Bob Barr wins Libertarian Party nomination.
Bob Barr wins Libertarian Party nomination.
The Libertarian Party on Sunday picked former Georgia Republican Rep. Bob Barr to be its presidential candidate. “I certainly have no intention of being a spoiler,” he said today. As Dana Milbank recently reported, Barr does note hide his disdain for John McCain:
Barr took issue with McCain’s Iran policy. “I’m not going to go around making up songs about such a serious matter as going to war with a sovereign nation, as Senator McCain did,” the former congressman said, tut-tutting McCain’s “Barbara Ann/Bomb Iran” episode.
He quarreled with McCain’s Iraq policy. “These troops need to be brought home,” he offered.
He ridiculed the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, which, he said, means McCain “cannot ever lay legitimate claim, at least with a straight face, to…being labeled as a conservative.”
He put down McCain’s plan to do away with pet-project earmarks, claiming it “would make barely a drop in the bucket with regard to the national debt, the deficit.”
And he disparaged McCain’s fiscal policy, saying “there are some legitimate questions that have been raised over whether Senator McCain is simply a Johnny-come-lately to the modest tax cuts.”
Steve Benen suggests that Barr might attract the support of Ron Paul and “be able to put a few percentage points together in some competitive states.”
Our countries are great friends, yes Bob Barr, formerly of the ruling regime?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPn4mlFycpI
May 25th, 2008 at 11:50 pmBarr/Paul 08. where can i donate? that could potentially seriously hurt McSame… this will get support not just from the Paulies and the Barries, but also alot of stupid republicans who think they are supporting Ron Paul being barred from the debates because they dont want to admit people who call themselves republicans are against the war..
May 25th, 2008 at 11:53 pmLibertarian, n.: Right-winger who wants to get away with stuff — legally.
THIS is great. The Paultards will hafta fish or cut bait — & the vote tally, though small, will only take bites outta McSame’s butt-tocks.
LooneyTunes vs. Maroon LooneyTunes — it do not GET any better.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:20 amRepublicans donations to Ralph Nader in 2000 were one key to his candidacy. I highly recommend the left promote Bob Barr’s candidacy as much as humanly possible.
Go, Bob, go!
May 26th, 2008 at 12:20 amCan’t wait to see how this plays out!!!!
He’d better watch his back, though.
As desperate as the Republican Party is right now, they’ll kill this guy to get him out of the way!
May 26th, 2008 at 1:29 amIs he Roseann’s husband?
May 26th, 2008 at 1:48 amThis can only help.
In that case, I’m ALL for it.
What a weird, freaky 21st Century it’s been so far, eh, Bunky? The ride is only gonna get bumpier…
May 26th, 2008 at 2:13 amMake no mistake about this type of Libertarian, Folks. They believe that any taxation, regardless of your income level, is an infringement on your freedom. They believe that the 2nd Amendment guarantees an individual right to own guns, rather than a collective right of the people to regulate their use and storage. They would be a disappointing substitute candidate for Progressives.
May 26th, 2008 at 2:19 amWayne A. Schneider Says:
Yes, Wayne, a strange bunch that could only survive under the umbrella of the major parties. If they actually got power they would be totally unable to govern. In fact Libertarianism is a contradiction in terms. How do you govern if you do away with the government as is their goal? Visions of the old west dance in my mind. And the only way to stop that is with an uncontrolled police force. And then you have…
May 26th, 2008 at 2:32 amSee Bob run.
May 26th, 2008 at 3:04 amRUN, BOB, RUN.
The Libertarian Party–for people who REALLY want to waste their vote.
May 26th, 2008 at 6:07 amIt’s not that we don’t want to be taxed. We know that the current tax system is over complicated and unfair. The current tax code punishes success. We also believe that government waste be cut.
And the second amendment is an individual right. The bill of rights limits the powers of government over the individual. The only exception is the 10th amendment. That limits the power of the federal government and empowering individual states and people.
May 26th, 2008 at 7:02 amIt’s not about doing away with government. it’s about getting it down to a manageable size. As ask Philly PD about an uncontrolled police force. The high taxes sure helped out a lot their.
May 26th, 2008 at 7:06 amLibertarian is still short for “I-vote-a-straight-GOP-ticket-though-I-don’t-always-agree-with-Bush.” They will all vote GOP in the fall.
May 26th, 2008 at 7:58 amVA Voter:
“The current tax code punishes success.”
You need to explain that pat phrase.
“We also believe that government waste be cut.”
Doesn’t everyone (who’s not a politician)? What do you consider waste–Farm subsidies? NASA? NOAA? Coast Guard? ( Why recue people who get themselves in trouble?). Industry regulations? EPA? Secret Service?
There’s plenty of waste in every department of course, but that’s a result of self-serving politicians. Each program needs to be examined on its mertis and some are bound to be ‘experimental’ and will prove to be a waste. Programs need to be reviewed and their success reported HONESTLY of course, so that means active oversight.
It’s not about doing away with government. it’s about getting it down to a manageable size.”
So how bg does the government need to be? How do you judge that?
Just asking.
May 26th, 2008 at 8:01 amBob Bob Bob, Bob Bob Barr ran…
May 26th, 2008 at 8:02 amMaybe now Neal Boortz will quit talking about Senator Clinton day and day out since Bob Barr will be running on the Libertarian Label.
May 26th, 2008 at 8:26 amYou can count on Boortz, a Libertarian (or so he says he is) to firmly attach his lips, to Barr’s love torpedo as he has Bush’s for the last 7 or so years! Don’t worry Boortz is capable of servicing more than one master!
Libertarians=Republicans who smoke pot.
May 26th, 2008 at 8:38 amI think this whole ‘libertarian’ movement takes more potential voters from the dems than it does from the gops.
May 26th, 2008 at 8:39 amA libertarian is someone who wouldn’t mind living right next door to a meth lab. Hell, they wouldn’t mind running a meth lab. Personal freedom, you know.
May 26th, 2008 at 8:53 amThis is one of Bob’s biggest points of disagreement with McCain. The Republicans that don’t like this war may be swayed by this. This is from his platform:
For far too long and at the cost of American blood and treasure, our great military has been too willingly and quickly used for purposes other than national defense. Our fighting men and women deserve better and the integrity of our nation must be restored.
