After failing to receive enough tokens to enter tonight’s debate, Daniel Imperato publicly endorsed Bob Barr. Barr accepted.
If Barr had attended last night’s “unofficial and all-inclusive” debate, he would have known that Imperato claims to have been in business with the bin-Laden family. He also claims to know George W. Bush very well. When questioned about any economic issue, Imperato discusses how the Jewish control of the financial system has led to Arab resentment.
Bob Barr heartily accepted Imperato’s endorsement, and features it prominently on his campaign Web site.
11 responses so far ↓
1 OH4Phillies // May 24, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Also of note on Barr’s blog post: Smith will be giving a nomination speech but not be in the debate.
Check out Jingozian’s intro video on his website:
http://www.resetamerica.com/message2libertarians/index.html
2 OH4Phillies // May 24, 2008 at 4:23 pm
But I digress. I can’t imagine this will help Barr among Libertarians. How much does he actually know/care about his opponents?
3 gregsarnowski // May 24, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Does the pope’s endorsement transfer over as well?
4 Andy Craig // May 24, 2008 at 5:28 pm
“How much does he actually know/care about his opponents?”
He seems to me like one of the few candidates NOT essentially wanting to purge everyone who disagrees with him. Root and Gravel have made very clear their loathing for their libertarian critics. Barr has probably done more than any other candidate to put forward a conciliatory face at the convention. In other words, he’s one of the few people there actually more interested in fighting the general election than fighting other Libertarians.
As for Imperato, even if he is a bit crazy, I see no reason for Barr to have snubbed him. It’s not like he’s going to be parading him around in the general campaign or anything.
One final thing- it’s a bit dishonest to be seriously using the bin-Laden thing against him. It’s a well-known fact that the bin-Laden “family” (clan is more accurate) A) is ridiculously numerous and wealthy in Saudi Arabia, and B) disowned Osama years ago. They’re Wahhabis, but they’re not terrorists.
5 OH4Phillies // May 24, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Alright. Thanks for the info! I wish I could be there.
6 Austin Cassidy // May 24, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Maybe he’ll seek the VP nod…
Barr/Imperato anyone?
7 Steve Perkins // May 24, 2008 at 7:02 pm
Imperato is… well, Imperato. However, had Barr snubbed him, the same people criticizing him now would have been criticizing him for acting “better” than lower-tier candidates.
8 G.E. // May 24, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Um, no. No one would have criticized Barr for rejecting Imperato.
9 Steve Perkins // May 24, 2008 at 7:38 pm
You just suggested in the lobby that Imperato isn’t a “real libertarian”, so therefore Barr isn’t a “real libertarian” because he didn’t reject him.
By that logic, you wouldn’t be a “real libertarian” either… because you lead and moderated a libertarian debate last night to which Imperato was invited. Why no shame on the organizers for not rejecting Imperato yesterday?
10 G.E. // May 25, 2008 at 1:49 am
No, no, no. Barr’s libertarianism isn’t in question because of accepting/rejecting Imperato, and I never suggested that (or intended to). It’s not unlibertarian to accept a non-libertarian’s endorsement, nor to reject a libertarian’s. It has no impact on one’s libertarianism.
Barr’s acceptance of Imperato’s endorsement — and his highlighting of it — shows tremendously bad political wisdom. Imperato is a nutcase, Steve. If Barr is the nominee, Imperato is going to be hounding him nonstop, acting as if he has something to offer.
11 Steve Perkins // May 25, 2008 at 1:54 am
Fair enough, G.E. However, if Imperato wasn’t able to garner attention from an LP crowd at an LP convention, I highly doubt that he could garner attention from the general public during a fall election cycle. If he leaves voicemail for Barr, so be it.
Leave a Comment