his speech exactly but I seem to recall it was on one of the subjects where the Constitution Party and the Libertarian Party probably share quite a bit of common ground – opposition to the Patriot Act and support of civil liberties.

  9. Eric Dondero Says:

    You know what, this will put the Constitution Party in kind of a bind now. Barr seems a bit more CP-oriented.

    Then again, competition in celebrities for both parties is a positive.

    Anyway, I posted the story up at www.mainstreamlibertarian.com

  10. Eric Sundwall Says:

    Here’s his speech at the LP convention in Portland last summer.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Xe6PCawgxc&eurl=

  11. Nigel Watt Says:

    Hmm…dark horse for the presidential campaign maybe?

  12. Mike N. Says:

    Thank god the LP finally had the sanity to bring in someone that knows something about politics.

  13. George Whitfield Says:

    Welcome to Bob Barr. I really appreciate his willingness to serve in a Party position.

  14. Jackcjackson Says:

    It’s his if he wants it….( Assuming you all know what “It” is)..

  15. RP Says:

    If he doesn’t publicly do a complete reversal of his ultra-pro-drug war stance, the LP will lose about a third of its members.

  16. Gene Berkman Says:

    Bob Barr has stated that the Defense of Marriage Act would not prohibit states from adopting laws to allow same sex marriage or civil unions. It just allows other states to refuse to recognize such unions.

    He made this point in stating his opposition to a constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriage.

  17. Stuart Richards Says:

    Well, people can change their minds. It happens all the time and nobody’s perfect.

    I’m very glad to have this gentleman in our party. :)

  18. Jason Gatties Says:

    I blogged about this a bit as well and I welcome him into the fold with open arms.

  19. Mike N. Says:

    Gene is correct. It is too bad the Outright Libertarians, who are now up in arms, do not realize this.

  20. Mike N. Says:

    Jason – nice blog.

  21. Starchild Says:

    It’s a bit of a stretch, Mike & Gene, to spin a piece of legislation entitled the “Defense of Marriage Act” as merely being about letting states choose on their own whether or not to recognize gay marriage or civil unions.

    Make no mistake, the DOMA was an attack on marriage equality. Of course people can change, and if Bob Barr has changed his position on this and other important issues such as the War on Drugs, he should very publicly make this clear.

    If he has not changed those un-libertarian views, he should still have been welcomed as a supporter of the LP in light of the views he holds which are libertarian, but not invited to take a policy making position in the party leadership.

    Anyone know how Bob Barr voted on flag-burning? Other issues?

  22. Mike N. Says:

    The word “equality” makes me want to barf. The government has no business getting involved with marriage in the first place.

  23. Brandon H. Says:

    Any chance of a Bob Barr / Ron Paul (or Vice Versa) ticket in 2008?

  24. Mike N. Says:

    Bab Barr has nothing to gain running as a Libertarian for President… other than defeat.

  25. Kn@ppster Says:

    The argument that the DOMA was there just for the purpose of allowing states not to recognize each others’ marriages is false on its face. Such recognition is constitutionally required, so it can’t be set aside with mere legislation. It would require a constitutional amendment.

    I don’t have anything against Bob Barr, and I’m assuming that his agreement to accept a seat on the LNC is a clear signal that he won’t be seeking the LP’s 2008 presidential nomination (seeking the nomination is, and is hopefully seen as, incompatible with administering the process through which said nomination is conferred).

    But LNC or presidential candidate either one, he has some extremely anti-libertarian positions which he should be demonstrating his repudiation of if he wants to be a party leader.

    This is a guy who said that if his mother was dying of cancer, anyone who gave her marijuana would deserve to go to jail; a guy who sponsored legislation for the specific purpose of precluding equal treatment of same-sex couples under law; and a guy who blew a public gasket over the fact that the military “allowed” non-Christian worship services on its bases, and non-Christians in its ranks.

    If he just didn’t like marijuana, homosexuality or non-Christianity, that would be one thing (I’d still find it disagreeable, but not strictly relevant) ... but he actively sought, from the floor of the US House of Representatives, to use the force of the state to impose those likes and dislikes on everyone else.

    If he’s not willing to repudiate those past actions publicly and sincerely, he has no business in any LP leadership position. On the other hand, if he is willing to do so, he could be a powerful asset for the LP.

    Regards,
    Tom Knapp

  26. Derek Says:

    I think his incorporation to the Libertarian Party is an important one. He’s got experience in Congress and can help point out to the Libertarians what they have to do. Having any ex-Congress member be in any third party is a very good sign. Barr can help lead the way to help the Libertarians not to be too extreme on some issues, which might be the reason why many voters still don’t vote Libertarian. I agree with 90% of the LP platform but the LP has to take advantage of it. I hope he recommends how the LP can do very well in local and state races and do better in Congressional and Presidential elections too. Certainly, his presence will help the LP. Good luck!!

  27. Otto Kerner Says:

    He’ll probably get sick of dealing with them pretty quick.

  28. Austin Cassidy Says:

    This is an excellent development. I think he’d be a really good 2008 Presidential candidate due to the wide national name recognition. That status would allow him to raise enough money to travel around the country and appear with state and local candidates and do joint-media events that earn millions of dollars worth of exposure. Plus, even with that type of a campaign I suspect he could earn between 600 and 800 thousand votes. Maybe more, depending on who the other parties nominate.

    I also think another awesome option would be to run him for Lt. Governor of Georgia… and pull massive LP resources into the race. The top spot is always a tougher contest and it would be harder to peel off voters, but for Lt. Governor he might have some shot at making it a 3-way race and even maybe winning. That’s for 2010, though.

    Maybe he could even do both.

  29. Jose C Says:

    >

    We should be calling for the separation of marriage and state for the same reason we have separation of church and state. Why do some call for increased government involvement in marriage by calling for government sanctioned gay marriages?

    And why do gays need and want government sanction and blessing of their lifestyles?

  30. Michael H. Wilson Says:

    I am not sure what baggage Bob Barr will bring with him to the party, but I would hope that he has moderated his views on a number of issues. If he hasn’t that might be something we need to discuss in more detail. We might ask ourselves whether that is Bob Barr’s fault, or ours for not being clear where we are on many of the issues.

    As someone who tags their signature line with Civil Liberties and Economic Freedom I find “smaller government, less taxes” to be a bit squishy, not to mention “socially tolerant and fiscally conservative”.
    M.H.W.

  31. Kn@ppster Says:

    Jose C,

    To the extent that government exists, one of its normal jobs is the recognition/recording/authentication of contracts and enforcer of last resort of those contracts.

    Marriage has evolved over time into a very specific type of contract, and one sufficiently common that instead of it being set up with its own specifics in each instance, proceeds according to standard form and terms.

    Being an anarchist, I wouldn’t mind getting government out of marriage … along with everything else. But so long as it’s not going to get out of marriage, a bare minimum reasonable standard would be that it not deliver its normal services prejudicially with respect to the gender of those utilizing those services.

    Regards,
    Tom Knapp

  32. Mike N. Says:

    It doesn’t matter who the LP runs as president – our candidate will never gain more than several hundred thousand votes. The mega party uses an age old tactic known as divide and conquer. They will be nominating their party’s most controversial candidate (Kerry, Hillary, Obama etc) in order to convince the electorate that they must go to the polls in droves to vote for their Rep or Dem opponent. It really doesn’t matter to them whether a Dem or Rep wins, just as long has they hold on to their monopoly.

    The LP needs to focus on 1 or 2 (max) state-level legislative races each election.

  33. Eric Dondero Says:

    LOL. Don’t ya just luv Thomas L. Knapp. Not even 24 hours after the Barr announcement is made official and already he – Poltiical Consultant for the Kubby Campaign – goes on the attack.

    Knapp can’t have this both ways. Out of one side of his mouth he says that “no way Barr will be a candidate.” On the other side of his mouth he savagely attacks him on gay marriage and drugs.