Our National Defense policy must renew a commitment to non-intervention. We are not the world’s police force and our long, yet recently tarnished, tradition of respecting the sovereignty of other nations is necessary, not from only a moral standpoint, but to regain the respect of the world as a principled and peaceful nation.
The proper use of force is clear. If attacked, the aggressor will experience firsthand the skillful wrath of the American fighting man. However, invading or initiating force against another nation based upon perceived threats and speculative intelligence is simply un-American. We are better than the policy of pre-emptive warfare.
Plus Bob Barr is for Individual Liberty & Restoring the Constitution. That is the polar opposite of McCain also. It should prove interesting to see if he can sway Republicans that are not happy with John McCain “The Maverick”.
May 26th, 2008 at 9:01 amRowan - that was certainly true during the theft of the 2000 election - Nader was just what the GOP ordered to help steal the election.
This time however may be different. Barr is a right wing thug, and hardly makes the arguments that Nader makes (who by the way is now trying to get on all state ballots as well).
Propaganda is America’s primary enemy (hardly the terrarus). That the GOP rejects Truth at the expense of our liberties is a crime against all of us. We are now a country that thrives on lies for the benefit of corporations.
When you no longer have a free Press, as our founding fathers said, you no longer have a Democracy.
May 26th, 2008 at 9:03 amRowan Berkeley Says:
I think this whole ‘libertarian’ movement takes more potential voters from the dems than it does from the gops.
May 26th, 2008 at 8:39 am
Think again, Rowan. Barr’s potential voters are just Republicans who don’t like the war, and can’t bring themselves to vote for anyone with a “D” next to their name.
May 26th, 2008 at 9:19 amWhile Bob Barr was no great fan of the Clintons, John McCain pines:
Sunset and evening star,
And one clear call for me!
And may there be no moaning of the bar,
When I put out to sea,
But such a tide as moving seems asleep,
Too full for sound and foam,
When that which drew from out the boundless deep
Turns again home.
Twilight and evening bell,
And after that the dark!
And may there be no sadness of farewell,
When I embark;
For though from out our bourne of Time and Place
May 26th, 2008 at 9:19 amThe flood may bear me far,
I hope to see my Pilot face to face
When I have crossed the Barr.
Apparently blowjobs aren’t part of Barr’s limited gov’ment brand of Libertarianism.
BloggerRadio.com Says:
Libertarians=Republicans who smoke pot.
—–
Republicans smoke pot?
Libertarians=Republicans who are too cheap to pay their taxes
May 26th, 2008 at 9:44 amThose who are attracted by the libertarian party should do a little research into the platform.
May 26th, 2008 at 9:45 amOne might admire the can-do-it-myself/don’t-need-government viewpoint of a libertarian, but it is extremely impractical, unreasonable, and actually detrimental if not dangerous to society as a whole.
Is his veep Borat or a co-ed?
May 26th, 2008 at 9:45 amI’m very good at my job. Over the years I have excelled and have earned raises and promotions. I’ve moved into new tax brackets. Soon I will have an opportunity to advance further. But If I do I move into another tax bracket. So I get to work harder and have more reasonability and have no more in my take home pay. That’s the government punishing me for doing well.
I think we can do away with of subsidies and corporate welfare. The market will naturally make these businesses more efficient and remove the ones that don’t. Some government organizations need to be eliminated or more localized. NASA is a good investment but the NEA shouldn’t get one government dollar. The Coast Guard is a very wise investment and very much necessary. As far as industry regulations are concerned, they shouldn’t be completely eliminated but they are excessive. Do you believe that the only reason a company has any safety concerns are because of government regulation? That’s crazy. The FAA grounded hundreds of thousands of people because the inspections didn’t fit the government standard. After standing all those people did the government find any real safety issues? Do you think an airline wants to lose a multimillion dollar plain with hundreds of potential law suits. Not to mention the lost business from poor safety records.
May 26th, 2008 at 9:53 amWhy should the NEA receive not a cent?
May 26th, 2008 at 10:03 amInteresting. Can you vote for someone without a ‘D’ next to there name?
May 26th, 2008 at 10:05 amSeems that Ralph Nadar has finally be neutralized by Bob Barr. Good.
Though, I must admit that I do greatly admire what both of these men and their parties are trying to do (break up the Democratic-Republican monopoly of government).
Unfortunately, I just don’t think they are going about it by the best means (nominating extremists). Nadar is essentially far left, while Barr is generally far right. If a third (or fourth, or fifth, etc.) party is going to get a foothold, it will have to be with viable moderate candidates.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:10 amVA VOTER
Go back to VIrginny and think this line of crap over again before bringin it here to stink up the place.
“The market will naturally make these businesses more efficient and remove the ones that don’t.”
Excuse me, the “CAPITALIST MARKET” only serves one purpose, and one purpose alone, and that is to make your porduct more competitive and enable you to gain more market share UNTIL you have a the whole market controlled. Then it is called a Monopoly, and without governemental controls, WHICH BTW are not “excessive” but actually are pussified by the GREAT-traitor-booosh, that CAPITALISM does nothing but GURANTEE a force for tyranny is ALWAYS present in those wishing to perform CAPITALISM.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:14 amCapitalism is ANTI-DEMOCRATIC, just look at who gets to vote in corporations, not one vote per ‘person” onve vote per share, it is TOTALLY non-democratic. It is Plutocratic, the more onw owns the greater the voice. TOTALLY ANTI-DEMOCRATIC.
VA Voter
Typical right-wing logic dictates that every dollar should be thrown in space and in the military, but not for education.
Want some real logic? The bracketed system, for the most part, is fine the way it is. Those who earn more should have to pay more so others can eventually earn more and pay more. Anything other than that is greed. After-tax pay still ends up being good for top earners anyway. I would only make adjustments for people making below $65,000 per year so they could recieve some relief, since the right is killing the middle class.
