Posted on 09/06/2008 9:10:55 AM PDT by BGHater
America is a nation of immigrants, but the process of assimilation has broken down. Although immigration provides economic benefits, it also affects America´s cultural and national identity. Immigration reform must begin with securing the border. Our primary obligation is to protect American citizens.
The United States has been enriched by immigrants from around the world. Free immigration remains an attractive ideal, but is impossible with the expensive and expansive nanny state that we´ve created.
What long made immigration work so well was America´s famed melting pot—and the absence of any welfare state. People who came to America wanted to become Americans. They came for economic opportunities, not government benefits. The result was a stronger America.
Today, however, the U.S. government has lost control of its borders. While too many people come illegally, we accept too few legal immigrants. Rather than consciously decide who should be welcomed as new citizens, citizenship is bestowed on anyone who happens to be born in the U.S. Current policy is a mess.
The federal government first must regain control over the nation´s border. Only then will the U.S. be able to deal with threats of terrorism and infectious diseases, as well as implement a consistent immigration policy. Effective enforcement is more important than a physical fence.
Next, we must eliminate government benefits for immigrants. As economist Milton Friedman observed, “It´s just obvious that you can´t have free immigration and a welfare state.” Early immigrants to America expected no government support. Although Congress has restricted eligibility for illegal immigrants, it´s difficult to control access to expansive public programs.
Moreover, a mistaken 1982 Supreme Court case, Plyer v. Doe held that states and localities must pay to school the children of illegal residents. Those who drafted the 14th Amendment would have been astonished by this conclusion.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
I wonder what Sen. McCain and his 'Country First' platform will be.
He is awfully quite about it lately.
Of Interest.
Who is Bob Barr and who cares?
Barr’s comments, exactly as written, should be a plank in the Republican Platform.
In an interview with Hannity, McCain said he “gets it” with regard to popular opinion on immigration. He agreed that border control must come first before any program that deals with those who are here.
I hope he still holds that view.
Looks like Barr is in favor of the worthless ‘virtual fence’ as opposed to the fence required by the Secure Fence Act.
Doesn’t Sarah Palin have a Bob Barr skin rug in her office?
On one hand Who cares what Bob barr says!
On the other, what IS John McCain’s stance lately? What’s Sarahcudas?
McCain gave a quick mention of illegals in his speech. Remember? ...”and what about the latina girl and her migrant worker Father? We’re all Americans”. Yeah. If he entered this country legally, and I doubt that’s what he meant. Screw the illegal SOB!
Bob Barr is changing his immigration stand again, having previously attacked conservative immigration reform back when he was a whore for the ACLU?
Barr is F***ing nuts. Since when are 1.2 million legal immigrants a year not enough. It should be scaled down to 300,000 a year.
Ah, the rantings of a fellow who murdered his own baby.
Yeah, I’ll pay lots of attention to that.
McCain’s stance is to do as little as possible to remind voters of his amnesty bill.
Barr’s stance, is to mimic a blind pig that roots up an occasional acorn.
“Today, however, the U.S. government has lost control of its borders. While too many people come illegally, we accept too few legal immigrants.”
Bob never went out of his way to help secure the borders when he was in the House of reps. And if he thinks over 2 million a year legal immigrants isn’t enough, he’s wrong.
Is he still working for the ACLU?
http://uscis.gov/graphics/publicaffairs/DayinLife_050629.pdf (click here to see orignial document)
Some of the DAILY work of USIS according to their own document:
* Conduct 135,000 national security background checks
* process 30,000 applications for immigrant benefits
* Issue 7,000 permanent resident cards (green cards -PER DAY)
* Welcome 2100 new citizens.
* Welcome 3500 new permanent residents.
Does this look like we are not allowing enough “Legal” entries?
Yea looks like he has changed his stance and worked for the ACLU.
Did he also support McCain-Feingold to take away some of your rights?
“Since when are 1.2 million legal immigrants a year not enough.”
It’s more than that Kabar.