    So Tom, why would you waste your time attacking the guy if you didn’t think he would be a possible Presidential candidate? I mean, he could be a possible endorser for a Steve Kubby for President run.

    A little birdie in my ear tells me there’s something else at work here. Maybe, just maybe Tom Knapp knows that the instant that the Barr news hit, Steve Kubby’s campaign for President was over.

    And as bad as Kubby and Crew feel right now, can you imagine being in George Phillies’ shoes? Ouch!

  34. Kris Overstreet Says:

    OK, I’ve made my long-winded post on this subject here.

    Long story short: we need Bob Barr, and about seven thousand activists and a few million voters like him, if we’re going to roll back the expansion of government and restore freedom. If we insist on only allowing people who agree with everything we say into the LP, we’ll never get anything accomplished, and our freedoms will continue to evaporate.

  35. Kris Overstreet Says:

    Sorry, forgot to close a tag there.

  36. Doug Craig Says:

    Mike N.

    The proplem lies in getting people in georgia to donate to someone in New York. The other proplem is not always money but foot soldiers.I am not sure what the answer is other than run better campaign.Also people are willing to give big donations to a presidential race where they will only give $25.00 to a local guy who has a chance.The presidential race should be about outreach and getting new members.I believe it is the mid size races we should stay awy from. Races like senate or us house or Lt . Gov.
    Our biggest proplem is we have ran very few campaigns from top to bottom like a winner. In a race you need either more or better money,volunteers,name recogn.,campaign team and a full time candidate
    what campaign has met all of these.

  37. Mike N. Says:

    I believe it is the mid size races we should stay awy from. Races like senate or us house or Lt . Gov.

    I agree.

    In a race you need either more or better money,volunteers,name recogn.,campaign team and a full time candidate

    Money is the key word there. Something that is in limited supply even if you consider the entire donor base. Therefore, if the LP came together as a whole determined to win 1 or 2 (max) state-level legislative races per year, we can start making progress. I think you would be surprised how many people would donate to candidates that actually stand a chance at winning in another state. When the donor base gets diluted by hundreds of candidates, that is when nothing happens.

    Repeating the same idiotic mistakes for 35+ years is insane.

  38. Stephen VanDyke Says:

    Dondero: Keep dreaming… hehe.

    Barr said he has no plans to run for office.

    I wouldn’t mind seeing him run for U.S. Senate after 2008.

  39. Eric Dondero Says:

    Here’s an interesting Libertarian Party historical factoid to ponder:

    If Bob Barr runs and wins the Libertarian Party nomination for President for 2008, which now appears likely, that will mean that fully 8 out of 9 Libertarian Party Presidential candidates since the Party’s inception in 1972 have been Republicans. That would include everyone except Harry Browne, who was a political drop-out self-identified Independent. Republicans are/were: Dr. John Hospers, Roger MacBride, Ed Clark, David Bergland, Ron Paul, Andre Marrou, Michael Badnarik and now Barr.

    Kind of pours vinegar in the arguments of those who say say that the Libertarian Party is just as much aligned with the Democrats as Republicans, eh?

  40. Eric Dondero Says:

    Response to Stephen van Dyke:

    Guess you weren’t around in the Libertarian Party back in 1987?

    Ron Paul said precisely the same thing. He said this for weeks almost months after he officially joined the LP and before he announced his intentions to run for the Presidential nomination.

    I know, I was there. I was working for the guy.

    It’s not to Barr’s advantage to declare at this time. Better to wait, maybe til March, April or May. Maybe even the summer.

    Which I’m sure will drive the Kubbys and Phillies of the world insane. If I were them I’d just save themselves the hassle and drop out.

  41. Free2Smooze Says:

    Barr can do much more good for the party as an organizer and fund-raiser for other candidates, and as a magnet for other dissatisfied R’s. If he runs for president, his hard right positions would fracture the LP membership before we grow up enough to accept the necessity of differing policy positions within the LP and he could be dismissed as a silly, misguided and angry former R with an axe to grind. Serious media would write him off as easily as they write us off now. Can you say Pat Buchanan. We need party infastructure, systems, and access to capital. Barr can help much more in these areas if he keeps his head below the bullets.

  42. Free2Smooze Says:

    On a related note, check out http://alternativepoliticaltechnology.blogspot.com/
    I am trying to compile the campaign internet tools and technology in one place so that alternative candidates can utilize the net to run more competitive campaigns.

  43. torah Says:

    Barr is precisely the reason the media WOULD flock to the LP.

    But, is there any word that Barr will use L. Ron Hacker as a top campaign consultant if he were to run?

  44. Chris Moore Says:

    I’m confused. Why do people think that a former congressman from Georgia with very little actual national name ID would do any better as the LP’s nominee than a certain former Texas congressman.

    Buchanan was part of the media before he ran on the Reform ticket, and they still pretty much ignored him.

    Hell, there is a former senator from Alaska running for president right now as a Democrat and the media do not even know he exists.

  45. Nick Wilson Says:

    “Kind of pours vinegar in the arguments of those who say say that the Libertarian Party is just as much aligned with the Democrats as Republicans, eh?”

    Eric, nobody is disagreeing that the LP has always been much more closely aligned with the Republicans than the Democrats. It’s also failed for 35 years, so maybe that’s the only response we need.

    We’ve been targeting an uneffective audience, as Republicans are just as statist as Democrats when they are in power – and thus the limited government gauze is just an image, a put on. The fact is that the libertarian IDEOLOGY is more in touch with leftist progressives than rightist hawk social authoritarianians. Once the Left realizes that Marxism and big government not only crushes small businesses, makes the poor poorer and leads to the state/military-corporate collusion they love to hear themselves decry, but also their tradition of extraconsitutionality gives people like your favorite president the power to run rampant over everyone’s civil liberties and the welfare state gives the Right tools for their own ends, the Democrats might as well go the way of the Whigs. That’s at least my goal.

    The main reason the LP never catches on to anyone is because it connects limited government with Randian Objectivism/elitism over Adam Smith’s progressive intentions for developing capitalistic theory. If we were advocating freedom, limited government AND progressivism, the appeal would be exponentially higher.

  46. matt Says:

    “I wouldn’t mind seeing him run for U.S. Senate after 2008.”

    Actually, that’s the best idea I’ve heard in a while. The LP did well in Georgia last cycle, run Barr in and see what happens. Plus, he’s an experienced legislator, which few in the LP are.

  47. Michael H. Wilson Says:

    Bob Barr may, or not make it in the LP, but he at least has a blog where I can find out some of his ideas. Other than what I have read in the papers I don’t know much about the man. But then I don’t know much about any of the members of the LNC, and I doubt I ever will, because frankly they don’t do much in the way of communicating to those of us who travel below decks. We are simply the riff-raff, the great unwashed, the peanut gallery, or whatever, but we ain’t being talked to unless it is to talk down to us.

    And to think all these computer people, many of whom know the value of openess when it comes to developing software, but seem to forget the value of openess when it comes to developing a politcal system.
    M.H.W.

  48. Mike N. Says:

    But, is there any word that Barr will use L. Ron Hacker as a top campaign consultant if he were to run?

    Lord help us.

  49. Kn@ppster Says:

    Quoth Eric Dondero:

    “LOL. Don’t ya just luv Thomas L. Knapp. Not even 24 hours after the Barr announcement is made official and already he – Poltiical Consultant for the Kubby Campaign – goes on the attack.”

    1) I’m not a “Political Consultant” to the Kubby campaign. I’m a fully on-board staffer.

    2) Notwithstanding my position on the Kubby campaign, I remain free to state my own opinions as I choose.

    3) I’m not “on the attack.” I’m glad to have Barr in the LP, although I hope that he’s changed some of his anti-libertarian positions over the years. I’m willing, to a degree, to assume that he has, given the fact that he went from being a hardcore Republican to an ACLU activist … but I’d like to hear him actually say it.

