Comments on: Libertarians left out of third-party consensus: Anti-war, pro-privacy, anti-debt, anti-Fed

By: G.E.

G.E. — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 20:42:10 +0000

There IS NO LIE.

Barr was LEFT OUT. You idiot. Go away.

By: sunshinebatman

sunshinebatman — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 20:25:48 +0000

Y’all forgot to move the lie form this headline.

By: davenate

davenate — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 15:31:13 +0000

There is only one way for third parties to gain recognition and votes. Any election held for Federal office has to be changed so you can vote once, but for every candidate you feel is acceptable. The most votes wins.

Having it any other way such as ranking your votes, will not work because too many people feel they are throwing their vote away.

This would be a very simple piece of legislation and would have advantages for the current two party system as well. For example, Pro war McCain got chosen as the Republican party candidate because Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee split their votes.

Being able to give 1 vote to every candidate you feel is acceptable is the only way to bring about true choice in this Democracy. Without this process, people will overwhelmingly vote for the lesser of two evils for fear of throwing their vote away.

By: VTV

VTV — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 09:54:39 +0000

Honestly, it is absurd for our party to fight to be viable via a presidential race. How could a party that has not fielded a single Congressmen or Senator hope to win the presidential election? Our presidential races don’t give us viability, they make us look pathetic. We should be concentrating our efforts (And that huge amount of money spent on ballot access) on researching Congressional districts and getting at least ONE congressmen on C-SPAN with the (L) in front of his name.

By: Spence

Spence — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 22:42:42 +0000

“Yes, IPR is â€œpro-Obamaâ€ says the deluded 9/11 Truther who supports CIA man Bob Barr. You have zero personal integrity or credibility.”

I believe he was referring to you. The actual quote:

“…tReason does a better job keeping their crazed spittle from compromising their reporting [necessitating] several rewrites, etc.”

That is something I can get behind. Course anyone that challenges what garbage this passes for news is quickly shown the only alternative, the sad sad TPW, and G.E. triumphantly saying “there’s still plenty of people who love to read our diatribe.”

By: inDglass

inDglass — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 21:44:41 +0000

It is great to see Nader and McKinney signing on to the point about the Federal Reserve. I see this as hope for more unity of the third party movement. I also see it as the icing on top of the Bob Barr disappointment cake. He just can’t seem to get anything right.

By: JSJones

JSJones — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 20:18:50 +0000

No, let’s defeat the Republicrats by becoming a viable political party instead of a self-righteous debate club of floundering fleas. “On the fence” libertarians will continue to vote Republicrat until the LP can show some signs of being a contender. We can’t be a contender by holding our heads high and settling for a laughable 1% of the vote. Again, let’s fight the internal battles between elections and unite during the elections. Is that “being like the Republicrats”? Only in strategy, not principle. Being smugly principled hasn’t gotten the LP anywhere in 35 years. No, Barr will not have any effect on this election, but the “1 percent, but principled” vote will continue to ensure that LP candidates in future elections will have not effect either.

By: Tim in Ohio

Tim in Ohio — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:49:21 +0000

So lets defeat the Republicrats by becoming Republicrats? Bob Barr is not going to have ANY effect on this election (other than perhapse “uniting the liberty movement” behind Baldwin.), so why sale the party’s soul for “media coverage and votes” that are not going to help anyway?

Becoming GOP Lite will not make things any better.

By: JSJones

JSJones — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:34:26 +0000

Nice strawman, Tim. Let’s just continue to flounder. Great strategy. It’s all about you being right with the 1%, meanwhile, the Republicrats continue to chip away at our liberties, year after year, while the 1 party system remains intact. Oh, well, at least you can feel good about yourself.

By: Ross Levin

Ross Levin — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:29:10 +0000

sunshinebatman – what you said in parentheses is great!

By: Tim in Ohio

Tim in Ohio — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:00:25 +0000

Right. So for the next election lets ask Al Gore to run as a Libertarian. Of course we’ll be voting for the LP, not Al Gore. Think of the votes!

If Bob Barr were to get 10% of the vote, we’d only end up with someone just as bad (if not worse) next election cycle.

No thanks. I’d rather be right with 1% than wrong with 51%.

By: G.E.

G.E. — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:45:29 +0000

JS – Double digits? You mean in raw number of votes? Cuz you can’t possibly mean like 10%.

By: JSJones

JSJones — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:43:23 +0000

MG: Yes, and it is incredibly unfortunate. The anti-Barr/Jump Ship Caucus doesn’t seem to understand the potential double-digit numbers we could score this election as a united party will benefit them in the next election cycle…less ballot hassle next go round, more media attention, etc. Fight the internal battles BETWEEN election years, not during. Barr isn’t going to win this election, no f’n chance. Let’s put the bickering and posturing behind us and support the LP/DD ticket! (Libertarian Party/Double Digits)

By: Mike Gillis

Mike Gillis — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:23:03 +0000

Man, and I thought the Greens fought amongst themselves…

By: G.E.

G.E. — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:18:32 +0000

sunshine is on the Barr payroll. Ignore him.

By: JSJones

JSJones — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:14:21 +0000

Sunshine: LOL :^)

By: sunshinebatman

sunshinebatman — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:08:02 +0000

No no JJ, you don’t understand. Barr “hijacked” the party because he won the nomination over some unimpressive passive-aggressive nobody who campaigned largely on the allure of her genitals a la Clinton/Palin. We must continue our drama queen pissing contests at all costs!!

(Seriously, you must have realized years ago that if the LP ever threatened to become viable half the party would quit…)

By: JSJones

JSJones — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 17:56:56 +0000

I wish the anti-Barr LPers would wake up and think long-term strategy & party viability instead of this short-term bickering that continues to keep the LP fragmented. Cast your vote for the LIBERTARIAN PARTY, not Bob Barr! The LP needs respectable, double-digit results to become something we haven’t for 35 years: a viable party. Come on people…united we stand, fragmented we flounder! AGAIN, FORGET BARR/ROOT, VOTE FOR THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY!

By: G.E.

G.E. — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 17:51:46 +0000

That is from the C4L.

Are you on the Barr payroll? I don’t know how anyone could be so slavish to a CIA, baby-murdering thug, otherwise.

By: G.E.

G.E. — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 17:51:06 +0000

Barr’s name is NOT listed in the document: “However, alternate candidates Chuck Baldwin, Cynthia McKinney, and Ralph Nader agree with Ron Paul ”

PERIOD. He was left out. By his own choice.