From an email from from Barr campaign manager Russell Verney:
When joining the campaign, I told Bob that I would require a few things for him.
First, I needed a campaign book that was extensive and made clear his libertarian values and how those solutions would put America back on the right track.
That book, Lessons in Liberty, will be available shortly on our web site.
I also asked Bob to put together another, personal book that explained how his beliefs have evolved over the years. I knew that I was asking for quite a bit but Bob delivered despite being consistently on the campaign trail since May.
Today, Bob’s personal book, Patriot Nation, was released and is available at www.thepatriotnation.com
56 responses so far ↓
1 bsharitt // Sep 30, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Ah, that explains Barr’s run.
While I’ll probably vote for Barr to support the Libertarian ticket, I don’t think this is the guy I want to read his book and get advise on libertarian ideas.
2 WinstonSmith // Sep 30, 2008 at 10:45 pm
This should be a good book. A Libertarian perspective from someone who has actually been in Washington.
This could very much have the same message as Ron Paul’s book. Hopefully people don’t dismiss it due to their bias against the author.
3 Hugh Jass // Sep 30, 2008 at 10:58 pm
I would have thought he would have wrote an autobiography, called If I Did It: Confessions of the Killer of the Libertarian Party
4 paulie cannoli // Sep 30, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Next up, a book by Russ V.:
Oops, I did it again: two parties down, who’s next?
5 G.E. // Sep 30, 2008 at 11:24 pm
The Five Entities Bob Barr Meets When He Goes to Heaven:
1. The Libertarian Party (R.I.P.)
2. Marriage #1
3. Marriage #2
4. The medical-marijuana patients he murdered
5. The baby he paid to have butchered in his wife’s womb
6 Trent Hill // Sep 30, 2008 at 11:28 pm
GE,
Don’t sugar coat it, tell us what you REALLY think about Bob Barr.
7 WinstonSmith // Sep 30, 2008 at 11:30 pm
I would have thought he would have wrote an autobiography, called If I Did It: Confessions of the Killer of the Libertarian Party
Funny, the party seems to be doing fine to me. Just because the anarchists pouted away when their kiddie porn candidate didn’t get nominated doesn’t mean the party is dying.
8 paulie cannoli // Sep 30, 2008 at 11:33 pm
Winston,
Except that the kiddie porn candidate did get nominated.
Memory hole time!
9 WinstonSmith // Sep 30, 2008 at 11:36 pm
A random blog. Convincing.
10 Hugh Jass // Sep 30, 2008 at 11:37 pm
Winston,
Bob Barr has managed to both alienate his natural base of voters (Ron Paul supporters) and prove himself devoid of any libertarian principle (supporting Al Gore and Jesse Helms, supporting the Fannie-Freddie bailout, supporting the criminilization of heroin, repealing only “parts” of the PATRIOT Act, fighting drug wars in Latin America, etc.)
11 paulie cannoli // Sep 30, 2008 at 11:41 pm
Winston,
Here you go, straight from the horse’s ass…I mean, mouth:
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/articles/41/us-justice-has-no-business-in-georgias-genarlow-wilson-case/
12 WinstonSmith // Sep 30, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Hugh Jass,
Paul supporters are not a natural base of support. His base was Dems, Republicans, Libertarians, Constitutionalists, and just about everyone else you can find. It was far from a majority Libertarian.
He didn’t support the Fannie-Freddie bailout. Maybe you should check his blog.
And why don’t you try to think political for a second. How seriously do you think Americans will take him when he goes around and says “Yeah you should be able to shoot tar every night.” We are still fighting for marijuana. Why don’t we start there and work our way up. To think the American people would even be close to alright with legalizing heroin is laughable. You have to understand politics.
13 G.E. // Sep 30, 2008 at 11:52 pm
Winston – Are you dumb or a liar or both?
Bob Barr DID support the bailout. He just used Orwellian language — something you should appreciate — in stating his support.