    4) While I’d rather Barr didn’t run for president in 2008, that’s not really what I was getting at. What I was getting at was that I don’t think he will, and that his decision to accept appointment to the LNC is more likely evidence that he won’t than that he will.

    “Knapp can’t have this both ways. Out of one side of his mouth he says that ‘no way Barr will be a candidate.’ On the other side of his mouth he savagely attacks him on gay marriage and drugs.”

    I’m not “savaging” him at all. I’m just pointing out his prior record on those issues and asking for clear evidence that he’s re-thought his previous positions. As Harry Truman said, “I don’t give’em hell—I just tell the truth about them and they think it’s hell.”

    “So Tom, why would you waste your time attacking the guy if you didn’t think he would be a possible Presidential candidate? I mean, he could be a possible endorser for a Steve Kubby for President run.”

    I’m not attacking him —nor am I in any way speaking for Steve Kubby or the Kubby campaign in discussing him. When and if Kubby or Kubby’s campaign have anything to say about Bob Barr, that statement will come from the candidate or the campaign, not from me as an individual.

    “A little birdie in my ear tells me there’s something else at work here.”

    More like a voice in your head. Does it call you “Isabelle?”

    “Maybe, just maybe Tom Knapp knows that the instant that the Barr news hit, Steve Kubby’s campaign for President was over.”

    I don’t make a habit of knowing things that have no basis in reality.

    “And as bad as Kubby and Crew feel right now …”

    Actually, last time I checked we were all feeling quite good. I don’t see anything in the news on Bob Barr to change that feeling. I don’t think he’ll be seeking the LP’s presidential nomination, and I welcome the exposure that his affiliation with the LP will bring to the party. I do hope that he’s become more libertarian, and that he publicly says so, but that’s just me.

    Regards,
    Tom Knapp

  50. Derrick Says:

    I think the Barr-running-for-president meme is way overhyped. It seems that he just wants to help build the party. I would rather see him in that capacity than as a candidate. I think it would do much more good.

  51. Mike N. Says:

    “Why I like George Phillies”

    http://libertarianyouth.blogspot.com/2006/12/why-i-like-george-phillies.html

  52. Derek Says:

    Good for the LP! Barr will really be a great inorporation because he knows how it is to win elections. I really hope he can give the LP the boost it needs because I think it’s time to bring it on and play the aces they have up their sleeves. Barr can be a very good tutor and he’ll help the LP got back on track and can give all the LP candidates tips on how to campaign or how to stand firm on your position without leaving anyone disfranchised. Definitely, Barr will lead the LP to the 08 election with its best candidates and the 08 election will be a big surprise for third parties. Congrats on your good luck!

  53. Jackcjackson Says:

    “Kind of pours vinegar in the arguments of those who say say that the Libertarian Party is just as much aligned with the Democrats as Republicans, eh?”

    No, I dont think the LP is “aligned” with either, but I think the LP can be welcoming to converts of all political backgrounds. There is a reason they left the GOP.

    I think the argument many make is that the modern GOP is no “closer” to Libertarians than modern Democrats. Personally, I am disgusted by the main Republican stances and find nothing remotely libertarian about them. I find no redeeming qualities in the Democrats either.

    HOWEVER, I would sure as hell rather lean a little “left” on a few issues ( or more highlight those stances) than be lumped in with bigots, “Republicans who REALLY hate taxes ( and/or smot pot) and REALLY love guns ( to the point of being involved in some nutcase extreme white supremicist blow-up-the-government militias)”,etc.

    So yeah, I would rather support FREEDOM, civil AND economic liberties,etc- Than just continue the image of the frustrated white guy who hates the government and is “too conservate” for the GOP.

    I have some issues with Barr, but being of the “bigger tent” opinion, I welcome him.

  54. Jackcjackson Says:

    Why do people think that a former congressman from Georgia with very little actual national name ID would do any better as the LP’s nominee than a certain former Texas congressman?

    I don’t, but I think Barr probably has higher name ID than Ron Paul.
    Almost all mentions of Paul I have ever heard come from libertarian circles. However, when Barr was in office there was a lot of national coverage of his name. Not all was positive but it was there.

    Barr joining the LP was front page news on Drudge so it was at least somewhat of a big deal outside LP circle jerks.

  55. Trent Hill Says:

    The Libertarian Party leans neither left nor right. This is pointless.
    It is govermentally/economically Right Leaning.
    But socially Left Leaning.

    It is neither left nor right. It doesnt fit on a one dimensional spectrum of politics.

    As for why, it pulls away more Republicans than Democrats.
    Democrats and Republicans are both tending towards socialist,highly centralized governing, this is true. However, you have to remember that alot of these people dissaffecting from the Republican Party, are dissafecting due to this fact. They are old Reagen Republicans. Reagan himself said “Conservatism is based in libertarianism.” While the democrats have typically uphelp centralized government more. They have NEVER attracted libertarians very much.
    So while Libertarianism isnt “closer” per se to either party, it draws more dissafected voters from the Republican party, because in the past the Republicans have garnered the votes of the libertarians (little l,not big L)

  56. Eric Larson Says:

    Overall, I think this is a great development for the LP. Sure, he doesn’t have the name recognition of John McCain or the money of a George Soros but he is newsworthy and any addition to the ‘team’ is a positive one. I learned of him joining in the Ft. Lauderdale airport while waiting for my plane so he at least generates some positive news for the party.

    Him joining the LP creates the image that we’re less fringe and politically viable (at least partially). As for his views on the issues, they seem to be mostly Libertarian which is all that matters. Just as there are a host of varying positions within the D’s and R’s there is room for that in our party as well.

    I hope his joining will be a positive one in which he and the party can learn from each other together.

  57. Eric Dondero Says:

    Trent, how does that explain the revolving door between the GOP and the LP all these years.

    Just last week a longtime perennial Libertarian Party candidate for every office imaginable down in Southwest Florida (Lee County I believe?), formerly switched to the Republican Party so that he could run and “win” a seat on the County Commission.

    I’m sure you remember back in August, the LP’s top elected official in the Nation, a County Exec. in Georgia, switched to the GOP.

    This is a good thing. Libertarians and Republicans go back and forth.

    Look at Ron Paul. First a Republican, then a Libertarian, then a Republican again, and now I wouldn’t doubt if he switches to the LP again for his final term.

    The Libertarian Party is an offshoot of the GOP. It serves a purpose the same as the Conservative Party does for the GOP in NY State.

    Hell, the LP was founded by the State Chairman of the Colorado Young Republicans. What more proof do you want then that? Practically all the Co-Founders along with David Nolan, came from the Young Americans for Freedom, a very Republican group in the late 1960s.

    The very first Presidential candidate for the LP was a Republican John Hospers, and he is one again today.

    Roger MacBride, the 1976 LP Prez candidate was a Republican, he switched to LP for a few years, and then went back to the Republican Party in 1983 and remained a Republican until he died in 1995.

    Ron Paul? First a Libertarian (way back in 1972), then a Republican, then a Libertarian, then a Republican again. And I won’t be surprised if by the end of his final term he will switch to LP again.

    Eric at www.mainstreamlibertarian.com

  58. Eric Dondero Says:

    Jackson, let’s take your argument on face value.

    You say “there’s a reason they left the GOP.” Okay then.

    Then what’s the reason why practically EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO LEAVES THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY JOINS THE REPUBLICANS??

    Guess you missed the news of that longtime Libertarian Party guy in Southwest Florida joining the Republican Party, huh? He had been like a bedrock of the Florida LP for years. About as solid and dedicated a Libertarian Party as you could find. And one day he ups and joins the Republican Party.

    Did the LP’s top elected official in the Nation down in Georgia, that County Exec., join the Democrat Party back in August? No, he joined the Republicans.

