While Bob Barr didn’t want to be seen “with people like [Cynthia] McKinney,” Boston Tea Party presidential candidate Charles Jay is more than happy to endorse the Campaign for Liberty’s four-point platform:
“The statement calls for four things that all freedom-loving Americans should be able to agree on,” says Jay. “A sane foreign policy, seizing back our right to privacy, ending government’s ruinous borrow-and-spend addiction, and prying America from the grip of a debased fiat currency.”
Jay, who will be on the ballot in just four states, says he understands why he wasn’t invited to share the stage with Ron Paul, but adds, “had I been invited, I’d not have embarrassed my party, and the libertarian movement, by ducking out on that commitment to attend at the last minute, insulting Congresswoman McKinney as an excuse, and attempting to upstage the event by publicly hectoring Ron Paul to serve as my running mate.”
23 responses so far ↓
1 John P Slevin // Sep 10, 2008 at 4:32 pm
You mean “candidate” Jay will sign on to Paul’s statement after Bob Barr, don’t you?
Yet another intentionally misleading article title by IPR’s resident expert in the lying article title.
2 Ross Levin // Sep 10, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Damn! How did this happen? Look at the story above this one.
3 Ross Levin // Sep 10, 2008 at 4:34 pm
You can delete it if you want.
4 G.E. // Sep 10, 2008 at 4:36 pm
WTF is “misleading” about the article?
You Barr people have been exposed.
5 Ross Levin // Sep 10, 2008 at 4:36 pm
And John P. Slevin leads in misleading comments. The word “candidate” wasn’t in the title. And your agenda shouldn’t make it into our news, just as much as our agenda shouldn’t make it in.
Don’t be mad that we’re fulfilling our duty and challenging Barr.
6 G.E. // Sep 10, 2008 at 4:37 pm
Sorry, Ross.
I’m about done for the day, though.
7 Ross Levin // Sep 10, 2008 at 4:51 pm
No harm done.
8 Mike Gillis // Sep 10, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Barr insulted McKinney? What did he say?
9 Fred Church Ortiz // Sep 10, 2008 at 5:04 pm
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/09/barr-didnt-want-to-be-on-stage-with-people-like-mckinney/
10 John P Slevin // Sep 10, 2008 at 6:53 pm
Some of us are not “Barr people” or Ruwart people, nor are we people who treat the joke of six or seven people (Boston Tea Party) as a serious political endeavor—as an example of why it is a joke is the very simple fact that in say, California, there are not as many people who ever heard of the BTP as it takes to fill a slate of electors.
G.E., I suggest rather than writing misleading articles here you get out and support some of those Mich candidates you’ve threatened not to support…
After all, your threat not to support them carries more weight if it has been preceded by actual support.
And, you can phrase your threat to those candidates more clearly: “I, the candidate, promise never to disagree with G.E. Smith about anything. If elected, I won’t do a damn thing before checking with G.E. Smith.”
I don’t disagree with anyone who says Barr’s campaign totally mishandled this matter…that is obvious. As obvious is that the writing here often seems to be created by the same kind of dunderheads who so mishandled Barr’s situation.
Then there is the attention paid to people like Mr. Kokesh…how many people does his “support” carry? Who really gives a damn what he has to say?
There is the very simple point that Ron Paul’s press conference probably didn’t sway a single voter from supporting Obama/McCain.
Paul’s current Campaign for Liberty hopefully will, someday, become effective at positive change.
Today was a wash for liberty. Paul wasted his time and Barr blew it.
11 Spence // Sep 10, 2008 at 6:57 pm
This is precisely why the world is not ready for anarchy yet. Paul goes off and says “here, do whatever you like” with no clear suggestion; nothing happens. Barr takes the corporatist approach “here, let me do it”, still fails. I’ll thank Paul for giving weight to several of my new found convictions over the past few years, but I’m increasingly starting to get annoyed with these little announcements he stops the press for.
12 G.E. // Sep 10, 2008 at 9:24 pm
JPS – You can ask Scotty Boman how much I’ve supported local Michigan candidates. And there’s absolutely NOTHING misleading about this article. You are a sycophant for the Barr campaign and want every story to reflect that murderous thug in the most positive light imaginable: START YOUR OWN BLOG.
13 Fred Church Ortiz // Sep 10, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Then there is the attention paid to people like Mr. Kokesh…how many people does his “support†carry? Who really gives a damn what he has to say?
At least 12,000 Ron Paul supporters that heard him speak at the R4R.
14 Trent Hill // Sep 10, 2008 at 10:43 pm
Kokesh carries alot of weight,especially with the Veterans for Peace, Iraq Veterans Against War, and Ron Paul supporters. He has done much to impress all three groups.
