VIDEO: Bob Barr on Fox 4/27/08

You Tube ^ | April 27, 2008 | Fox News Channel

[Kurt Evans]

The link to the video is reproduced in post #2.

[Kurt Evans]

BARR '08

[Kurt Evans]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=GO1zincStqE
http://bobbarr.org/

[Impy]

I’m tempted to vote for him. I live in the RED (commie) state of Obamillinois which he will win by a wide margin so it doesn’t matter. However I’d like to contribute to McCain’s popular vote. If I am pissed off enough on election day or polls show a non-competitive race I might do it.

[counterpunch]

No thanks.
Just say no to the ACLU and retreat from Iraq.

[counterpunch]

Don’t vote for the scumbag Bob Barr.
He’s a card carrying member of the ACLU and shares the radical left’s agenda of Iraq retreat.

Don’t fall for Kurt Evans’ pranks.
He’s a known troll.

[Gondring]

Berks County, Pennsylvania—which contains Reading, PA—gave John McCain less than 2/3 of the vote. Ron Paul got 26%. So there are still a lot of people out there who remain committed to conservative small-government principles.

I think Bob Barr would do relatively well, as people are sick of liberals like John McCain, and I imagine he’ll have my vote in November.

[Kurt Evans]

October 7, 2002
EVANS CAMPAIGNS IN WESTERN, NORTHERN SOUTH DAKOTA

BROOKINGS, SD — Libertarian U.S. Senate candidate Kurt Evans has completed a six-day tour that included campaign stops in 15 cities in western and northern South Dakota.

Evans traveled more than 1,200 miles in early October campaigning in Rapid City, Spearfish, Buffalo, Bison, Lemmon, Faith, Eagle Butte, McLaughlin, Mobridge, Selby, Gettysburg, Faulkton, Ipswich, Aberdeen and Groton.

“Two issues I’m hearing about repeatedly are taxes and gun control,” Evans said. “People are telling me they want their taxes reduced and their constitutional right to bear arms protected.”

The tour also included a two-hour guest appearance on the talk radio program “Live!” with Jim Thompson. The syndicated program airs on stations in Belle Fourche, St. Francis, Lemmon and Sturgis.

[Gondring]

He’s a card carrying member of the ACLU

Yes...he consults for them on privacy issues. You know, one of those "liberals" for being against government intrusion into individuals' lives:

The ACLU and Barr found common ground several times during his stint in Congress, including mutual opposition to a national ID, the Justice Department's Carnivore Internet snooping system, the proposed "Know Your Customer" banking regulation, and the controversial Operation TIPS citizen-spy program. . . . Barr was able to persuade the House to pass a bill requiring federal agencies to consider the privacy implications of new regulations.

"Barr is the idol of the gun-toting, abortion-fighting, IRS-hating hard right wing of American politics." --Bill Shipp, Athens Banner-Herald

[counterpunch]

Yes, You have a long history of undermining GOP candidates in order to help the Democrats. You single handedly gave the election to Tim Johnson over John Thune in 2002. You took more votes from Thune than he lost by.
Now you are doing your best on FR to undermine Republicans and help get Democrats elected.

You are the worst kind of scoundrel.
I believe you should be banned.

[roamer_1]

Now you are doing your best on FR to undermine Republicans and help get Democrats elected.

You are the worst kind of scoundrel.
I believe you should be banned.

AFAIR, we are not in the business of getting Republicans elected, but Conservatives. Perhaps you'd feel better among your peers.

[Kurt Evans]

By Jacob T. Levy, PhD
Tomlinson Professor of Political Theory
McGill University
November 24, 2002

Rachel DiCarlo, at the Weekly Standard's website, repeats the claim that Libertarian Kurt Evans cost Republican John Thune the South Dakota Senate race. As I've blogged before, this claim is almost certainly not true. While Evans did indeed get more votes than separated Thune from Johnson, that was weeks after Evans had dropped out of the race and endorsed Thune. This means that the Libertarian-Republican swing voters are very likely to have swung to Thune. (The 3,000 votes represents a much smaller share of the vote than Evans was picking up in polls before he dropped out.) The remaining 3,000 probably wouldn't have voted for Thune in any event; and on net Evans helped Thune (first, by swinging his way those voters who could be swung; second, by keeping 3,000 of the other voters from voting for Johnson).