    Don Gorman left the Libertarian Party about a year ago. Did he run for a NH House seat as a Democrat? No. He ran as a Republican.

    Scott Bludorn in Illinois? He was the IL LP’s strongest candidate for years. He joined the GOP.

    Couple years ago Larry Elder left the LP. Did he join the Democrats? No, he joined the GOP.

    The Republican Liberty Caucus has tons of Libertarian Party refugees, many of whom are now elected officials.

    Hell, I’m a Libertarian Party refugee myself, and I founded the RLC.

    Come to think of it, I can’t think of a single Libertarian Party member who left the LP to join the Democrats. I’m sure there’s one out there. But every big name Libertarian who gets frustrated with the lack of a winning record of the LP, eventurally finds their way to the GOP.

  59. Eric Dondero Says:

    Interesting point Nick; The “reach out to Republicans strategy” that the LP has engaged in for 35 years has failed. So, “lets go the Democrat direction.”

    Go right ahead, Nick.

    You will succeed only in splitting the Libertarian movement right down the middle, for there are countless libertarian Republicans out there who absolutely despise most Democrats and just about everything they stand for.

    You start some sort of “Libertarians for Burak Hussein Obama” and you watch how many of your libertarian comrades will turn on you in an instant.

    If a “Libertarian-Democrat” alliance is such a hot item, then why hasn’t the so-called “Freedom Democrats” every accomplished anything?

    Let’s see now, they’ve been around now for almost 8 years? How many Ron Pauls have they elected to Congress in that time? How many State Legislators even?

  60. Eric Dondero Says:

    Derrick, question for ya? You say that the Barr meme is “way overhyped,” and doubt Barr has any intentions of running for President.

    Why do you think former Congressman Ron Paul stepped away from the Republican Party in 1985, and joined the Libertarian Party? Was it just because he had altruistic intentions? Just wanted to “help the Party” and all?

    How about former Congressman Sam Steiger of Arizona back in 1981? He left the GOP and formerly joined the Libertarian Party for a year. Do you think it was because he just “wanted to help the AZ LP”? Or, do you think it might have had something to do with his desire to run for Governor that year and appear on the ballot, to shake AZ politics up, and to establish himself for a future GOP run?

    Dereck, I worked for the United States House of Representatives for 6 years. I walked the Halls of Congress for weeks. I have met Tom DeLay, Dick Armey, Newt Gingrich, all the former House leaders, and lower level Congressman, as well.

    Let me tell you something. A United States Congressman does not walk away from a major party to join a third party, just because he “wants to help build that party.”

    If that were the case, what would be in it for him?

    Maybe the National Chairmanish of the Libertarian Party? C’mon, get real. You think that’s what he’d be aiming for?

    A Congressman has only one thing in mind. How do I move up the ladder to the Senate or even the Presidency.

  61. Nigel Watt Says:

    I agree with SVD…Let’s not run Barr for president (instead, let’s run George Phillies), but Senate for Georgia in the next election? Please, bring it on.

  62. Carl Says:

    The fact that Barr has joined the LP/LNC is the best news for the LP in a long time. If a previously elected Congressman joins a third party, it provides quite a lot of status boost for the party. The question is: can the party be open enough not to drive him out? I think the Objectionableist factions will work very hard to do so.

    Historical note: I was the loudest voice on the LNC/SPT against targeting Barr in the spoiler strategy. I did not consider him a libertarian at the time, but I thought he was more libertarian overall than the average congresscritter—which made targeting him look stupid. I think it is quite a positive reflection on the man that he has opted to join/help the party that targeted him for removal from office.

    Regarding Eric’s revolving door between LP and RP: see the chart a holisticpolitics.org. The RP does have a larger active libertarian faction than the DP, but it also has a faction that is just as authoriatarian, a faction which is currently in control. What is notably missing is an active left-libertarian movement within either party (left as in egalitarian).

    Since I have moved to the economic left, I get a better reception for my ideas (ideas which are cuts in government economic activity) from moderates and Democrats than I get from conservative Republicans. This, despite the fact that I am more socially conservative/militarily interventionist than most LP members. The Nolan Chart is a very poor guide to finding libertarians within the Democratic Party.

  63. Bill Wood Says:

    I’m very happy Bob Barr has joined the Libertarian Party. It might inspire others who realize that the Republican party is no longer the “Small Government/ Individuals rights ” Party , but have been afraid to join us to “come out of the closet” and join us. The news of his joining us made the Washington Post, FOX and Friends, Reason’s website, plus numerous other places. Now, will Dick Armey of Texas be next?

  64. Timothy West Says:

    I wish Ron Paul would switch now.

  65. Mike N. Says:

    Let’s not run Barr for president … but Senate for Georgia in the next election?

    That would be a huge waste of time and money.

    The LP needs to focus on 1 or 2 (max) state-level legislative races each election.

    You don’t build a house by building the roof first.

  66. Mike N. Says:

    Let’s not run Barr for president … but Senate for Georgia in the next election?

    That would be a huge waste of time and money.

    The LP needs to focus on 1 or 2 (max) state-level legislative races each election.

    You don’t build a house by building the roof first.

  67. Trent Hill Says:

    No, but you DO have to retain ballot access in order to run a viable Presidential candidate, and Barr would be the best shot at maintaing Goergia ballot access for 08.

    I hope Dick Armey of Texas switches….

    At any rate, any Republican, who is LIKE Ron Paul, needn’t switch to the LP, as they are already acting in manner which facilitates libertarianism, even if it doesnt help the Libertarian PARTY.

    As for what you said, Dondero, about no Congressman doing anything for altruistic purposes. Wrong.
    You are forgetting MANY of our founding fathers. People like Ron Paul don’t join the Libertarian Party in order to get name recognition, or boost votes. They do it based on principle. What did Ron Paul gain from running for the LP Presidential nomination? A few hundred thousand votes (nation-wide,not in his district) and some monetary support (Although not much), and he pissed off alot of Republicrats.

  68. Free2Smooze Says:

    Nick—Here in Washington State we ran a hard left Libertarian Senate campaign with Bruce Guthrie focusing on immediate pull-out of Iraq and marriage equality. He was in the statewide debate, ran TV ads, had a great website and received a good deal of press (much of it positive) and got 1.4% of the vote. Democrat voters didn’t buy it and Libertarian leaning Republicans could find no reason to vote for what they perceived as a leftist pacifist.

  69. Bill Wood Says:

    Tim, I know how you feel about Ron Paul. I think if he switched the republicans in his district would probably run someone against him.

  70. Nigel Watt Says:

    That would be a huge waste of time and money.

    The LP needs to focus on 1 or 2 (max) state-level legislative races each election.

    You don’t build a house by building the roof first.

    Presumably he would have his own fundraising resources. Sorry I didn’t make that clear.

  71. Susan Hogarth Says:

    http://www.colliething.com/2006/12/bob-barr-appointed-to-lnc.html

    “What this is about: The process by which Bob Barr was placed on the Libertarian National Committee (LNC) as representative of the Southeast (SE) region.

    What this is NOT about: Bob Barr’s suitability for the position he was appointed to.

    Essence of the matter: The chairs of the SE region did not act against rules in the appointment of Bob Barr to the LNC, but they did act inappropriately.”

  72. Jackcjackson Says:

    reason: Are you going to make a Libertarian run for president?

    Barr: No. I’m contemplating no runs for any office. I’m delighted to be asked to work in this capacity for the Libertarian Party, and I’m going to work on range of issues. But I’m not a candidate.

  73. Mike N. Says:

    http://reason.com/news/show/117284.html

  74. Kris Overstreet Says:

    My response to the new Reason interview:

    http://lyansroar.blogspot.com/2006/12/follow-up-new-interview-with-bob-barr.html

    There’s still a lot unanswered, but I still think Barr is a good thing for the party.

    We’ll have to wait and see.