Are there areas where government can do better? Sure, but I have much more confidence in the government establishment than I do leaving the private sector to its own devices.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:15 amVA Voter,
You’re speaking in theory rather than in reality. And the reality is that those who make more money have more tax loopholes and exemptions that wind up with them paying LESS in taxes - not more as you have suggested - than those who make less. And let’s not forget Bush’s tax cuts to the wealthy.
Taxes are not meant to be a punishment system. They are a way for us all to have access to roadways, water and sewage systems, hospitals, education, etc. When we collectively pool our money together, it makes these public resources possible that none of us could have afforded on our own.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:16 amdbadass Says:
Why should the NEA receive not a cent?
Because it is ART and art is not based on Merit of any measure, so ergo it has “no meritorious benefit” in the retarded Capitalistic mindset.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:16 amAlso, VA Voter, don’t forget that when Capitalism eventually strangles itself from greed and excess that Communism takes over… LOL
May 26th, 2008 at 10:18 amwell, I’m a Limey, we do things differently there, but, from what I think I understand so far, the first thing that a serious GOPster will do is distinguish between “economic conservatives” and “social conservatives.” GOPsters are “social conservatives,” in that they hate your personal freedom to drink, smoke, have sex, wear weird clothes or no clothes at all, etcetera. However, in no way are they “economic conservatives,” since there is nothing they admire more than presidents who print vast amounts of money and squirt it in the general direction of Boeing and Lockheed Martin.
For both these reasons therefore, Libertarianism will not attract serious GOPsters.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:38 amOT, but, where else?
these headlines from googlenews page prompt a big question:
McCain ‘enjoys excellent health’
eFluxMedia - 46 minutes ago
By Anna Boyd After months of delay, Republican John McCain’s medical records were released on Friday answering a series of concerns expressed about his age and his ability to lead the United States .
John McCain’s doctors give him clean bill of health Los Angeles Times
McCain’s Health Is Called Robust by His Doctors New York Times
… “robust”… then WHY did i see him being HELPED - i mean,
May 26th, 2008 at 10:48 ama hand firmly holding his arm - while he descends a few steps,
looked like he was leaving a restaurant, some public place…
it was part of a clip montage on the TODAY show this morning…
there is nothing “robust” about that guy…
Ron Paul will siphon off a few votes from McCain.
Bob Barr will take a few more with the moderate Repugs.
That may offset the few votes that Nader will take from Dems.
Now if we can only get the nomination secured, so Obama can bash McCain for his outrageous comments, flip-flops and associates, we can get serious.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:49 amWill the libertarians please just shut up and contribute to the common good without the endless birtching about your taxes. Also will you please get your idiot free stater friends out of NH. Thanks
http://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=ExWfh6sGyso&feature=related
May 26th, 2008 at 10:51 amI’ve been very impressed with the Ron Paul machine.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:51 amI love this! This should take some votes from John McCain! LOL!
May 26th, 2008 at 10:52 amthere is nothing “robust” about that guy…
No kidding, saw him on CNN, all casual-like in jeans, and the man could barely stand up straight after struggling to get out of a car - looks like my alzheimer inflicted 85 year old grandfather.
May 26th, 2008 at 10:55 amVA Voter Says:
Interesting. Can you vote for someone without a ‘D’ next to there name?
May 26th, 2008 at 10:05 am
I can, and I have.
May 26th, 2008 at 11:01 amVA Voter Says:
——————————————————————————–
Zooey Says: Think again, Rowan. Barr’s potential voters are just Republicans who don’t like the war, and can’t bring themselves to vote for anyone with a “D” next to their name.
Interesting. Can you vote for someone without a ‘D’ next to there name?
May 26th, 2008 at 10:05 am
Can you vote for someone with a “D” next to their name ?
May 26th, 2008 at 11:04 am“McCain’s Health Is Called Robust by His Doctors”: New York Times
…always get a second opinion…
May 26th, 2008 at 11:05 amCheck your school account
May 26th, 2008 at 11:05 am“It’s not about doing away with government. it’s about getting it down to a manageable size.”
The last 3 garbage GOP presidents have all increased the size of our government drastically ; tell us which of the three you did not vote for , if any ……………
May 26th, 2008 at 11:09 amBobb Barr
The name and look this twit has screams “game show host” ………………
May 26th, 2008 at 11:19 amor a fictional french elephant
May 26th, 2008 at 11:22 amRowan Berkeley Says:
May 26th, 2008 at 10:38 am
Rowan, bubbie…you assume the average wingnut knows the difference.
These are people who voted for Bush — twice — and who regularly vote against their own self interests, just so teh gays can’t wallow in the misery of marriage like the rest of us, and so every unwanted pregnancy can survive until it’s an unwanted child.
Just sayin’…
May 26th, 2008 at 11:28 amLibertarians also are “not against gays, but don’t want them teaching our kids and marrying”, and think Global Warming is a hoax. I don’t have a major problem with their 2nd Amendment issues, but their privatization, and other stealth GOP ideas are troublesome. Basically, they are Republicans, with Antiwar ideas, and reefer smoking.
However, the European model of multiple parties is more sane than the USA’s so-called one party system, which is in effect one large corporate party, being run by the military, pharmaceuticals, Oil, and AIPAC, with two branches. So why not have 24 parties, Green, Labor, Libertarian, Gay/Lesbian/Bi/Tran, Socialist, Communist, Fascist,Christians, Buddhists, Liberals, Conservatives, and more. No contributions except individuals, and only $100 maximum. Then we would see what this country is about.
May 26th, 2008 at 11:36 amBrain From Planet Arous Says:
——————————————————————————–
Libertarians also are “not against gays, but don’t want them teaching our kids and marrying”, and think Global Warming is a hoax.
May 26th, 2008 at 11:36 am
And that little ‘ditty’ reveals the hypocritcial nature of these “Libertarians” , who , like you state later in your post , are nothing but Repubs in a different lining.
Is the tag “Libertarian” indicative of those all about/for individual liberties for all Americans ?
And what ? Gays and lesbians aren’t Americans ?
What a crock of shit ………….
May 26th, 2008 at 11:43 amWasn’t it Buchanan who briefly joined those freaks that wanted to execute adulterers? WTF was up with that whole deal?