15 Trent Hill // Sep 10, 2008 at 10:44 pm
Fred,
84,000 people watched the Rally via the Campaign for Liberty’s website feed.
16 Mike Theodore // Sep 10, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Plus those that saw the speeches on Youtube.
17 G.E. // Sep 10, 2008 at 10:46 pm
There were some good people who accepted Barr’s nomination. Some even continued to support him after the Helms release; after the Fannie/Freddie bailout; after the global warming scam flip flop; after suing a private church…. But now, no one with any human decency supports this cretin, so there’s no point in reasoning with the criminal-minded individuals who continue to shill for him.
18 Fred Church Ortiz // Sep 10, 2008 at 10:52 pm
Trent & Mike make valid points.
I can guarantee you anyone that was actually there for Kokesh’s speech would’ve been turned by his actions today in an instant – he had the crowd eating out of his hand. The man’s got weight, and I’m sure we’ll be seeing a lot more of him.
19 Thomas L. Knapp // Sep 11, 2008 at 12:39 am
Quoth the unpleasant and ignorant Mr. Slevin:
“Some of us are not ‘Barr people’ or Ruwart people, nor are we people who treat the joke of six or seven people (Boston Tea Party) as a serious political endeavor—as an example of why it is a joke is the very simple fact that in say, California, there are not as many people who ever heard of the BTP as it takes to fill a slate of electors.”
A slate of electors for California would be 55 people. Given the fact that our California affiliate has at least 25 active members in its online group, I’d say it’s likely that more than 55 Californians have at least heard of it. I guess we’ll find out how many have heard of, or hear of, the BTP in California when we start registering voters there for ballot access in 2010, 2012 and beyond.
A slate of electors for Florida is 27 — we turned in 46, including alternates. So in one state alone, call it your hypothetical six or seven, six or seven times over, not just to the point of joining the BTP, not just to the point of registering as BTP voters, but to the point of agreeing to serve as BTP presidential electors.
While the BTP is obviously not yet a large party, its national membership as defined in individuals voluntarily certifying that they desire to be members and support our platform is now in excess of 300. That’s more than the LP had for its first presidential election, it doesn’t count those who have chosen to belong to state affiliates but not the national organization … and I rather suspect we’ll poll more votes in November than the LP’s 1972 ticket did, too.
When and if you’re prepared to get your facts straight, or even get the facts at all, I’ll treat your opinion as worthy of consideration. Until then, you’re an ignorant troll with the cyber-equivalent of chronic halitosis.
20 JimDavidson // Sep 13, 2008 at 11:03 pm
Three hundred men proved to be instrumental in holding the pass at Thermopylae about 2500 years ago when freedom in Greece was threatened by the imperial ambitions of Persia.
The Boston Tea Party now has three hundred members at our national site, and over 400 in our biggest Facebook group. We have eleven state affiliates, our first ever presidential candidate on the ballot in three states (the LP managed 2 states in their first outing in 1972), nine other state groups in various stages of formation, and around 20 candidates endorsed or nominated by our party.
My goal is to have 500 members by our convention this 24th of October. I think it won’t be possible to have state affiliates in all the states, but my goal is to form affiliate groups for each state by then, as well.
Obviously we aren’t just six or seven people, John P. Slevin. Now that you know it, if you say it again, you would be a liar.
Rather than finding things to hate about us, why not look at what we are doing for LP candidates. We’ve issued press releases for many LP candidates who happen to agree with our smaller government platform. Several have received campaign contributions as a result of our support.
You don’t have to like us. In fact, if you are a liar and a hater, it might be better if you resent us. But, we’re here. Get used to us.
21 VTV // Sep 13, 2008 at 11:14 pm
Yeah… G.E. Should get out and support local candidates. We need help now that I have to play damage control every time I talk to a Ron Paul supporter about my campaign. “Your not like that Barr guy are you?”.
Seriously. Ron Paul could of been something great for the LP in this election cycle, and that all got flushed down the toilet. Thanks to Barr.
22 G.E. // Sep 13, 2008 at 11:14 pm
Make it 301, Jim.
The LNC’s cowardliness in failing to even bring a motion to remove Barr was the last straw. When there aren’t even two people on the LNC willing to step up and represent their constituents, I think it’s clear the LP isn’t worth fighting for anymore. I know the motion would not have passed — but it, in itself, would have been the biggest reprimand imaginable. Now the story’s so old, any action to heal the rift between the C4L and LP will be laughable. Bob Barr and the criminal faction that controls the LNC have sunk the LP.
23 JimDavidson // Sep 13, 2008 at 11:54 pm
Welcome to the party, GE!
Leave a Comment