On its website, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution says that in a recent interview, Green presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney discussed Libertarian Bob Barr, another former representative from Georgia. McKinney said, “The only thing I would say about Bob is that it’s interesting that Georgia is so well-represented in the non-major party lineup. Of course, I worked in the Congress for a long time with Bob Barr and, in fact, members of the Libertarian Party have reached out to me on several occasions this year and I expect there will be more mutual reaching.” Asked if she and Barr “might actually be working together on some issues,” McKinney replied, “I didn’t say that. … Where there is the possibility of having discussions, then I wouldn’t turn down discussions. There’s nothing afoot.”
McKinney talks about Barr
July 23rd, 2008 · 41 Comments
Filed Under: Green Party · Libertarian Party
41 responses so far ↓
1 Robert Milnes // Jul 24, 2008 at 1:48 am
These 2 should be talking about a fusion ticket & coordinating the 40% inclusive progressive/libertarian vote downticket. & Either a green OR libertarian on ALL ballots. & 100% ballot access. But “There’s nothing afoot”.
2 Mike Theodore // Jul 24, 2008 at 1:51 am
I’d expect her to be more hostile to him.
3 Peter Orvetti // Jul 24, 2008 at 2:46 am
Robert,
I’m just curious, and mean the following as sincere inquiries, not as leading questions:
Do you believe you will be elected president this year? If not, how many votes do you think you will receive? Have you arranged to appear on the ballot in any state(s)?
4 Mike Theodore // Jul 24, 2008 at 2:50 am
Let me add to that Peter, if I may. Even Colorado, where (from what I hear) you barely have to do anything to get on the ballot?
If you come out while I’m here, I’ll let you hitch a tent in my mom’s front yard. Just don’t talk to the lady folk.
5 Peter Orvetti // Jul 24, 2008 at 3:46 am
If I recall, you need the names of nine electors and $500 to get on the Colorado ballot. Apparently there will be 18 tickets on the ballot there this year. I’m not sure which states are easier, if any.
6 Mike Theodore // Jul 24, 2008 at 3:49 am
Electors, as in for the Electoral College?
If so, I know my brother out here would gladly do it just for laughs. I know I would.
7 Robert Milnes // Jul 24, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Peter Orvetti, I kind of pretty much lost hope when Tom Knapp, with whom I’d corresponded extensively mostly about the Progressive Alliance & strategy, all of a sudden backed Kubby instead of me. He would have made an ideal campaign manager-for me. Then my first choice for vp Dr. KK (Karen Kwiatkowski) said no-not just to me but the whole thing this cycle. Things went downhill from there for me, personally & campaign. Clearly Milnes/Kwiatkowski would be the best ticket for America, but it just isn’t happening. I’ll stay in for a while longer as an Independent, but actually I’ll be lucky to salvage 1/2 the gold season in the National Forest. June1-Oct. 15. & from there help my disabled friend in CA get squared away. So, no, I do not expect to be elected president this year.
8 Robert Milnes // Jul 24, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Mike Theodore, thank you for the invitation. But no. I’d rather go the rest of the way across to CA & pan gold than waste much more of my time trying to talk to the American people from your mom’s front yard when even the so called radicals & revolutionaries don’t get it.
9 Robert Milnes // Jul 24, 2008 at 7:18 pm
By the way, Titanic had several bilge pumps steam powered.
10 Robert Milnes // Jul 24, 2008 at 7:22 pm
& then when Knapp et al went off on the BTP tangent, further splitting the vote, I figured the situation was pretty grim.
11 Robert Milnes // Jul 24, 2008 at 7:22 pm
I’m not on any ballots & do not care anymore.
12 Mike Theodore // Jul 24, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Robert, if you go back to the original thread and read what I said, the pumps were useless.
I don’t want to bother everyone else with this.
13 Robert Milnes // Jul 24, 2008 at 7:47 pm
Well, I’m sorry. You might just be wrong. & how old are you, Oh Wise One?
14 Robert Milnes // Jul 24, 2008 at 8:00 pm
you biffed about how wrong I was because of your experience bumbling on your little boat & saying how the bilge pumps didn’t matter because even if Titanic had them they were probably hand cranked. Kind of like a Jack-in-the-Box.
15 Robert Milnes // Jul 24, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Kind of like a Jack-in-the-Box? A question. I do not mean to imply you said that.
16 Robert Milnes // Jul 24, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Just because you wrote what you wrote does not necessarily make it true or accurate.
17 Mike Theodore // Jul 24, 2008 at 8:06 pm
16, Grand Pompa of Common Sense. Now I’ve been around boats most of my life and when I was younger I studied the Titanic and the sinking.
You got me started again on it, and I was going through some information this morning. Captain Smith did in fact start the pumps. With water in 5 compartments, and the people who stayed behind to man them drowning, nothing could have been done.
It’s not like he said “oh, the ship is sinking”, then stop the pumps. They just couldn’t get water out of compartments with big holes in the side!
18 Mike Theodore // Jul 24, 2008 at 8:07 pm
BTW, Theodore’s don’t bumble, we bamble!
19 Robert Milnes // Jul 24, 2008 at 8:07 pm
No bother. Loser talks about loser. Don’t worry about it.