May 26th, 2008 at 11:45 amDon’t bet on it.
He voted for the Patriot Act, which is poison to 99% of Ron Paul supporters.
And why do you care about who the Libertarian Party nominee is? If it were someone else, you wouldn’t care. Why now?
May 26th, 2008 at 11:52 amWho ever heard of a BOB bar?
May 26th, 2008 at 11:52 amAlejandro Says:
——————————————————————————–
Steve Benen suggests that Barr might attract the support of Ron Paul and “be able to put a few percentage points together in some competitive states.”
Don’t bet on it.
He voted for the Patriot Act, which is poison to 99% of Ron Paul supporters.
And why do you care about who the Libertarian Party nominee is? If it were someone else, you wouldn’t care. Why now?
May 26th, 2008 at 11:52 am
Who here has claimed on any level that they care about the Libertarian party nominee ?
May 26th, 2008 at 11:56 amNevar Says:
Who ever heard of a BOB bar?
May 26th, 2008 at 11:52 am
I’ll be staying away from that bar. Both of my sisters are married to guys named “Bob.” I know what to avoid. ;)
May 26th, 2008 at 12:09 pmMCMetal Says:
Who here has claimed on any level that they care about the Libertarian party nominee ?
To be fair, there have been a number of progressives who were attracted to the anti-war stance of Ron Paul and the Libertarians because he was really the only national candidate willing to say the whole thing was a stupid disaster. A lot of them never bothered to examine the rest of the libertarian platform, or may have gotten stuck on the “do what you want as long as no one gets hurt” meme.
The reality of the Libertarian ethos is this: “I’m in it for me. Period. Anything that interferes with my desire to do whatever I want, when I want to do it, is illegal and wrong.”
May 26th, 2008 at 12:10 pmAny taxation on your INCOME is an infringement on your freedom.
The right to keep and bear arms for self-protection is most definitely an individual right regardless of what the 2nd amendment says.
Can you picture Ron Paul running a meth lab? I sure can’t.
Is that why he voted for the Patriot Act?
If you are talking about FEDERAL dollars. States already fund and administrate education. Why does the Federal government need to put another layer of bureaucracy on top of it?
Eliminate the income tax for every individual and we wouldn’t be so worried about who gets tax cuts and who doesn’t.
I have never voted for a Republican in my life, with one exception, and that’s Ron Paul in the recent primaries.
Where the hell do you get this crap?
The Republican model of “privatization” just means giving government contracts to your corporate buddies. When a libertarian says privatization, they mean allowing competition in the market place instead of government interference. Take the telecom industry for example. Take the health insurance industry as another.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:15 pmLibertarians are worse than Republicans.
I have no desire to return to the Gilded Age. Nor do I wish to be a second class citizen by virtue of my vagina, be considered property or a serf owned by the rich.
No thanks.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:19 pmZooey Says:
Nevar Says:
Who ever heard of a BOB bar?
May 26th, 2008 at 11:52 am
I’ll be staying away from that bar. Both of my sisters are married to guys named “Bob.” I know what to avoid. ;)
Hey?!?!?!?!
May 26th, 2008 at 12:24 pmIt’s those “roberts” you need to avoid.
Besides, we’re both nouns and verbs!
May 26th, 2008 at 12:25 pmYeah, libertarians want women to become second class citizens. Uh huh.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:25 pmLook, I don’t know why the Libertarian Party nominated Bob Barr. It took until the 6th ballot so maybe there were some shenanigans. He’s no Libertarian. But the Libertarian Party for the past 10 years or so has been mostly populated by Republicans that were disgruntled by the theocratic path that the Repubs have gone down recently. Also the corporate whoring didn’t help. So the Libertarian Party has been crap for a while now. I guess that’s why they nominated such a crappy candidate over Mary Ruwart who was a more traditional Libertarian.
http://www.ruwart.com/Pages/Home/
May 26th, 2008 at 12:31 pmgummitch Says:
——————————————————————————–
MCMetal Says:
Who here has claimed on any level that they care about the Libertarian party nominee ?
To be fair, there have been a number of progressives who were attracted to the anti-war stance of Ron Paul and the Libertarians because he was really the only national candidate willing to say the whole thing was a stupid disaster. A lot of them never bothered to examine the rest of the libertarian platform, or may have gotten stuck on the “do what you want as long as no one gets hurt” meme.
The reality of the Libertarian ethos is this: “I’m in it for me. Period. Anything that interferes with my desire to do whatever I want, when I want to do it, is illegal and wrong.”
May 26th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Finding someone’s disapproval of Chimpy’s illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq is hardly unique though , is it , gum ?
I mean , I don’t know ; I don’t claim to speak for others or even anyone else but myself , but I’ve never liked Ron Paul anyway because I’ve always known his history.
Kinda’ tough to cling to someone just over 1 topic , even though that topic is extremely important , isn’t it ?
May 26th, 2008 at 12:31 pmAlejandro
My question was directed at VAVoter , not you.
I wasn’t questioning your Libertarian “credentials” or loyalty………..
May 26th, 2008 at 12:33 pmI just love it when the right wing circles up for a firing squad.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:35 pmI answered your question anyway.
I don’t have any credentials or loyalty to any political party.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:36 pmAlejandro Says:
——————————————————————————–
The right to keep and bear arms for self-protection is most definitely an individual right regardless of what the 2nd amendment says.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Really ?
Is your right to free speach a by-product because of the existence of the 1st Amendment , or it simply doesn’t matter ?
May 26th, 2008 at 12:37 pmMCMetal Says:
Kinda’ tough to cling to someone just over 1 topic , even though that topic is extremely important , isn’t it ?
The reality is that there are a LOT of people who are one-issue voters. For them it could be guns, abortion, immigration, Roe v Wade . . . and they’re either so passionate about that single issue that they’re unwilling to look beyond it, or they just can’t be bothered. Unfortunately, a lot of American voters seem to fall into the latter category. They absorb whatever is drummed into their heads by their parents, their community and their tv stations and never examine any of it.