He said that the government “had to do something” and “doing nothing was not an option.” But after a “one-time” bailout, the two companies — which were already private! — should be “privatized.” What did he mean by “privatized?” In true Orwellian fashion, he meant they should be nationalized! He said the implicit line of credit to the Treasury should be made EXPLICIT, and the FEDERAL RESERVE should have been given MORE OVERSIGHT POWER.
You can deny the truth all you like. I have little doubt at this point that you are paid shill for Barr. The campaign is wasting its money.
14 WinstonSmith // Sep 30, 2008 at 11:54 pm
Barr boasts that he was a few weeks ahead of the curve, pointing to an August 15 press release warning that the bailouts of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Bear Stearns would lead to more irresponsible behavior and more bailouts in the future.
“The mere possibility of a bailout will discourage companies and markets from adjusting in the future,†said the release.
“Barr supports letting the free market run its course,†said Cory.
http://blog.bobbarr2008.com/category/issues/issue-bailouts/
Those pesky facts.
And I’m far from a paid shill. I just enjoy making people like you look stupid.
15 G.E. // Sep 30, 2008 at 11:58 pm
MORON – He changed his position. Take a look at his earlier statements.
“Bob Barr supports the free market” –hahahahaha! Good one! And Winston Smith is something other than a government-worshiping Barr lackey.
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/07/bob-barr-contradicts-lp-government-has-to-do-something-to-bail-out-fanniefreddie/
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/07/barr-gets-specific-on-fanniefreddie-bail-out-proposal-give-the-fed-more-power/
And let me proactively address your lame comment that these articles are from IPR: They quote Barr directly and cite sources. So suck on that, you worthless shill. When you come back with yet another defense of the evil Barr, you will once and for all be outed as a paid sycophant, who can be safely ignored from this point forward:
16 WinstonSmith // Oct 1, 2008 at 12:05 am
So he realized he was wrong and that is bad?
Some of the smartest economists in this country said something needed to be done due to it being the governments fault in the first place. But I have a feeling you believe you are smarter than them.
It seems you got put in your place a few times in your second link by a real economics expert. But don’t worry, the government is trying to kill you.
17 Hugh Jass // Oct 1, 2008 at 12:34 am
In comment 12, you praise Barr for having opposed the bailout. In comment 16, you praise Barr for having agreed with the “smartest economists in the country” and supporting the bailout? Either that’s sour grapes or you are a liar. BTW, the smartest economists in the country can be found here: http://www.mises.org/
18 WinstonSmith // Oct 1, 2008 at 12:36 am
Hugh,
I never once praised Barr for agreeing with the bailouts. I only said some of the smartest economists in the country agreed with him.
I said he was smart for realizing he was wrong.
19 G.E. // Oct 1, 2008 at 12:40 am
haha! The expert who brought Sallie Mae into the discussion? Yeah, right.
Bob Barr was for the bailout, for privatizing companies that were already privatized — even though his privatization scheme was actually a nationalization scheme — and that was what, two months ago? And now he’s “changed his mind” and that’s a “good thing”? PUH-LEASE.
Barr, like the other “economic expert” you say “corrected me” (by bringing SLMA into the convo?) is a lifelong employee of the state. He’s clueless, just like you.
20 G.E. // Oct 1, 2008 at 12:40 am
“Some of the smartest economists in the U.S.” are statist Keynesian shills for the state, idiot.
21 Spence // Oct 1, 2008 at 12:47 am
So…it’s not enough when you:
-Try to usurp another running candidate’s support, (largely) same platform, and (formerly) same party.
-Copy his website
-Snub said candidate in a press conference meant to bolster your ratings.
-You have to steal his book to make even more money, eh?
Desperate times, Barr? I think he knows the 2nd Depression’s around the corner.
22 Trent Hill // Oct 1, 2008 at 12:58 am
Wow. Maybe im a newbie, but I had no idea that David D. Friedman was the son of Milton.