  75. Mike N. Says:

    He’s expected to make a big announcement soon about his stance on the Drug War as well (a major reversal from his days as a congressman).

    Did you get this from a credible source?

  76. Joseph Knight Says:

    Well, it all comes down to the drug war – and whether the ol’ drug warrior is going to adopt a libertarian position as Stephen VanDyke suggests. The evidence, unfortunately, suggests LINO.

    From the REASON interview:
    REASON: In 2002, the Libertarian Party called you the
    worst drug warrior in Congress. No hard feelings?
    BARR: To be honest with you that’s never come up in
    our discussions. I’m not going to let minor disagreements come between us.

    Hmmm. If you wish to kick in my door, terrorize my family, seize my property, remove me from my family, job and community, and keep me in a cage like an animal for no reason other than what I grow in my garden or smoke in my pipe, excuse me but we have more than a “minor disagreement.”

    And, even as an LNC rep, Barr continues his war on drugs:
    http://thesmithfamilyfoundation.org/event.cfm

    Yeah, let’s run Barr and Boortz. Vote LP: Jail the sick for smoking unapproved medicene and tax the poor more!

  77. Trent Hill Says:

    Bob Barr’s position is one he has gained through hardwork and dedication mr. Joseph Knight.
    Despite the fact that you may not agree with his “war on drugs”, you must admit his reasons are well intentioned. Nothing like:
    “Vote LP: Jail the sick for smoking unapproved medicene and tax the poor more!”
    or
    “If you wish to kick in my door, terrorize my family, seize my property, remove me from my family, job and community, and keep me in a cage like an animal for no reason other than what I grow in my garden or smoke in my pipe, excuse me but we have more than a “minor disagreement.”
    That is a REDICULOUS statement.
    Because EVERYONE who smoks pot gets their family terrorized. And they all do it for medicinal reasons.
    Extremist wings like you are the reasons the LP cant attract more voters.

    I agree his position is bad. But you have to prove why your position is BETTER, not why his position is evil. Because it really isnt, its just stupid.

  78. Joseph Knight Says:

    “you must admit his reasons are well intentioned”

    Trent Hill, I must admit nothing of the kind. Tyranny isn’t just stupid, it’s evil. If Barr doesn’t repudiate his authoritarian positions – and I’m not holding my breath – I predicit there will be yet another major split in the party.

    You may think my statement is rediculous because I take it personally when people commit or advocate aggression against me and that’s your right. But I think the movement would go further and faster if MORE people took it personally rather than just philosophically.

    Please explain how we get freedom by following leaders who work against it.

  79. Jackcjackson Says:

    Ok, so the LP got Bob Barr….just as he’s getting ready to represent the pro-WOD position in a debate?

    http://www.thesmithfamilyfoundation.org/event.cfm

    I feel like there might be a place for Barr in the LP, but I feel uneasy about him in any Leadership role.

  80. Wes Benedict Says:

    Bob Barr joins the LNC. Is he just another Neil Boortz?

    Much to the surprise of Libertarian Party (LP) members throughout the US including myself, Bob Barr was just elected to fill a vacancy on the Libertarian National Committee (LNC), the body that governs the national LP. As a former Republican Congressman known for supporting many anti-libertarian initiatives in the past, might Barr turn out to be just another Neil Boortz?

    I certainly hope so.

    Let’s take a closer look at radio talk show host Neil Boortz first. Boortz is widely known for claiming to be a libertarian, for supporting the LP on air, and for voting for LP candidates. However, he’s significantly despised by many libertarians for his adamant support for the War in Iraq.

    As a libertarian who is against the War in Iraq, where do I see the positive impact of Neil Boortz? Purely and simply, Neil Boortz helps to publicize the LP. Even though he supports the War in Iraq, I can’t think of another person in 2006 who has done more to advertise the LP, and quite paradoxically, to advertise the LP’s opposition to the War in Iraq, than Neil Boortz.

    Read the rest here:

    http://wesbenedictforlnc.blogspot.com/2006/12/bob-barr-joins-lnc-is-he-just-another.html

  81. Trent Hill Says:

    Bob Barr is, by and large, a pro-libertarian. And his “Drug War Stance” is based upon a want to help control many dangerous substances. While I personally dont agree with this, it is altruistic in nature. Bob Barr is not “committing aggression” against you. He is attempting to solve a well known problem with heroine, cocaine, and the likes.

    And while Bob Barr’s views on the War on Drugs are Authoritarian, he is obviously a Libertarian at heart, and rather than running him out of the LP before he has a chance to do anything, you bleeding heart Libertarians ought to take him in,and show him the error of his ways.

    He is not inherantly evil. He is obviously QUITE wary of big government, and may have ALREADY rethought his position on the WoD.

  82. Timothy West Says:

    The Donald & Paula Smith Family Foundation
    Presents a debate:

    Medical Marijuana:
    Should the sick be able to smoke?

    Featuring
    Bob Barr
    Former Congressman
    21st Century Liberties Chair for Freedom and Privacy at the American Conservative Union

    V.

    Ethan Nadelmann
    Executive Director, Drug Policy Alliance

    Moderator
    James E. Fleming
    Professor at Fordham Law, author of Securing Constitutional Democracy

    Co-Sponsors: Fordham Law Federalist Society & American Constitution Society

    Thursday, January 18th, 2007

    Fordham Law School
    http://thesmithfamilyfoundation.org/event.cfm

    sounds like Barr has taken the pro medical MJ position to me.

  83. Susan Hogarth Says:

    Tim wrote: “sounds like Barr has taken the pro medical MJ position to me.”

    If that’s the case it won’t be much of a debate, as the Executive Director of the Drug Policy Alliance will hardly be taking the anti medicalMJ position.

    And it is labeled as a debate.

  84. Timothy West Says:

    I may have confused them with the ONDCP scumbags. different bunch I take it.

  85. Mike N. Says:

    There are a lot of supposed Libertarians that hold very anti-libertarian views. As long as the platform doesn’t turn socialist/fascist, and pro drug war nuts like Barr don’t get elected as Libertarians, we should be fine.

    As far as I know, Barr has no agenda to retard our platform (unlike the retard caucus) and he has stated he doesn’t plan on running for office.

  86. Executive Detractor Says:

    Wes Benedict,

    I’m not trying to say you’re an idiot—I’ll let other people make up their own minds on that issue after reading your bi-polar schyzophrenic long-winded rants about just about everything you seem to know everything about.

    In any case, whatever your views on Mr. Boortz, his name is spelled Neal, not Neil.

    How can people take your views seriously when you obviously don’t even know enough about the man to spell his name right?

    This party is a joke. Why do you people even bother?

  87. Trent Hill Says:

    “This party is a joke. Why do you people even bother?”
    Quoth the Democrats in 1859, right before the Republicans swept to victory.

    Why do we bother? Because we are principled.

  88. Kris Overstreet Says:

    Hm.

    Wes, it appears I owe you an apology. I thought this Executive Detractor person was you. Sorry for making the mistake.

  89. Free2Smooze Says:

    My only question is, why did Barr and the LP make the announcement on a Friday afternoon, thereby minimizing press coverage? It doesn’t look very savvy from a PR perspective.

  90. Eric Dondero Says:

    Trent, you just stepped right into a big pile of armadillo shit.

    What did Ron Paul gain from running on the LP ticket for President in 1988?

    One of the best damned fundraising lists every assembled by a libertarian in the history of our movement. Ever wonder how he can spend $3 million plus every time he runs for reelection?

  91. Eric Dondero Says:

    Who is the next Republican Congressman to join the Libertarian Party?

    Dick Armey maybe?

    No, I seriously doubt it. If anyone joins the LP it will be ex-Congressman Steve Stockman of Houston, Texas. Stockman is friends with Ron Paul. Stockman calls himself a libertarian. Stockman has all sorts of Libertrarian Party friends and supporters.