Sorry, must be feeling cynical this morning.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:37 pmAlejandro Says:
——————————————————————————–
I answered your question anyway.
I don’t have any credentials or loyalty to any political party.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
My life is now complete ……………….
May 26th, 2008 at 12:37 pmYes. I have a right to free speech no matter what some statement on a piece of paper says.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:40 pmgummitch Says:
——————————————————————————–
MCMetal Says:
Kinda’ tough to cling to someone just over 1 topic , even though that topic is extremely important , isn’t it ?
The reality is that there are a LOT of people who are one-issue voters. For them it could be guns, abortion, immigration, Roe v Wade . . . and they’re either so passionate about that single issue that they’re unwilling to look beyond it, or they just can’t be bothered. Unfortunately, a lot of American voters seem to fall into the latter category. They absorb whatever is drummed into their heads by their parents, their community and their tv stations and never examine any of it.
Sorry, must be feeling cynical this morning.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Don’t apologize ; there’s no need , as you posted nothing ‘wrong’.
But your assessment , while generally correct/spot on , seems to describe Americans that aren’t really ‘progressive” , which I believe was the original point……….
May 26th, 2008 at 12:41 pmAnyway , it is sad that someone would cling to 1 issue so desperately ; except if their “issue” was the entire Constitution of the US and/or the belief in a real functioning democracy as this country was originally intended to be………
Alejandro Says:
——————————————————————————–
Really ?
Is your right to free speach a by-product because of the existence of the 1st Amendment , or it simply doesn’t matter ?
Yes. I have a right to free speech no matter what some statement on a piece of paper says.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
According to whom ?
May 26th, 2008 at 12:42 pmVaVoter,
If you think working hard raises your taxes. If you the tax code is fair. Why don’t you talk to the richest man in the world, Warren Buffett? He has said the he pays a smaller percentage of his income in taxes than the secretary who works for him. His income is all from investments.
Take a look at the hedge fund managers who made billions last year and paid a smaller percentage than you or I do.
The problem is the tax code. Wealthy individuals have gotten special provisions put into the code to give themselves special breaks that you don’t get to use. My favorite example is the Oil Depreciation Allowance. Someone buys land to remove the minerals and sell them at a profit. They get a tax break because they removed the minerals to sell at a profit, because the value of the minerals is no longer there.
I have investments in various markets. I pay less on the income I get from my investments than I do for the work income that provides me the money to invest.
The tax system needs to remove many of the special breaks and treat income as income. Once we are all on the same level playing field then we can address changes.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:42 pmWhy can’t I own a simple switchblade or a suitcase nuke solely for self protection? I also feel I need some weaponized anthrax. I don’t understand why the 2nd ammendment advocates only get off on the bang bang thing. My well armed militia needs answers as well as castor beans
May 26th, 2008 at 12:43 pmAccording to me.
Don’t you also claim a right to free speech?
May 26th, 2008 at 12:45 pmDo you not think this is inherent in your being?
dbadass Says:
——————————————————————————–
Why can’t I own a simple switchblade or a suitcase nuke solely for self protection? I also feel I need some weaponized anthrax. I don’t understand why the 2nd ammendment advocates only get off on the bang bang thing. My well armed militia needs answers as well as castor beans
May 26th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
And I need my hallucinogens , weaponized in an aerosol formula , for my own public army ; though there are those who would claim (and probably rightfully so) , that I have been using them on myself……….
May 26th, 2008 at 12:47 pmGod this is retarded.
Believe it or not, possession of a suitcase nuke violates people’s rights.
I have a right to not be obliterated while you are protecting yourself.
Use some reason, please.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:47 pmThis retarded discussion is making me wonder if I’m hallucinating right now.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:49 pmAlejandro Says:
——————————————————————————–
MC Metal:
Alejandro Says:
——————————————————————————–
Really ?
Is your right to free speach a by-product because of the existence of the 1st Amendment , or it simply doesn’t matter ?
Yes. I have a right to free speech no matter what some statement on a piece of paper says.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
According to whom ?
According to me.
Don’t you also claim a right to free speech?
Do you not think this is inherent in your being?
May 26th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
No
I believe it is inherent in our thoughts , formed by the privilege of being born Americans , with the ability to be able to feel whatever way we choose because of the work and sacrifice(s) of others.
It is easy to claim something after others have paved the way ; would you claim/feel as you do , if you had been born during the Crusades or in King Arthur’s court ?
I highly doubt it………….
May 26th, 2008 at 12:51 pmAlejandro Says:
——————————————————————————–
Why can’t I own a simple switchblade or a suitcase nuke solely for self protection? I also feel I need some weaponized anthrax. I don’t understand why the 2nd ammendment advocates only get off on the bang bang thing. My well armed militia needs answers as well as castor beans
God this is retarded.
Believe it or not, possession of a suitcase nuke violates people’s rights.
I have a right to not be obliterated while you are protecting yourself.
Use some reason, please.
—
May 26th, 2008 at 12:53 pmSo I am good on the knife? What boundary line do you draw for say armor piercing bullets, pistol grip short shotguns, fully automatics? I am anxious to see the “reasoning”
Alejandro Says:
——————————————————————————–
And I need my hallucinogens , weaponized in an aerosol formula , for my own public army ; though there are those who would claim (and probably rightfully so) , that I have been using them on myself……….
This retarded discussion is making me wonder if I’m hallucinating right now.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Take a look at your asinine and off-the-wall assements/responses and try to claim you aren’t ………..
May 26th, 2008 at 12:54 pmAlejandro, my good man, we regularly engage in satire.
Assuming you know what that is, may I suggest you try to stay current with any given posters remarks.
If you are unfamiliar with this literary vehicle, Google it….
May 26th, 2008 at 12:56 pm– the real hard line theocrats like Gary North still appear on Lew Rockwell’s site, defined as “Libertarians,” because, if you define government in terms of the First Amendment, they are against it - they want Godly Rule. I know it sounds like playing with words, but that’s what they’re doing.