20 Robert Milnes // Jul 24, 2008 at 8:12 pm
What makes you say there was big holes in the sides? Did it hit one on one side then hit another on the other side? More than 2? Actually a more recent hypothesis is that the rivets were not of top quality & were loosened upon impact.
21 Robert Milnes // Jul 24, 2008 at 8:14 pm
Evidently the ship was ordered to stop dead in the water. Perhaps the pumps would operate more efficiently if the ship were operating at full steam.
22 Mike Theodore // Jul 24, 2008 at 8:19 pm
Bad choice of wording. The impact threw water into 5 compartments on the starboard side. I’ve heard something about the rivets, but I never looked into that. First Officer Murdoch ordered the ship to stop once they saw the iceberg. Of course, it couldn’t stop in time.
Once it did stop, it was certain it would sink. If the ship went forward, the water would have sprayed back into the ship instead of a gradual leak. The water would flow over the compartment doors, and the pumps would just be pumping out water that kept coming in.
23 Peter Orvetti // Jul 24, 2008 at 10:17 pm
When did the kid from “Growing Pains” show up on deck?
24 Mike Theodore // Jul 24, 2008 at 10:22 pm
Ummm….
What?
25 Fred Church Ortiz // Jul 24, 2008 at 10:40 pm
Don’t you mean the A-Team? Easy to get those two confused.
26 Mike Theodore // Jul 24, 2008 at 10:49 pm
Oh, wasn’t that Murdock, not Murdoch?
27 Robert Milnes // Jul 25, 2008 at 2:05 am
I can’t even keep the Titanic from sinking after hitting the iceberg/keep the GP & LP from losing after nominating McKinney & Barr, without critics & detractors changing the subject.
28 Robert Milnes // Jul 25, 2008 at 2:25 am
Let’s consult some contemporary 1912 navigation charts & figure where the nearest land (beach), shallows, shoals or sandbars are to Titanic’s present location. Could it have made it there at full steam? i.e. is it too late for the gp & lp to form a fusion ticket & get on almost all ballots?
29 Robert Milnes // Jul 25, 2008 at 2:32 am
Interesting year 1912.
30 Mike Theodore // Jul 25, 2008 at 2:38 am
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d1/Titanicmap2.png
Ships were slower then. Especially when they were filling up with thousands of gallons of water. Water is heavy, if you haven’t noticed.
You see the next red line in front of where the ship sinks (in the picture)? I don’t think the ship could have gotten that far in 2 1/2 hours without a hole in starboard.
31 Robert Milnes // Jul 25, 2008 at 3:08 am
@450 miles to NYC. @375 to Newfoundland. @25 mph max. speed. There was no hole! Buckling of the hull & riveted plates (watertight seal) & bulkhead damage.
32 Mike Theodore // Jul 25, 2008 at 3:14 am
Hole is a relative term.
Ship |||| Atlantic Ocean
1 2 3
Something went wrong with 2, allowing 3 to flow into 1. Call it what you wish, but that’s about the size of it.
33 Mike Theodore // Jul 25, 2008 at 3:14 am
The numbers were supposed to be under the designated area.
34 Robert Milnes // Jul 25, 2008 at 3:16 am
At what rate was water leaking in v. rate pumped out? + how much effect by repair crews? & bucket brigades. + any closer land or shallows/sandbars? Beach that boat!
35 Robert Milnes // Jul 25, 2008 at 3:31 am
Run it aground! The closer to Newfoundland the closer to the continental shelf. Draft 34′6′. http://www.titanic-nautical.com/titanic-facts.php
36 Mike Theodore // Jul 25, 2008 at 3:32 am
Robert, there were no ratios recorded to my knowledge of the amount pumped out. Because it is common knowledge that they were useless. They were running and it didn’t do anything. With 5 compartments filled with water, there was no way the ship couldn’t have gone down.
Repair crews? Should they have tried to seal it? Even though the 5 compartments were filled almost immediately? Even if they had modern day scuba gear, due to the fact that the water was seeping above the doors, the pressure of the entering water would have pinned them.
Your bucket brigades would have put more souls in the way of the water. Even if all the passengers worked at it, they wouldn’t be able to scoop all the water out for the few days required to get to land. Note that at that point, there was no way to organize that many passengers.
Robert, that water is deep. Really, really deep. There weren’t any hills, or shoals, or islands. Just miles and miles below the surface.
37 Mike Theodore // Jul 25, 2008 at 3:34 am
Just because it was the closest land mass, doesn’t make it a stones throw away. You underestimate the magnitude of Oceans.
38 Robert Milnes // Jul 25, 2008 at 4:27 am
I KNEW IT! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sable_Island This should have been known by the Titanic officers.
39 Robert Milnes // Jul 25, 2008 at 4:31 am
Wikipedia: Sable Island. I tried to put up link but comment didn’t post. Off the coast of Newfoundland.
40 Robert Milnes // Jul 25, 2008 at 4:38 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sable_Island
41 Mike Theodore // Jul 25, 2008 at 4:50 am
If you go on Wikimapia, it shows you where the ship sank. Now using basic measuring technology (ruler), Sable Island was 600 miles away from the sink site.
There is no way IN HELL that the Titanic could have reached 20 miles, nonetheless 600.
You must log in to post a comment.