    And he’s sort of flailing around these days in politics, looking for a place to land. (Bad mixed metaphor I know).

    He made a weak-ass attempt to run for that Congressional seat, same one as Bob Smither. Pathetic attempt in fact. He needed to collect only 500 signatures. He got only 515! Only 15 over.

    Stockman’s philosophy is just like Barr’s.

    I’d say Steve Stockman.

    Other possibles: Sam Steiger of Arizona, Paul McCloskey of California (who backed Ron Paul in his 1988 Presidential bid, and Jim Hansen of Idaho, though I don’t know if he’s still alive?

  92. Eric Dondero Says:

    Wes, your argument on Neal Boortz is based entirely on the fact that he’s Pro-War on Islamo-Fascism, and use that to say “he’s not really a Libertarian.”

    Au contraire, mon bonne homme.

    The correct libertarian position is Pro-War on Islamo-Fascism. To be opposed to the War on Islamo-Fascism means essentially you’re aligned with the Islamo-Fascists and you have no problem with Radical Muslims who want to violate your civil liberties.

    Pro-War on Islamo-Fascism = Pro-Liberty

    Anti-War on Islamo-Fascism = Pro-Authoritarianism

  93. Eric Dondero Says:

    LOL on Reason interview with Barr.

    You could go back to 1985 when Ron Paul first joined the Libertarian Party and find tons of interviews where he said EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

    “Are you planning to run for President?”

    RP: “No, I have no plans to run at this time.”

    You Libertarian Party people are so damned gullible when it comes to politics. You believe everything.

    Your naivety re: politics, explains why so many of you all have such a hard time actually winning elections.

    I don’t get it. You all are like super, super, duper cynical when it comes to public policy: “Bush sucks, we’ll never win the War, blah, blah, blah…”

    But when it comes to actualy politics, you fall for every line someone feeds you.

    Sheesh!

  94. Eric Dondero Says:

    To Wes,

    Tried to post this to your Blog, but not a “team member.”

    We libertarians who hold the correct position on the War in Iraq – fervently in favor of it, do not hold these views cause we’re “knee jerk Republicans.”

    Hell, I’m pissed at Bush, cause he’s kind of a willy nilly on the War on Islamo-Fascism. He’s practically Cindy Sheehan lite.

    “Can’t attack Fallujah… That wouldn’t be prudent… Can’t call them Islamo-Fascists… that wouldn’t be politically correct… Can’t talk about the WMD we found, the liberal media wouldn’t like that… Can’t talk about the Iraqi-connection to the Oklahoma City bombing…
    Can’t go after the Holocaust denier in Iran… Might upset American liberals…”

    Bush is a squishy moderate in the War on Islamo-Fascism.

    The reason we REAL LIBERTARIANS wish to fight this War is to protect our civil liberties.

    Thos mother-’f’in’ Islamo-Fascists want to:

    Force my wife to wear an ugly burqa from head to toe, force me to kneel down and pray to Allah 5 times a day at the point of a gun, stone prostitutes to death in my small town square, cut off the genitals of my Gay friends, outlaw my free speech, and jail all my marijuana-smoking buddies for life!

    Pro-War on Islamo-Fascism = Libertarian

    Anti-War on Islamo Fascism = Defact Pro-Islamo-Fascist

  95. Mike N. Says:

    Dondero,

    I take it you do not support Ron Paul’s anti-war stance?

  96. Mike N. Says:

    Any time you meet some idiot who thinks the war in Iraq is great, please hand him or her a copy of the official US Military forces enlistment form.

    http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/military_enlistment.pdf

  97. Mike N. Says:

    But Dondero DOES support Hillary Clinton’s stance on the war:

    http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8428

    http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/450620p-379153c.html

  98. Sean Scallon Says:

    Barr’s joining the LP puts him up front and center in the ranks of Presidential candidates for the LP ahead of all the serious but not highly regarded candidates and non-serious candidates..

    A Paul/Barr fusion ticket? Let’s hope so. Somebody got to stand up and oppose this stupid war.

  99. Craft6 Says:

    I’m surprised that no one has brought up the fact that the LP targeted Bob Barr for electoral defeat, ran ads against him, then loudly trumpeted their success in helping defeat him on their party web site. He wasn’t just a libertarian-leaning Republican with some anti-libertarian positions—he was made out to be LP Enemy No. 1 (or at least in the top 10).

    Now many Libertarians are welcoming him with open arms. What gives?

    Barr has been an outspoken critic of the Patriot Act and a voice for reason on civil liberties since leaving office, and was probably more libertarian than the vast majority of Congressmen (not saying much, there)—was it a mistake to target him for defeat? Has everyone in the LP simply forgotten about it? Or was the LP’s part in defeating him overstated by the national party?

  100. Joseph Knight Says:

    “To be opposed to the War on Islamo-Fascism means essentially you’re aligned with the Islamo-Fascists”

    Horse hooey! It just means we’re opposed to Bushevik-Fascism as much as Islamo-Fascism. In fact, more: no Muslim has ever cost me a freedom but Republicans have cost me plenty.

    And Dondero, do we have a clue to a phiosophical shift in YOUR thinking? In the past you seem to include anybody who has ever taken any libertarian position on any issue to be a libertarain – some of the politicians on your list are real knee-slappers. Now you are talking about “real” libertarians. What gives?

  101. Carl Says:

    Craft6: I brought it up. See my earlier post.

  102. Free2Smooze Says:

    Eric – I attended a Leadership Institute workshop with Steve Stockman. While he was certainly sympathetic and happy to see several LIbertarians in attendence, he also made it clear to me that he was a Republican party guy.

    We are starting to attract people like Barr that can help us organize, fund-rasie, attract candidates, build organizations and reach voters and it seems like you guys either want to throw him out because he doesn’t agree 100% with you or you want to sacrifice him on the alter of a failed presidential run and turn him into another irrelevent loser.

    If Barr runs for anything, and he shouldn’t, he would do more good winning his old district back then getting 2% in a presidential run.

  103. Wes Benedict Says:

    Eric Dondero,

    One can hold your hatred of so-called “Islamo-fascists” and still oppose America’s invasion and occupation of Iraq for sound strategic reasons. Iran and Iraq used to fight each other. Now they fight Americans (in addition to thier old battles).
    Osama Bin Laden used to attack Middle East dictators that he didn’t like. The list of muslim against muslim violent struggles in recent history is extremely long.

    You seem to hold the view that the Islamic way of life is militarily superior to the American way of life. I believe our great American free enterprise system is what made America the strongest economic and military power in the world.

    I believe Islamic militancy will self-destruct from within if America would get out of the way, similar to the way the Soviet Union communists self-destructed and the Berlin wall came down. However, we have inserted ourselves in between too many of their self-destructive conflicts and have paid a price and slowed their melt-down while stunting our own growth.

    Had you been President in the 80’s and 90’s, perhaps you would have invaded Russia and East Germany before they self-destructed.

    Eric, whose side are you on in Iraq? The Sunnis or the Shia’s or both? Or, perhaps you’re more of a Kurd kind of guy. I’m surprised you’re interested in Bush’s nation-building plan and welfare for Iraqi’s. I’m against welfare for Iraqi’s. I’m against spending American tax-payer dollars to build infrastructure for Iraqi’s. If we build it they will break it.

    I support voluntary private foreign aid. Many American Jews send money to support Israel. Millions of Mexicans working in American send money to Mexico. I believe Cuban Americans still have the right to send money to Cuba but that might have been curtailed.

    Eric, if you want to support the Shiites in Iraq, by all means send your money or go there yourself and fight or maybe bring some petition boards and ask them to sign a petition to get Libertarian-Republicans on the ballot in Iraq.