“...the latina girl and her migrant worker Father? We’re all Americans”. “
Yeah, I caught that too. No, WE are not all Americans. Latina girls, along with their migrant worker fathers, are foreigners, and if they’re here without our permission, they are illegal aliens.
McCain really ticks me off sometimes. I wish the Repub. ticket could be flipped.
>>Well, here is Bob Barr stance.
I wonder what Sen. McCain and his ‘Country First’ platform will be.
He is awfully quite about it lately. <<
He has got to have second thoughts.... with McCain behind by a few points..and if McCain wins it will likely be only be a few points... Bob knows he can get blamed for handing Obama the election.
The best thing he could do would be to make a deal to be Border Czar in a McCain administration and endorse McCain...
but sadly we know the border is one of the weakest points for McCain.
Unfortunate.
Even those two points are more than McCain has ever offered.
I know, especially when you count those on quasi-immigrant visas like H1Bs.
Unfortunately, the Republicans and the Democrats are not Constitutionalists. They like many Americans believe in a “National” Government instead of a Federal Government as the Constitution delineates. A good book to promote at this time is “Who Killed The Constitution”; it can be found at amazon or your local library can order it.
I’m hoping that Barr forces McCain to the right. Nothing wrong with that.
If McCain chooses otherwise, well you can’t blame Barr for McCain not winning.
You know, I thought the same thing about the Republican Ticket but the problem is that she is just as committed to big government(National as opposed to Federal) as the rest of them. It’s just a matter of degree. We need to get back to the Constitution. Unfortunately most Americans don’t know what that means.
yep.
>>
I’m hoping that Barr forces McCain to the right. Nothing wrong with that.
If McCain chooses otherwise, well you can’t blame Barr for McCain not winning.
<<
McCain is talking the talk on the border... But I don’t believe him.
But we had a chance to nominate somebody else and now its McCain or Obama. I want it to be McCain.
And if Barr’s votes would have given victory to McCain he knows he will get blamed.
But Republicans don’t want to be like Obama supporters when they forced Hillary out of the race. Barr has the right to run and he heard.
“In an interview with Hannity, McCain said he “gets it” with regard to popular opinion on immigration. He agreed that border control must come first before any program that deals with those who are here.”
He doesn’t “get it” except that “Borders First” is a trigger scam. Team Bush created this stunt. That is, they declare the borders secured, then they amnesty and work program 10-50 million people to destroy wages and make gazillionaires richer.
John McCain is on the record, in this campaign, that he is for mass amnesty and new “unskilled” worker programs.
I never said he didn't want amnesty. I said he was in favor of border control first, which is exactly what his website says.
One battle at a time. If we can get the borders controlled, we can fight the amnesty a separate issue. It will not be wrapped up into one bill like it was last time.
Obama will tie it together with his healthcare for illegals and ram it down your throat.
Which are you going to support?
Read his website before posting.
McCain wants border control first. Nothing comes after until the border governors certify the border is secure.
Amnesty comes next, but at least it is in a separate bill. We can fight that on its own.
Obama will ram healthcare for illegals down your throat.
Which are you going to support?
PS: Remember, Reagan granted amnesty against the wishes of his base.
I feel if we can get the borders secure, it is the most critical part of this whole equation.
Bob Barr said on the Glen Beck show that he wants the border fence taken down because its ugly.
Bob Barr just lambasts the Libertarian position on immigration!!
Maybe he’s covertly trying to destroy the Libertarian Party!!!
Yes, Bob! Take on the Libertarians - head-on!!!!!!!
ACLU employed Bob Barr has no credibility when he’s been in the employ of open-border-advocating treason-lovers for years.
“We need to get back to the Constitution. Unfortunately most Americans don’t know what that means.”
No they don’t, which is why a 3rd party attempt is fruitless. It only confirms that fact of ignorance.
What’s needed is education on the matter.
Yeah, I dunno if has spoken to La Raza as well.
“Bob Barr just lambasts the Libertarian position on immigration!!
Maybe he’s covertly trying to destroy the Libertarian Party!!!”