May 26th, 2008 at 1:00 pmIt’s really been interesting reading all the comments here. Not one real comment about what it really means to be a Libertarian.. Lots of comments from people demanding they get a piece of someone else’s pocketbook. Who cares if the Libertarians win the vote.. Right now it doesn’t matter. What matters is the future of the next generations.. A Libertarian will tell you he/she has no right to force you to pay taxes for anything that you don’t beleive in, other than what’s stipulated in the Constitution. Period. Voluntary association, contract law, hard work, advancement due to the merit of your hard work. These are the things important, and the things not one liberal will ever talk about, because they’ve got to be sorry for themselves and complain about how hard it is. Liberals want to make sure there’s always successful people around, you can bet on that, because they need someone else to be successful in order to tax the success away and put it in their own pocketbook.. Shame on you! If we don’t understand that it was the individual person, working hard to improve himself, that made our country the envy of the world, and the place, to this day millions of people dream of coming to, then we can give our kids a country of complainers, where all that matters is where the next handout is coming from. I’m so worried for my kids and grandkids.. I would suggest you all go read the Constitution, and put down Mein Kampf or whatever socialist/communist/fascist manifesto it is you worship.
May 26th, 2008 at 1:08 pmEthology tells us a different story. A story in which social beings work together for survival and the common good. The whole tale told above is rooted in a predetermined mindset. With the exception of a few friendless but wealthy (tangibles)those highest on my local food chain are all very altruistic “liberals”. This as all countries and societies was/were built on the collective desires of common shared good.
May 26th, 2008 at 1:15 pmRichard Case Says:
If we don’t understand that it was the individual person, working hard to improve himself, that made our country the envy of the world, and the place, to this day millions of people dream of coming to, then we can give our kids a country of complainers, where all that matters is where the next handout is coming from. I’m so worried for my kids and grandkids.. I would suggest you all go read the Constitution, and put down Mein Kampf or whatever socialist/communist/fascist manifesto it is you worship.
I’d suggest that you try reading a little history before you launch into another tirade like that. Because one of the things that has made this country the “envy of the world” (when it was) has been a robust economy and a high standard of living. It wasn’t the liberals that squandered our industrial success, it was the corporations and those who ran them. And it was the liberals who fought and bled and died so that you could enjoy a 40-hour work week, health care, retirement benefits, et al.
May 26th, 2008 at 1:19 pmNo doubt you are familiar with a book called The African Genesis, written by Robert Ardrey, a native son of Chicago, and, I may add, a true son of America. I quote to you from his penetrating work : ‘When I was a boy in Chicago, I attended the Sunday School of our neighbouring church. I recall our Wednesday night meetings with simplest nostalgia. We would meet in the basement. There would be a short prayer and a shorter benediction, then we would turn out the lights, and, in total darkness, hit each other with chairs.’ Mr. Ardrey’s early training tempered his character, to face and make known the truth about the origins and nature of mankind : ‘Not in innocence and not in Asia was mankind born. The home of our fathers was the African Highland. The most significant of all our gifts was the legacy bequeathed us by our immediate forebears, a race of terrestrial flesh-eating killer apes.’
“Raymond A. Dart of the University Of Johannesburg was the strident voice from South Africa that would prove the southern ape to be the human ancestor. Dart put forward the simple thesis that man emerged from the anthropoid background for only one reason : ‘because he was a killer. A rock, a stick, a heavy bone, was to our ancestral killer ape the margin of survival.’ (And now we sat in his office at the wrong end of the world). ‘Man’s original nature imposes itself on any human solution. The aggressive nature of the southern ape, suh, glowing with menace, fought your battles on the perilous veldts of Africa, 500,000 years ago. Had he not done so, you would not be living here, in this great city, in this great land of America, raising your happy families in peace and prosperity.’
from William Burroughs, “The Coming Of The Purple Better One”
May 26th, 2008 at 1:23 pmRichard Case Says:
——————————————————————————–
It’s really been interesting reading all the comments here. Not one real comment about what it really means to be a Libertarian.. Lots of comments from people demanding they get a piece of someone else’s pocketbook.
May 26th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
You believe those advocating for equal treatment in how taxes are levied upon all Americans is equivalent to “demanding they get a piece of someone else’s pocketbook” ?
Way to be observant there , Johnny Watcher……….
May 26th, 2008 at 1:25 pmAlejandro Says:
Any taxation on your INCOME is an infringement on your freedom.
Sorry, Alejandro, this is a bizarre application of logic. Ultimately, no matter what you make people pay taxes on, it can be construed as being on a tax on your income, for how else would you pay them if you do not have enough income? Like it or not, Libertarians must accept that we live in a Society, which means that we live as a collective group. We are stronger together than we are as individuals, and it is better for us, not simply as a Society, but as a species, to live and work together for the commond good of all of us. But in order for any of us to enjoy what you so endearingly refer to by that vague term “freedom”, we must give us some of our selfishness for the good of the whole. Our taxes pay for the infrastructure and underpinnings of the Society that allows people to gain wealth through the years and improve their own standards of living. Some people may think that they are “self-made men”, but that is a myth, for there is no guarantee that they would have succeeded if not for opur Liberal way of life in America.
Face facts, Libertarian friends, there comes a point where you just don’t need the excess money you have, and it may even be mroe than enough for your children and grandchildren to go through life without wanting for the basic needs of food, clothing and shelter. But Society does not owe your children and grandchildren any more than that. Anti-tax Libertarians make it sound as though we want every single dollar above the bare minimum needed to survive taken away in taxes. This is absurd. Thanks to Republican supporters like Grover Norquist (why does he support the Republican Party when they keep putting “big government”-types in the WH?), the excessively wealthy in this country (yes, there is such a thing as “excessively wealthy”) pay way less than their fair share of taxes, yet they continue to reap the benefits of a society that lets them get away with this.
Having said all of that, I interpret the Sixteenth Amendment (”Income taxes”) as taking away the right of the States to tax income and specifically granting it to the federal government. If anything, the States can no longer tax income, but the federal government can.
The right to keep and bear arms for self-protection is most definitely an individual right regardless of what the 2nd amendment says.