  104. Andy Says:

    “If Bob Barr runs and wins the Libertarian Party nomination for President for 2008, which now appears likely, that will mean that fully 8 out of 9 Libertarian Party Presidential candidates since the Party’s inception in 1972 have been Republicans. That would include everyone except Harry Browne, who was a political drop-out self-identified Independent. Republicans are/were: Dr. John Hospers, Roger MacBride, Ed Clark, David Bergland, Ron Paul, Andre Marrou, Michael Badnarik and now Barr.

    Kind of pours vinegar in the arguments of those who say say that the Libertarian Party is just as much aligned with the Democrats as Republicans, eh?”

    Hopefully Bob Barr has changed his positions on the Drug War and gay marriage. If so I welcome him to the LP. He might make a good candidate for office, however, I wouldn’t be so quick to endorse him for the 2008 Presidential nomination. We ought to take a “wait and see” approach with Bob Barr.

    As for most Libertarian Presidential candidates having been Republicans at one time, so what? The Republican Party has PRETENDED to be the party of limited government for many years. They fooled a lot of people, including some former LP Presidential candidates who after waking up to the fact that the Republican Party LIED to them joined the Libertarian Party.

  105. Andy Says:

    “The correct libertarian position is Pro-War on Islamo-Fascism.”

    I’d rather see a war on Neo-Con fascism. Check out this amazing speech from Ron Paul where he exposes the Neo-Con fascists.

    NEO-CONNED!
    http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htm

    Exert:

    More important than the names of people affiliated with neo-conservatism are the views they adhere to. Here is a brief summary of the general understanding of what neocons believe:

    They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual.

    They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.

    They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.

    They accept the notion that the ends justify the means—that hardball politics is a moral necessity.

    They express no opposition to the welfare state.

    They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.

    They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.

    They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.

    They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and withheld from those who do not have the courage to deal with it.

    They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill advised.

    They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem.

    They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.

    Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should not be limited to the defense of our country.

    9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.

    They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists.)

    They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.

    They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party.

  106. Eric Dondero Says:

    Whose side am I on in Iraq asks Wes Benedict. Easy.

    The Kurds!

  107. Eric Dondero Says:

    Mike N.

    I was employed by Congressman Ron Paul on and off for 12 years. I served as his Travel Aide in 1987/88 in his Libertarian Presidential Campaign. Ron and I traveled to over 40 states together to campaign, including Alaska.

    I worked again for him briefly in his aborted Republican Primary Presidential run in 1992. That’s when Buchanan ran instead.

    I then worked for Ron as his Campaign Coordinator starting in 1995 and 96 and helped elect him to Congress here from TX CD - 14.

    I then served as Ron Paul’s Senior Congressional Aide in the District. Constituency and Governmental relations.

    It was quite the cush job. Made lots of money.

    I can honestly say Ron Paul and I were close friends for 12 years. He and Carol and the Family would even have me over for their weekly pool parties.

    They are wonderful people.

    But as soon as the War in Iraq struck, Ron and I had a major falling out. We didn’t speak to each other for over 6 months.

    The last time I spoke to him was to tender my resignation. I could no longer work for a man, who did not see the vicious threat of Islamo-Fascism.

    Sadly, the War in Iraq ended a 12-year friendship.

  108. Andy Says:

    “As a libertarian who is against the War in Iraq, where do I see the positive impact of Neil Boortz? Purely and simply, Neil Boortz helps to publicize the LP. Even though he supports the War in Iraq, I can’t think of another person in 2006 who has done more to advertise the LP, and quite paradoxically, to advertise the LP’s opposition to the War in Iraq, than Neil Boortz.”

    Boortz is horrible for the LP because he gives people the wrong impression of what a Libertarian really is and this turns off many potential converts and also brings the wrong kind of people into the LP. And by “wrong kind of people” I’m not indicating that we shouldn’t go after conservatives,” however, it depends on what kind of “conservative.” Pro-war, pro-police state, pro-corporate fascist, Bush loving NEO-conservatives should be avoided like the plague. Conservatives who are “gun nuts,” anti-New World Order, home schoolers, and who know that Bush is a phoney and who really want smaller government are potential converts.

    Click the link below to see Neal Boortz at a meeting with fellow Neo-CON talk radio propagandists as they recieve their marching orders from Lord Bush.

    Talk Radio Whores Recieve Their Orders From Bush
    http://prisonplanet.com/articles/October2006/171006_b_Orders.htm

    How could any self respecting Libertarian sit in the same room with Lord Bush and NOT want to spit in his face?

  109. Andy Says:

    “But as soon as the War in Iraq struck, Ron and I had a major falling out. We didn’t speak to each other for over 6 months.

    The last time I spoke to him was to tender my resignation. I could no longer work for a man, who did not see the vicious threat of Islamo-Fascism.

    Sadly, the War in Iraq ended a 12-year friendship.”

    Unlike you Ron Paul understands what liberty is. Ron Paul knows a con-job when he sees it. The War in Iraq is a fraud and anyone who supports it is not a libertarian.

  110. Eric Dondero Says:

    Andy, so how does that explain the exodus of ex-Libertarian Party members who have joined the Republican Liberty Caucus in the last few years?

    Hell, a bigtime Libertarian candidate just switched two weeks ago to the GOP down in Southwest Florida. The guy had run for ever office imaginable for years as an LPer. He was quoted in the local paper as saying, that he was tired of losing, and wanted to run as a Republican for County Commission.

    Three months ago, the LP’s top elected official nationwide joined the GOP, the County Executive in Georgia. He even came to the RLC Convention.

    Practically every single RLC person in a leadership position with the group, comes from the Libertarian Party.

    Hell, I was LP for 6 years in the 1980s, even served on the LNC.

    Nothing wrong with a stint in the LP. But most realize that if they actually want to win offices other than Soil & Water Board, best to go GOP.

    Eric at www.mainstreamlibertarian.com

  111. Eric Dondero Says:

    So Andy, what’s your solution to dealing with the Islamo-Fascist threat?

    The Euros tried appeasement for decades. Now they are being overrun. And even some of their top Europeans are being slaughtered in the streets by the Islamo-Fascists, like Theo van Gogh and Pim Fortuyn.

    We now see the Dutch in particular fighting back, finally! There’s a huge backlash in the Netherlands now against open immigration for non-Dutch North African Arabs who reject Dutch culture, in particular sexual freedom.

    Would you invite these non-Americans into our country? Just open the doors to people who openly despise our Marilyn Monroe/Elvis/Chevy Truck/Hot Dogs/Baseball/Hollywood/Big Breasted Blonde women culture?

    Do you just wish to destroy every that’s American? You just want to hand over your country to these people? Or, will you fight back against the Muslim extremist onslaught as the brave Dutchmen are doing?

  112. Eric Dondero Says:

    Joe Knight, you say you’re opposed to Islamo-Fascism. Good. Now tell me what’s your plan for dealing with the threat of Islamo-Fascism?

    I’m here on the front lines in America’s 4th largest city. I see all the illegal aliens, many of them from Arab countries here in Houston. They reject and despise America and our culture. They’ll tell you to your face that our “days are numbered,” and that they fully intend to turn America into an Islamic State.

    Poppycock, you say?

    Tell that to the citizens of Hamtramac, Michigan, who are forced to listen to “Allah Ahkbar” blared over loudspeakers downtown 5 times a day.

    Tell that to anyone who flies into the Minneapolis Airport who can’t get a cab from the Muslim drivers, cause he’s had a drink or two and that goes against Sharia Law.

    Tell that to Ohioans who like to go to Fitness America, who now cannot workout in a Co-Ed environment cause of the objections of the local Islamic community.

    Wake up! They’re here, and they want to either convert us or kill us

    If you have another plan for dealing with this threat Joe, I’m all ears. But for now, I choose to fight back and not be a girly man.

  113. Andy Says:

    “Andy, so how does that explain the exodus of ex-Libertarian Party members who have joined the Republican Liberty Caucus in the last few years?”