LOL, kind of like how Pat Buchanan destroyed the Reform Party? Did Bob Barr ever work for Trickie Dick like Pat B. did?
“Read his website before posting.
McCain wants border control first. Nothing comes after until the border governors certify the border is secure.”
You do not understand triggers.
There is no “fight” after the border governors give their stamp of approval. The declaration of “security” triggers amnesty.
The trigger scam is part of the same package, the same bill. There will be no other “vote.” There is no more fight. You lose.
There is no bill. There is none being debated. This all does not exist!
You are carrying on as if this bill was passed and is just waiting to trigger amnesty. It does not exist.
Having McCain support border control first is a step in the right direction. Let's get that passed because that will garner enough votes.
We'll debate amnesty later.
That is what I have been and you should be telling your representatives to do.
Until then, nothing is going to happen without new legislation.
Bob Barr’s nomination would offer conservatives a choice.
Neocons and statists in the Republican ranks have attacked Mr. Barr for joining Congressman Dick Armey (ACU record 97%) in working with the ACLU in defending the Fourth Amendment. Even one of the smartest and most conservative talk show hosts to grace the air waves recently made the totally ridiculous statement that Congressman Barr isn’t a “real” conservative because he has sided with the ACLU in that fight.(They sided with Rush Limbaugh after all.) Yet it is interesting that some, maybe even most, of those who have attacked Mr. Barr for working with the ACLU on protecting the Fourth Amendment and the rule of law had no qualms about siding with the ACLU themselves to fight the McCain-Feingold attack on free speech.
These hypocrites generally neglect to mention that Mr. Barr was not just siding with the ACLU in this effort to protect the Fourth Amendment. He was also siding with groups like the American Conservative Union, Americans for Tax Reform, the Free Congress Foundation, the Second Amendment Foundation, and other solidly conservative groups. Nor do they mention that bedrock conservative groups like the Christian Coalition, the National Rifle Association, Gun Owners of America, the National Association of Manufacturers, the Family Research Council, the Southeastern Legal Foundation, the Business-Industry Political Action Committee, the National Right to Life Committee, to name just a few, have also worked with the ACLU to protect a Constitutional right.
Of course, it’s easier to attack one man than to attack scores of groups with millions of members and the resources to counter attack. It is easy to demonize an individual true conservative, but very risky to attack groups with millions of conservative members. Attacking every conservative leader or group who ever sided with the ACLU on an issue would immediately expose these hypocrites for what they are. Some of the talk show personalities, bloggers, columnists and talking heads, who have attacked Congressman Barr as not being a conservative because he works with the ACLU defending the Fourth Amendment and the rule of law, by their own reasoning must not be “real” conservatives either, since they sided with the ACLU defending the First Amendment.
The truth of the matter is, if when Bob Barr got the Libertarian Party’s nomination, he became the only conservative in the race. His candidacy will offer conservatives a choice of voting their convictions by voting for a man with an unblemished track record of supporting classical conservative positions, or voting for the lesser of two evils.
Barr, a former Member of Congress, has served with the U.S. Department of Justice and Central Intelligence Agency. He continues to serve on the Board of Directors of the National Rifle Association and works with such groups as the American Conservative Union Foundation and the ACLU on issues related to privacy and national security and also serves as the Chairman for Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances.
Barr has a lifetime 98% ACU rating.
McCain’s lifetime ACU record is 82% but his 2006, the most recent year for which ratings are available, ACU record was 65%. Among Republican Senators only Lincoln Chafee, Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe and Arlen Specter had worse voting records.
Barr led the Clinton impeachment hearing in the House and Bob was adored at this site untill the ascendancy of the neo and theo conservatives who started posting here beginning around 2003.
This Statement used to adorn the home page of FR
Free Republic has sponsored several rallies at our nation’s Capitol. The first was the nationally televised “March for Justice” on October 31, 1998, where Congressman Bob Barr called for the impeachment of President William Jefferson Clinton. The enthusiastic crowd of 4,000 FReepers also enjoyed rousing speeches by Alan Keyes, Larry Klayman, Gary Aldrich and other great conservatives. The MFJ was a moving experience for all.