The Framers of the Constitution were very careful in how they worded things. The Second Amendment guarantees “the right of the people“, whereas the Fifth Amendment begins “No person shall be held…”. The Fifth protects the individual from the gonverment, while the Second protects “the people”. The correct interpretation of the Second (despite what the Libertarian party and the NRA say) is that because a well-regulated militia was necessary to the security of a free state (the Constitution did not allow for our government to maintain a standing army, but that’s a different abuse of power we should discuss another day), “the people” would have the right to decide which kind of arms their militia would have and where they would be kept should the need to arm the citizens arrive. How this got twisted into an individual right to own any kind of weapon you want is anybody’s guess. What it boils down to is that you have the right to join a well-regulated militia (as opposed to a bunch of guys who own guns and call themselves a “border patrol” or something), and to have a weapon for use in that duty, but beyond that, you have no individual Constitutional right to own guns.
May 26th, 2008 at 1:27 pmUSSR as an example of overarching governmental control being one and every unregulated economic scheme such as the South Sea Bubble, the 1929 stock market debacle to name but two serve as the distaff sides of the ‘free-market’ versus the regulated-market argument.
“Do you think an airline wants to lose a multimillion dollar plain (sic) [plane?] with hundreds of potential law suits. Not to mention the lost business from poor safety records.”
That would be a government-regulated safety record, as opposed to an industry-regulated safety record. Flying, for example, is ultimately at both the passengers’ and owners’ own risk. Over time a median of risk for both parties has been established and is accepted. But who controls the risk? Not the passengers, but the manufacturers and the operators. The ‘free market’ tests risk, but when the vendors reach the point where they exclusively determine the risks on their own terms, and are able to define the product, service and market according to their own needs, then the market is forced to accept or deny the risks involved. In the imagined “free market” risk is equally shared, in reality risk falls on one party or another and revolves around who has control of the risk involved.
‘Free-market’ proponents love to claim the onus of risk in capital investment and effort, but then invariably claim the bulk of the risk lies with the individual consumer—a particularly disingenuous argument when the consumer’s choice is based only on the risk-information presented by the service provider which ‘coincidentally’ invests more in good publicity than good product.
When challenged in fact or theoretically (with much historical evidence as counterpoint) the ‘free-marketeer’ then invokes a special clause that a truly “free market” (which only THEY can determine) will absolve them of all contrary claims, despite the fact that the significant progression they have made towards their goal of zero regulation has in fact led to increased risk for the consumer and citizen–BUT on the other hand greater short-term profits for investors.
I’m afraid you have adopted an absolutist Manichaean viewpoint (for whatever reason) about society, government and economics that thousands of years of reliable history simply does not support.
May 26th, 2008 at 1:27 pmRaymond Dart and many others would most likely had differing views had the bonobo been the studied ape rather than the chimp. The preconception of man’s nature as inherently violent may be a mix of Darwinian and Capitalist thought with a dash of colonialism and inherent racism
May 26th, 2008 at 1:30 pmdbadass Says:
Raymond Dart and many others would most likely had differing views had the bonobo been the studied ape rather than the chimp. The preconception of man’s nature as inherently violent may be a mix of Darwinian and Capitalist thought with a dash of colonialism and inherent racism
Apparently, Ardrey got off on this tangent while covering the extremely violent Mau Mau uprising in Kenya, and the horrific stories told about them by white residents. His theory subsequently colored every piece of evidence, every bashed-in ape skull, that he saw when first observing fossils of early humans.
May 26th, 2008 at 1:41 pmWayne.
I haven’t considered state versus federal taxation on income—that’s an interesting point.
I think I can say that Alejandro’s remark that “Any taxation on your INCOME is an infringement on your freedom” is pure pablum—a “sound bite” or “talking-point”.
I agree that “you have no individual Constitutional right to own guns” but as that is the way it has been ‘interpreted’ (through lobbying), I am tempted to take advantage of the apparently codified interpretation whilst I still may—given the state of things today and the state of things that may well come.
Cheers!
May 26th, 2008 at 1:47 pm“The preconception of man’s nature as inherently violent may be a mix of Darwinian and Capitalist thought with a dash of colonialism and inherent racism…” dbadass
May 26th, 2008 at 1:48 pmLOL
I found amusing the Vatican Astronomer’s recent pronouncement that there most likely is extra-terrestrial life, some of which may be born without original sin….
LOL
I don’t think Burroughs was actually quoting Ardrey, I think he was just using him as a jumping off point for his routine. But I haven’t read Ardrey. Don’t want to either. I love “The aggressive nature of the southern ape, suh, glowing with menace.” That’s classic.
May 26th, 2008 at 1:52 pm“I don’t think Burroughs was actually quoting Ardrey, I think he was just using him as a jumping off point for his routine. But I haven’t read Ardrey. Don’t want to either.”
Rowing Jerkily
It’s doubtful you would appreciate Kipling’s satire of the colonialists disdain for differences either.
May 26th, 2008 at 1:58 pmAlejandro Says:
Yeah, libertarians want women to become second class citizens. Uh huh.
Hello, idiot. The Libertarians want to make abortion illegal. Controlling a woman’s reproduction is a sure way to make her a second class citizen, assh*le.
May 26th, 2008 at 2:17 pmYet another KKK buddy joins the Libertarian cause now that Ron Paul jumped ship.
May 26th, 2008 at 2:20 pmRowing Jerkily
It’s doubtful you would appreciate Kipling’s satire of the colonialists disdain for differences either.
– if you’re too busy making infantile puns on my name to actually cite anything, then I probably won’t.
May 26th, 2008 at 2:23 pmBob: I’m on a mission is to Barr-Beque GOP party.
May 26th, 2008 at 2:42 pmI did notice someone using that redundant term “liberal” earlier in the thread. It seems to continue to serve as an insult, because the people on the receiving end haven’t yet figured out that there is nothing in classical liberalism that they need to hang onto, and if there was, it wouldn’t be the job of progressives to hang onto it, anyway. What in its day was liberalism is now better described, in my opinion, as Lockean conservatism. That’s my own phrase for it, and it seems to fit better than “libertarian.”