    Some of them are probably warmonger jackasses who don’t belong in the LP in the first place. Others probably think that they can change the Republican Party from within.

    If a good Libertarian can get elected under the Republican banner (or any other banner for that matter) I’ve got no problem with it. Notice how you don’t see me criticizing Ron Paul.

    Trying to change the Republican Party from within in a libertarian direction is a good thing, however, I see a few problems.

    1) The heart that controls the Republican Party is so corrupt that they will never change.

    2) A lot of the “libertarian” Republicans are not as libertarian as I’d like them to be.

    3) Only forming alliances with Republicans makes it appear to the general public that libertarians have something to do with Republicans and a lot of people will confuse the worst aspects of the Republican Party as being connected with libertarians.

    The Libertarian Party should be a label unto itself. It’s not about “left vs. right,” it’s about the state vs. you.

    It would be nice to see a day when there’s an election between a libertarian Republican and a libertarian Democrat.

  114. Kris Overstreet Says:

    Wake up! They’re here, and they want to either convert us or kill us

    Congratulations, you’ve just described fundamentalist Christianity.

  115. Andy Says:

    “So Andy, what’s your solution to dealing with the Islamo-Fascist threat?”

    You talk about the “Islamo-Fascist threat” as if this is the greatest threat to our freedom. This is ridiculous. The REAL greatest threat to our freedom is the US government!

    The Muslims haven’t declared that it’s OK to take private property and hand it over to politically connected corporations under Eminent Domain.

    The Muslims haven’t passed 20,000 gun control laws.

    The Muslims didn’t start the War On Drugs which has sent millions of Americans to prison.

    The Muslims do not have military forces stationed all over the world as if they were the Roman Empire.

    The Muslims don’t steal our income through taxes.

    The Muslims haven’t given us any of the abuses to our liberty that we suffer under. The Muslims do not have the power or the influence to do a damn thing. The REAL enemy is the US government!

    What to do about the “Islamo-fascist” threat? How about stop attacking their countries? How about stop proping up third world dictators? How about cutting off all foreign aid? How about bringing all US troops home? How about minding our own damn business?

    “Now they are being overrun. And even some of their top Europeans are being slaughtered in the streets by the Islamo-Fascists, like Theo van Gogh and Pim Fortuyn.

    We now see the Dutch in particular fighting back, finally! There’s a huge backlash in the Netherlands now against open immigration for non-Dutch North African Arabs who reject Dutch culture, in particular sexual freedom.

    Would you invite these non-Americans into our country?”

    In a true libertarian society all land would be in private hands and it would be up to individual land owners or groups of land owners as to who would go on what land. I personally would not want to live around Islamic extremists, but there are plenty of other people that I would not want to live around as well.

  116. Andy Says:

    “Wake up! They’re here, and they want to either convert us or kill us

    Congratulations, you’ve just described fundamentalist Christianity.”

    Yeah, to fight “Islamo-fascists” we should align ourselves with facist “Christians” and fascist “Jews” and have a big Holy War. This will change them!

  117. Mike N. Says:

    But as soon as the War in Iraq struck, Ron and I had a major falling out. We didn’t speak to each other for over 6 months.

    I bet he (Mr. Paul) cried for days…

  118. Andy Says:

    Here’s a suggestion for Bob Barr. Run for Congress under the Libertarian Party banner in 2008. The LP played a role in Barr losing his seat in Congress by running ads that exposed his opposition to Medical Marijuana. If Bob Barr has really seen the error of his ways on this issue he could make passing Medical Marijuana a major campaign issue. I will support Bob Barr for Congress if he does this and I will do what I can to help him get elected – so long as he doesn’t jump on that stupid “Fair Tax” bandwagon.

  119. paulie cannoli Says:

    Too late, he already jumped.

    Yep, minor disagreement.

    A few million killed and imprisoned here, a few million there…

    Not really enough to amount to a major disagreement anytime soon, eh?

    Among other things my new LNC rep also favors a belligerent foreign
    policy towards Venezuela, and a “Defense of Marriage Act” (think:
    freedom is slavery, war is peace, etc).

    Additionally, he is debating in favor of torturing cencer patients to
    death slowly for smoking pot (next month) and hasn’t said anything to
    repudiate his former position that the US Military should hold
    Christian religious services but not those of any other religion.

    At least I don’t know that he has said anything to the contrary.

    Hello?

    (Can I join the Greens or Freedom Democrats yet?)

    Well, I talked to Steve Gordon and Shane Cory (mostly Steve) about
    this today and they were not sure on that.

    I’ve heard some rumors to that effect.

    Haven’t really seen much about him changing some of his other
    anti-liberty positions either. On other issues I have seen some
    progress, to be sure.

    Personally I’d have Kevin Zeese on LNC before Bob Barr, but that’s
    just me.

    Steve and Shane seem to think policy views are irrelevant to being on
    LNC, it’s just an administrative job. Perhaps there is some merit to
    this argument. If so, should the LNC actively recruit other
    non-libertarians? I’m quite sure we are more likely to find more
    competent administrators outside the party and movement than within it.

    As for drug war stance: aside from rumors nothing solid yet.

    Best indications I have seen on his current position on the issue is
    that he is debating against med pot next month at Fordham and his
    politic statement about minor differences in the Reason interview.

    The Chavez thing appears recent too.

    BTW I was out of the loop. I didn’t know Bodenhausen was on LNC until
    he was almost off it.

    The Barr thing is having reprecussions already.

    Some people are not signing our ballot access because “bob barr is the
    new leader of your party.”

    More discussion

    http://praxeology.net/blog/2006/12/15/the-doors-of-perception/

  120. paulie cannoli Says:

    Here’s a suggestion for Bob Barr. Run for Congress under the Libertarian Party banner in 2008.

    On second thought, don’t.

  121. Andy Says:

    “Here’s a suggestion for Bob Barr. Run for Congress under the Libertarian Party banner in 2008.”

    “On second thought, don’t.”

    I was suggesting that Bob Barr be given a chance IF he has really changed his views on the Drug War and a few other things. If he hasn’t then forget him.

  122. paulie cannoli Says:

    fair enough.

    more fair than the “fair tax” which btw Barr does in fact support.

  123. Hogarth isn't telling the truth... Says:

    What this is NOT about: Bob Barr’s suitability for the position he was appointed to.

    I’ve read the e-mails. I’ve read the comments by both you and members of your state’s executive committee.

    That statement is absolutely false.

    You asked questions on how Mr. Barr was registered to vote (Georgia has an open primary). One of you executive committee members constantly referred to Mr. Barr as a Republican, despite the fact that he had joined the Libertarian Party.

    You’ve acknowledge in e-mails to the region chairs that no by-laws were broken. I’d be happy to forward the e-mail to you to refresh your memory.

  124. paulie cannoli Says:

    My LPA archive is kaput.

    I’ll put as much of it as I can find elsewhere here (click on my name) while Stuart and/or I figure out how to add me at Last Free Voice.

    For now it’s just a test page.

  125. Andy Says:

    “fair enough.

    more fair than the “fair tax” which btw Barr does in fact support.”

    I haven’t heard anything about Bob Barr supporting the “Fair Tax” sham.

  126. Eric Dondero Says:

    So Andy, your solution is then to surrender. Spoken like a true yellow-bellied coward. Of course we all know you never served in the Military. Proof that you’re even more of a girly man.

    As we are all marching off the death camps at the point of a gun from the Islamo-Fascists, I’ll be sure to find you amongst the crowd to remind you that you and people like you are the reason we will be getting gassed.

  127. Darcy Richardson Says:

    Paulie’s right. Bob Barr initially endorsed the misnamed “Fair Tax” during his unsuccessful primary race against John Linder in 2002.

  128. Eric Dondero Says:

    Response to Andy:

    There will be no day when there’s a “libertarian Democrat” versus a