Congressman Barr called the FReepers back to Washington on December, 5th, 1998, for the “Judgment Day” rally, held on the Capitol steps. He and many other conservative speakers urged the Congress to vote for impeachment. According to Barr and several other Congressmen, these rallies, coupled with ads we ran in the Washington Times, and the resulting surge of grassroots activism, helped to move some of the reluctant Congressmen to vote for impeachment.
We were cosponsors with the Free Congress Foundation for the “House Managers Tribute” rally and dinner honoring the House Managers on May 4th, 1999, at the Washington Hilton and Towers. All thirteen House Managers, plus Congressman Tom DeLay and many other conservative notables attended. Henry Hyde and Steve Forbes were our keynote speakers. Alan Keyes, Larry Klayman, Congressmen Bob Barr, James Rogan and Chris Cannon and many other conservative leaders spoke at the rally.
That was then.
I now expect the new brand of (?)conservatism which is touted here these days to try and trash this fine conservative man. But back then we sure appreciated his contributions to our cause.
McCain is a fanatic for amnesty and for CFR. Those issues alone prevent him from being considered a conservative. There are also those huge number of votes he missed. Barr is definitely more conservative than McCain and somebody I could vote for.
And a fence on the border does not stop illegals from legally entering on a visitors pass or some other visa and then just never returning home. Being a nurse in a border town opened my eyes to how most get in the welfare system. They come over on a visitors pass but instead of returning, they live with a relative or friend until they can have a baby in one of our hospitals. Once their baby is born, the baby qualifies for all the various welfare programs. The mother’s hospital bill is reimbursed by the federal govt because it is codified as “self-pay”. Being a border town, the hospital qualifies for federal reimbursement for illegals.
Since it was a small town and I was there for years, I would see the same people coming to the hospital under different names every time. You can imagine the nightmare of trying to discern an accurate medical history when one patient has numerous records under different names.
If you have read McCain-Kennedy, as I have, border control was part of it along with milestones in terms of the amnesty. McCain and Obama both signed the 2006 Secure Fence Act. McCain is now talking about have a commission of border governors to certify border security before implementing an amnesty, which will destroy this country with the stroke of a pen. Don't be fooled by McCain.
Poll: Voters Unaware of Candidates’ Immigration Positions; McCain Supporters Farthest Off the Mark,/p>
One battle at a time. If we can get the borders controlled, we can fight the amnesty a separate issue. It will not be wrapped up into one bill like it was last time.
It is more than the borders that need to be controlled. 35 to 40% of all illegals come into this country legally and then overstay their visas. We have never fully implemented the US VISIT program to track and deport illegals. As someone who fought the amnesty issue for several years, i.e., the 2006 Senate amnesty bill [S 2611] that passed and the 2007 McCain-Kennedy bill lobbying on the Hill, I can tell you that the battle will be joined again in the House. The Senate will pass amnesty regardless of whether Obama or McCain is in the WH.
McCain is as upset about the defeat of his bill in 2007 as he was about his 2000 loss in SC in the primaries. He will do whatever is necessary to get amnesty passed. He is obsessed with it. And the forces arrayed against us that support amnesty are formidable, e.g., the US Chamber of Commerce, the Dems, RINOs, the Catholic Church, labor unions, the ACLU, La Raza, etc. I am not optimistic about our chances of stopping it. Subsequent to the defeat of McCain-Kennedy, the pro-amnesty types tried to get amnesty piecemeal by attaching it to appropriation bills, e.g., the Dream Act to the DOD bill and a guest worker program to the Ag bill.
The Dems control congress and the committees. Currently, Cong Price [D-NC} is trying to eviscerate the 287 [g] program, which would be a major blow to cracking down on illegals using local and state law enforcement officials. An Sen Menendez [D-NJ] is trying to kill the e-verify system that allows employers to check on propspoective employees using their SSNs. The program expires in Nov. The loss of it would almost be a death knell in cracking down on employers.