23 Sivarticus // Oct 1, 2008 at 3:36 am
Barr is just a sicko. For all the dismal his cronies levy on Ron Paul now, why did Barr design his site to look just like Paul’s and have a volunteer box saying “talk to Ron Paul supporters” from the very beginning? Barr was trying to gain the support of Ron Paulians, and he lost it big time. Even he knows how crucial it was to win them over to his campaign. He screwed up bad, and torpedoed himself nearly a month ago at the Ron Paul press conference.
24 Spence // Oct 1, 2008 at 3:52 am
I sincerely hope he crashes and burns and takes the LP with him.
25 darolew // Oct 1, 2008 at 7:20 am
Both the people defending Barr and those attacking him come off looking like morons. Ugh.
26 ElfNinosMom // Oct 1, 2008 at 11:06 am
Does anyone know who is profiting from the books? Are proceeds going to Barr personally, to his campaign, or to the LP?
27 Steve LaBianca // Oct 1, 2008 at 1:00 pm
WinstonSmith // Sep 30, 2008 at 11:30 pm
Funny, the party seems to be doing fine to me. Just because the anarchists pouted away when their kiddie porn candidate didn’t get nominated doesn’t mean the party is dying./i>
Said like a true neurotic who represses the painful thought of reality.
The truth is, there are more factions in the LP than ways to slice an apple. No “WS”, the LP is sick. The cure is to get the parasites, i.e. the non-LP factions to stop killing the host.
BTW, there was no kiddie porn candidate for the LP nomination. Such characterizations of any candidate who ran for the LP nomination is purely a fabrication.
28 Steve LaBianca // Oct 1, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Sorry, the first paragraph is the only one which should have been italicized, thus quoting the person. My bad!
29 Steve LaBianca // Oct 1, 2008 at 1:39 pm
I said “The cure is to get the parasites, i.e. the non-LP factions to stop killing the host.”
I meant the “non-libertarian” factions, which are many, with one of them being the conservative Barr/W.A.R. faction.
30 Michael Seebeck // Oct 1, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Oh, goody, my son can use two new coloring books!
31 mscrib // Oct 1, 2008 at 3:54 pm
There’s a reason why most Austrian economists* reside in Auburn: nobody else cares about them. Listen, budding economists: if you want your research to matter and for people to take you seriously, you have to learn math and econometrics. Austrian economists are lazy and ignorant, and thus can’t find jobs at top-tier universities.
*excludes people who self-identify as “amateur economists” and who lack the usual professional credentials (degrees, articles published in peer-reviewed journals, etc.)
32 paulie cannoli // Oct 1, 2008 at 3:55 pm
You may have missed the recent post from GE showing that interest in Austrian economics is growing exponentially.
33 G.E. // Oct 1, 2008 at 4:09 pm
mscrib is providing HORRIBLE advice here. Austrian economists are in high demand in the world of finance and investment.
Secondly, I don’t self-identify as an “amateur” economist — that’s the name of one of the publications for which I write. I’m not an economist at all, but a financial analyst.
Barr’s defenders are now attacking Austrian free-market economics. The wonders will never cease.
34 G.E. // Oct 1, 2008 at 4:10 pm
And by the way, the Austrians were all right and the Keynesians were all wrong.
Barr’s backers = Keynesians. That’s all you need to know. He’s being defended by hardcore statist redistributionists who discredit real economic theorists because the state refuses to employ them. Wonderful.
35 darolew // Oct 1, 2008 at 4:28 pm
“…if you want your research to matter and for people to take you seriously, you have to learn math and econometrics.”
While I fully support everyone learning math (calculus FTW), the only good reason to learn econometrics is to better understand its flaws. Human action is too complex too be fit into quantitative equations, and statistics are easily manipulated and misinterpreted. Econometrics is bunk.
Generic ad hominem attacks don’t refute Austrian economics. Even a Friedmanite or a classical economist should know that.
36 G.E. // Oct 1, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Learning econometrics is the modern-day equivalent of learning how ill “humors” cause illnesses.