It's true that, most of the time in most states, Libertarians drain more Republican votes than they do Democratic ones (though not by nearly the same margin as Greens drain more Democratic votes than Republican ones). But in this race it wasn't. Kurt Evans did something that was most unusual for a political candidate. He genuinely tried to help one of his opponents to win. For the Republican commentariat to keep criticizing him for costing their guy the race is deeply unfair.

Pointing out the idiosyncratic facts about this race of course seems like a distraction from the big argument about whether voting for Libertarians hurts freedom by hurting freedom-minded Republicans, or helps it by focusing the minds and energy of Republicans on protecting their libertarian flank, the argument over third parties and strategies and tactics. But I want to insist on the details of the particular case, before "Evans cost the Republicans a seat" becomes too entrenched in people's memories.

After my first post on this topic, I recieved an e-mail from Evans himself. He said that he's been "trying to lay low and be quiet," but he's clearly irked by the unfair attacks on him. (Some of those attacks have been from Libertarians calling him a traitor, others from Republicans who believe the story that he cost Thune the race.)

"First of all, my actual support of roughly 3 percent was acquired mostly by positioning myself as a protest against attack ads. My opponents both said I was drawing from them about equally.

"But let's assume that *every vote* finally cast for me (91/100ths of 1 percent) would have otherwise been cast for Congressman Thune.

"When I gave him my endorsement, I drew attention to the voter fraud controversy and said it was a reminder that our entire political system depends on truth and honesty.

"I went on to say that it had become apparent to me that Congressman Thune shared my commitment to being a man of integrity and character.

"The announcement got tremendous media play on television and radio and in the newspapers.

"If my endorsement shifted 46/100ths of 1 percent of the vote away from Johnson and toward Thune, the net effect of my candidacy was to narrow the margin of victory."

Republicans: Send this gentleman an apology, and a thank-you note, not continued flak.

[Kurt Evans]

CNN INSIDE POLITICS
Holbrooke Urges Diplomacy on Iraq; White Powder Found at Gore Offices; Bush Meets with Saudi Ambassador

Aired August 27, 2002 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

JUDY WOODRUFF, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Judy Woodruff in Washington. Another former U.S. diplomat urges caution on Iraq. Richard Holbrooke shares his thoughts on how the U.S. should handle Saddam Hussein.

RON BROWNSTEIN, "LOS ANGELES TIMES": I'm Ron Brownstein. Iraq is not the top issue for most voters but there are signs the pressure is growing for candidates to take a stand...

(snip)

WOODRUFF: Checking the headlines in our "Campaign News Daily": Just hours before tonight's debate among the three Democrats running for Florida governor, Janet Reno has unveiled her first TV ads. The ads feature Reno explaining her stands on several issues -- mainly prescription drugs -- and plenty of shots of the Reno red pickup truck.

The South Dakota Senate race remains a toss-up, according to a new poll. Democrat incumbent Tim Johnson and his challenger, Republican John Thune, both received 40 percent in a recent survey by KELO Television. And in a race where every vote looks crucial, Libertarian Kurt Evans comes in with 5 percent.
...

[counterpunch]

We know already.
You stole the election for the Democrats.
You must be real proud.

[Kurt Evans]

You must be real proud.

I'm glad the 2002 race ended up close enough to encourage Thune to challenge Daschle in 2004, because Daschle's defeat probably discouraged Democrats from obstructing Bush's nominees to the Supreme Court.

Other than that, I'm not very proud of Thune, and I strongly suspect he's gotten the word.

[LibLieSlayer]

barr is a turn-coat scumbag POS aclu LIBERAL! He is a liar and the truth is not in him!

LLS

[LibLieSlayer]

YOU are no better than the turn-coat barr! You are NO Conservative... not embracing an aclu activist LIBERAL!