May 26th, 2008 at 2:51 pmFor Row on Beserkedly:
The White Man’s Burden
Take up the White Man’s burden–
Send forth the best ye breed–
Go bind your sons to exile
To serve your captives’ need;
To wait in heavy harness,
On fluttered folk and wild–
Your new-caught, sullen peoples,
Half-devil and half-child.
Take up the White Man’s burden–
In patience to abide,
To veil the threat of terror
And check the show of pride;
By open speech and simple,
An hundred times made plain
To seek another’s profit,
And work another’s gain.
Take up the White Man’s burden–
The savage wars of peace–
Fill full the mouth of Famine
And bid the sickness cease;
And when your goal is nearest
The end for others sought,
Watch sloth and heathen Folly
Bring all your hopes to naught.
Take up the White Man’s burden–
No tawdry rule of kings,
But toil of serf and sweeper–
The tale of common things.
The ports ye shall not enter,
The roads ye shall not tread,
Go make them with your living,
And mark them with your dead.
Take up the White Man’s burden–
And reap his old reward:
The blame of those ye better,
The hate of those ye guard–
The cry of hosts ye humour
(Ah, slowly!) toward the light
“Why brought he us from bondage,
Our loved Egyptian night?”
Take up the White Man’s burden–
Ye dare not stoop to less–
Nor call too loud on Freedom
To cloak your weariness;
By all ye cry or whisper,
By all ye leave or do,
The silent, sullen peoples
Shall weigh your gods and you.
Take up the White Man’s burden–
Have done with childish days–
The lightly proferred laurel,
The easy, ungrudged praise.
Comes now, to search your manhood
Through all the thankless years
Cold, edged with dear-bought wisdom,
The judgment of your peers.
Rudyard Kipling
This writing has considerable relevance to Memorial Day, I should say.
May 26th, 2008 at 3:07 pmMCMetal Says:
And that little ‘ditty’ reveals the hypocritcial nature of these “Libertarians” , who , like you state later in your post , are nothing but Repubs in a different lining.
Is the tag “Libertarian” indicative of those all about/for individual liberties for all Americans ?
And what ? Gays and lesbians aren’t Americans ?
What a crock of shit ………….
On top of that, they are isolationists. many of them hate Al Gore’s guts, and say he is worse than George Bush. I think Libertarians in general are insane, and this “arm everyone” is drastic to say the least. Mike Malloy is a flaming liberal/Progressive, yet he owns guns. In fact, one could have weapons in their house to protect family, and still be a Progressive, even though that is indicative of the paranoid society we live in now.
The best one yet is “Environmentalists are causing high oil prices because of punishing oil companies to adhere to non-pollution rules”.
May 26th, 2008 at 7:14 pmone could have weapons in their house to protect family,
My dog does a much better job of protecting my family (just a Labrador) and doesn’t accidentally kill anyone EVER.
May 26th, 2008 at 9:29 pm“…(just a Labrador) and doesn’t accidentally kill anyone EVER.”
How close does it come?
May 26th, 2008 at 9:41 pmwhere’s my switchblade?
May 26th, 2008 at 10:59 pmLabradors are easy, just bring a squeaky toy duck, toss, and say “Fetch”…
May 26th, 2008 at 11:15 pmfriends for life…
May 26th, 2008 at 11:15 pmyou’ll toss my switchblade from my cold dead hands. Unless of course I have already swapped it for a Labrador
May 26th, 2008 at 11:19 pmKeep the blade.
May 26th, 2008 at 11:22 pmLabradors quickly become confused with actual family members.
Now that what’s his name mentioned it, look at the picture of Bob Barr at the top of the post and tell me he doesn’t have that “Labrador” look about him…..
May 26th, 2008 at 11:24 pmThat wasn’t written as satire, nebbish war. It was written seriously.
May 27th, 2008 at 12:18 amnutty whore, you may read as follows at wikipedia:
Kipling was now a famous man, and in the previous two or three years, had increasingly been making political pronouncements in his writings. He had also begun work on two poems, Recessional (1897) and The White Man’s Burden (1899) which were to create controversy when published. Regarded by some as anthems for enlightened and duty-bound empire-building (that captured the mood of the Victorian age), the poems equally were regarded by others as propaganda for brazenfaced imperialism and its attendant racial attitudes; still others saw irony in the poems and warnings of the perils of empire.
see Gilmour, David. 2002. The Long Recessional: The Imperial Life of Rudyard Kipling, Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, New York.
May 27th, 2008 at 12:24 amLibertarians sure have changed. Now they have a guy who believes that the government should meddle in peoples private sex lives, and who not only thinks marijuana should be illegal, but that people shouldn’t even be allowed to vote on the question!
Or maybe they just like a guy who changes his positions whenever he thinks he can get some political advantage. Ideological convictions are SOOO last century!
May 27th, 2008 at 12:38 amPardon me while I yawn.
May 27th, 2008 at 12:47 amMe, I just like Captains Couragous.
May 27th, 2008 at 12:50 amIf I remember correctly, Barr was one of the first Republicans to get in line to hump Bill Clinton’s leg during Monica-gate. Them Republicans is classy people.
May 27th, 2008 at 3:00 amClinton has taken Kentucky and Obama is right there in Oregon.
The Democratic race for nomination is still very much alive – and most likely to be decided by superdelegates – as CNN points out clearly
http://edition.cnn.com/ 2008/ POLITICS/ 05/ 20/ primary.wrap/ index.html
If you’re tired of waiting around for those super delegates to make a decision already, go to LobbyDelegates.com and push them to support Clinton or Obama
If you haven’t done so yet, please write a message to each of your state’s superdelegates at http://www.lobbydelegates.com
Obama Supporters:
Sending a note to current Obama supporters lets them know it’s appreciated, sending a note to current Clinton supporters can hopefully sway them to change their vote to Obama, and sending a note to the uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Obama. It’s that easy…
Clinton Supporters too …. !
It takes a moment, but what’s a few minutes now worth to get Clinton in office?! Those are really worth !
Sending a note to current Clinton supporters lets them know it’s appreciated, sending a note to current Obama supporters can hopefully sway them to change their vote to Clinton, and sending a note to the uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Clinton. It’s that easy…
May 27th, 2008 at 6:40 am