37 Trent Hill // Oct 1, 2008 at 4:39 pm
“There’s a reason why most Austrian economists* reside in Auburn: nobody else cares about them. Listen, budding economists: if you want your research to matter and for people to take you seriously, you have to learn math and econometrics. Austrian economists are lazy and ignorant, and thus can’t find jobs at top-tier universities.”
Yep, professors from Auburn, to George Mason, to Pace University, Florida State University, New York University, Suffolk University, Towson University, Grove City College, Hillsdale College, University of Missouri, University of Texas, Loyala University in New Orleans, University of Nebraska, King’s College, Western Carolina University, Western Michigan University, San Jose State University, Loyala University in Maryland, etc etc etc.
It is not the dominant version,that is for sure–but to say it is “confined to Auburn” is ignorant.
Besides, Auburn is one of the bases—but not the only one. George Mason, Grove City College, and Florida State U all have pretty significant Austrian prescences.
38 Trent Hill // Oct 1, 2008 at 4:40 pm
Oh–and that was just a short list of Mises folks.
39 VTV // Oct 1, 2008 at 4:46 pm
I wonder how many times I am going to have to take my name of the Bob Barr campaign’s mailing list. I have been getting things every other day.
40 mscrib // Oct 1, 2008 at 4:52 pm
G.E.,
Neoclassical analysis has contributed a great deal to economics at large. However, I will say that there is probably too much mathematics and econometrics being inserted into papers and forced upon students of economics. And I’ll admit that Austrian analysis can be very, very useful.
But, in the end, the Austrians lose because they fail to adapt to modern developments. The fact of the matter is that although mathematics and econometrics haven’t, in and of themselves, contributed greatly to the advancement of economics during the past 50 years, formal mathematics is the de facto (if not de jure) language of modern economics. Also, studying recent time periods with econometric tools can be useful if there are sufficient data. The failure of Austrians is to reject these tools out of principle, and is the reason why most hard-core Austrians are regarded more as ideologues (or at best, historians or philosophers) than as economists.
41 mscrib // Oct 1, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Trent,
I was using a writing technique called “hyperbole.” I thought you would be used to it, at least given the comments that frequently appear on this site. Are you trying to dispute the fact that there is a bias against Austrian academic economists? Well, there is, and for some very good reasons…
42 mscrib // Oct 1, 2008 at 4:59 pm
G.E.,
I take it you’ve never bothered to “learn” econometrics? I think the same is true for too many Austrians…
43 johncjackson // Oct 1, 2008 at 5:05 pm
Are these “real” books? You know, available in actual book stores and Amazon,etc? If not, what’s the point. eBooks certainly have a place in life now, but I think anyone with half a brain realizes that “the internet” is still overrated when it comes to reaching actual voters.
Even Wayne Root gets books published and on store shelves ( though the shelf life is short).. and Ron Paul had a best seller through actual physical sales both on Amazon and in actual book stores, not from Choir downloads.
Haha if you search amazon books for “bob barr” the first result is the “A Revolution:.. by ROn Paul” book.
“Winston” is right about 1 thing- ROn Paul supporters are not really the natural base for Bob Barr ( or to a certain extent even the LP), but he was wrong about much else.
44 johncjackson // Oct 1, 2008 at 5:07 pm
I just noticed GE has one of the best and most prominent reviews of the Ron Paul book on Amazon.
45 darolew // Oct 1, 2008 at 5:08 pm
“The fact of the matter is that although mathematics and econometrics haven’t, in and of themselves, contributed greatly to the advancement of economics during the past 50 years, formal mathematics is the de facto (if not de jure) language of modern economics.”
So Austrian economists should use the wrong methods to come to the right conclusions? There might be some value in that, as it might draw the interest of many traditional economist with reject Austrian analysis out of hand. However, such would be a very hollow victory.