LLS

[LibLieSlayer]

barr is an aclu activist... NOT a Conservative. He is a Benedict Arnold.

LLS

[counterpunch]

Everytime a Democrat wins, the liberal agenda is advanced.
Everytime a Republican loses, the conservative agenda is undermined.

Even if a Republican doesn’t vote 100% with the right-wing of the party, that Republican still helps pad the vote, and still caucuses with the GOP, meaning more committee seats, and possibly the difference between majority or minority status. That means chairmanships, and the ability to set the congressional agenda.

So when you say “oh this person is a RINO because they didn’t vote the way I wanted them to that one time,” you are actually just undermining EVERY elected Republican in congress, giving the Democrats more power, which will always mean the liberal agenda getting advanced. No matter how “liberal” you claim your targeted Republican may be, the truth is the Democrat who would replace him is always to his left, and it is always a net loss to the conservative cause.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

I certainly am not happy about McCain as the Republican nominee, but it's not clear to me that Barr would be better.

For example, Barr's website says that he would "secure our borders," but they all say that. Did Bob Barr swipe his immigration policy from Barack Obama (or Bush, McCain, Clinton,...)?

If that page from lonewacko.com is unfair to Barr, I want to know why.

[roamer_1]

Everytime a Democrat liberal wins, the liberal agenda is advanced.
Everytime a Republican Conservative loses, the conservative agenda is undermined.

There. Fixed.

As to the rest of your post, We don need no steenkin RINOs.

It is thinking like yours that has turned the Republican party into a bastion of liberalism. Big Tenters... sheesh!

[roamer_1]

barr is an aclu activist... NOT a Conservative.

I am afraid I will have to see what cases Barr has rep'd the ACLU on. Wile I am not a big fan of the ACLU, They are on the right side of the equation from time to time...

It is still unlikely that I will vote for Barr anyway, as his position on the war cannot be reconciled. I can dig the whole non-intervention thing, but not for things that are already under way...

[counterpunch]

No, you seem to be playing Checkers when you ought to be playing Chess.

Republicans are the more conservative party, so the more seats the Republicans hold, the more conservative the agenda can be.
Democrats are the more liberal party, so the more seats the Democrats hold, the more liberal the agenda will be.

Individual members contribute in small ways, but their primary contribution is in adding to the caucus, therefore moving the balance of power more towards their party in the chamber. The vast majority in congress on either side are just go-alongs. There are only a handful of ideological leaders, and the numbers of seats held by their party determines how much say they have.

[roamer_1]

Republicans are the more conservative party, so the more seats the Republicans hold, the more conservative the agenda can be.
Democrats are the more liberal party, so the more seats the Democrats hold, the more liberal the agenda will be.

There is where your thinking seems to break down. I deny that Republicans are more conservative. I deny that the Republicans stand for what they say they do.

If they did in fact stand by their words, they would *not* be endangering our sovereignty. They would *not* be refusing to close the border. Any argument you might care to make against me dies on that barren field alone, and you damn well know it.

Your loyalties lie with the troops a-foremost, and I can respect that. But IMHO, America lies on the very brink of utter disaster, and that most imminent threat comes not from the ragheads, nor from the Democrats (who are already the tool of Communists), But from the very core of her defense- The Republican party.

If the Republicans fail to stave off socialism within their own ranks, there will be no America for the troops to come home to. She will be stripped of her sovereignty and the control of her own destiny, after which it is just a matter of time.

This is but a shell game- Too bad so few have not been able to keep their eye on the prize.

[LibLieSlayer]

Just look up the transcripts from any of his interviews during the past three years. I despise him as much as james carville!

LLS

[rob777]

"I’m tempted to vote for him."


I am strongly considering it myself. He has no chance of winning, but I would like to see him at least succeed in forcing a discussion on limiting the role of government.

[roamer_1]

Just look up the transcripts from any of his interviews during the past three years. I despise him as much as james carville!

Oh, never fear. I will find it out. Thanks for the heads-up. I respect your opinion.