46 mscrib // Oct 1, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Is anyone (other than WinstonSmith) planning to buy either of these books? I’ve always wondered why people waste so much of their time reading over-hyped campaign literature.
47 mscrib // Oct 1, 2008 at 5:17 pm
darolew,
I don’t think the methods are wrong (just less useful than their proponents claim). And, hypothetically, if everyone affiliated with Mises actually started using them, they would probably be published by serious journals more often (and get tenure at top-tier universities, etc.). I fully support the Mises folks infiltrating “Establishment Economics,” provided they can do it.
48 mscrib // Oct 1, 2008 at 5:18 pm
I forgot to mention that they’d have to drop some of the dogmatic Rothbardian weirdness in order to do this.
49 darolew // Oct 1, 2008 at 5:28 pm
“I don’t think the methods are wrong (just less useful than their proponents claim).”
If the methods are correct, should the conclusions be also? If that’s the case, why are most econometric-derived conclusions statist fallacies?
“And, hypothetically, if everyone affiliated with Mises actually started using them, they would probably be published by serious journals more often (and get tenure at top-tier universities, etc.).”
Probably not.
“I fully support the Mises folks infiltrating “Establishment Economics,†provided they can do it.”
Again, that may have some value, but it also concedes a lot of points to the establishment economists. Using their methodology against them is to concede their methodology is correct.
50 darolew // Oct 1, 2008 at 5:28 pm
*shouldn’t the conclusions be also
51 mscrib // Oct 1, 2008 at 5:45 pm
darolew,
What is your opinion on the significance of game theory in understanding rational decision making? Personally, I think it’s useful (to an extent) and I seem to recall a whole lot of formal math, which Austrians unfortunately reject out of principle.
52 darolew // Oct 1, 2008 at 5:55 pm
“What is your opinion on the significance of game theory in understanding rational decision making?”
I’ll confess ignorance. I really haven’t done enough reading on game theory to have formed an opinion.
“…and I seem to recall a whole lot of formal math, which Austrians unfortunately reject out of principle.”
I do seem to recall some math and equations in Austrian writings, but generally it’s pretty limited.
–
Austrians probably never will use math, which I think is a good thing. One of the biggest disputes in economics is what forms the foundation of the science. Austrians contend that it’s praxeology. Others, math, still others, statistics, yet more others, models, etc. For a century and a half the Austrian school has been fighting and actively debunking the methods of the others. To give that up, the Austrian School would lose its defining characteristic.
53 Rachel H // Oct 1, 2008 at 8:58 pm
ElfNinosMom @ 26 -
“Does anyone know who is profiting from the books? Are proceeds going to Barr personally, to his campaign, or to the LP?”
Nothing goes from Barr to LP; it’s all one way.
And who was it that accused other nominees of running in order to sell books? (Not EMN)
54 Rachel H // Oct 1, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Yeah, I know, it’s ENM.
Peter Orvetti is an idiot?
)
And I’m a dumb@$$.
55 Prospective Advertiser // Jan 26, 2009 at 8:07 pm
So, on a lark, I looked up his book rank on Amazon. Patriot Nation doesn’t show up on Amazon, which seems likely to mean fewer sales. His “The Meaning of Is: Squandered Impeachment Wasted Legacy of Clinton” book has a 786,000 or so sales rank. I’m not sure how to find actual sales figures, but there is probably a publisher book wire of some sort for that kind of data.
Then I went here:
http://thepatriotnation.com/Advocates/
Look at the title tag. “Bob Parr’s laws.” Yeah. Bob Parr. Maybe that’s why I can’t find his book on Amazon. lol
The page offers a downloadable version of the book, which is probably also not selling very well. (Pirates ahoy?) And it wants to open a popup window. I’m thinking no thanks.
56 Prospective Advertiser // Jan 26, 2009 at 8:09 pm
I’ve watched Jack Parr on television, and Congresscritter, you’re no Jack Parr! Nor Bob Parr, either, it seems. Amazon shows no book with that author, either.
Leave a Comment