Obama will tie it together with his healthcare for illegals and ram it down your throat.Which are you going to support?
In terms of amnesty, both are abysmal on the issue. The both want amnesty. In some ways, it will be easier to fight Obama and the Dems on the issue than McCain and it will also make the Dems totally responsible for the consequences, something they don't want. There are a number of blue dog Dems that are with us on this issue including Heath Shuler and the SAVE act.
As a matter of conscience and principle, I cannot vote for anyone whose policies will destroy this country. An amnesty will mark the end of this country. It is irreversible.
I'm not going to buy into that premise.
This country is far more resilient than you know. We have had amnesty before (a few years after the Mariana boatlift that injected Cuban criminals and spies directly into our cities)and survived.
I do not support amnesty and would fight it. However, you are citing past bills and not future legislation. I hope we can do border security as its own bill so we can fight amnesty on its own.
PS: Fighting Obama and what will probably be a strong Democrat majority House/Senate is a fool's dream.
There are a lot of things about Barr to like.
One of those things is NOT his efforts during the last months to hurt the Republican party.
No matter what, though, Sarah Palin being put on the ticket with McCain eliminates any possible reasoning to support Barr.
The irrevocable decision to legalize the status of the 12 to 20 million illegal aliens would have direct and immediate consequences on the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who will be authorized entry as a result of this change of status. Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation estimated that the 2006 CIR bill would have resulted in an additional 66 million legal immigrants over the next 20 years due to existing chain migration policies that allow legal permanent residents to sponsor family members for entry as part of family reunification. And the figure of 66 million is based on the conservative Census Bureau estimate of 11.9 million illegal aliens, and does not include the current annual intake of over a million legal immigrants. The numbers are staggering.
In analyzing the 2007 CIR bill, Rector stated, “The main fiscal impact of S. 1348 will occur through two mechanisms: (1) the grant of amnesty, with accompanying access to Social Security, Medicare and welfare benefits, to 12 million illegal immigrants who are overwhelmingly low skilled; and (2) a dramatic increase in chain immigration, which will also be predominantly low skilled.”
The bottom line is that high school dropouts are extremely expensive to U.S. taxpayers. It does not matter whether the dropout comes from Ohio, Tennessee, or Mexico. It does matter that the Senate immigration bill would increase the future flow of poorly educated immigrants into the U.S. and grant amnesty and access to government benefits to millions of poorly educated illegal aliens already here. Such legislation would inevitably impose huge costs on U.S. taxpayers.” Heritage research has concluded that the cost of amnesty alone will be $2.6 trillion once the amnesty recipients reach retirement age.
In 1986 the U.S. Government estimated that one million people would apply for amnesty. The number turned out to be 2.7 million. If the current number of illegal aliens is closer to the 2005 Bear-Stearns report estimate of 20 million, the demographic and economic impact of amnesty will be exponentially greater than that estimated for an illegal alien population of 12 million. Without having reliable data on how many illegal aliens are in the country, it would be totally irresponsible to pass legislation that would grant legal status to untold millions regardless of the numbers. It is not the way to make good public policy.
This country is far more resilient than you know. We have had amnesty before (a few years after the Mariana boatlift that injected Cuban criminals and spies directly into our cities)and survived.
You seem to have no concept of the numbers involved. The demographics of this country are already changing rapidly. We have added 100 million people since 1970 and will add another 139 million by 2050 without an amnesty, most of the increase due to immigration, legal and illegal. You are talking about adding another 66 million to more than 100 million on top of that. And 87% of the current legal immigrants coming into this country are classified as minorities. According to the recently released Bureau of the Census Press Release, by 2023 half of all children will be minorities and by 2050 the non-Hispanic single race white population will comprise 46% of the population, down from 66% in 2008.
The Hispanic population will nearly triple from 46.7 million to 132.8 million during the 200-2050 period and will double from the current 15% to 30% of the total population. And this does not reflect an amnesty and the addition of 66 million to 100 million more legal immigrants thru chain migration, i.e., family reunification, within the next 20 years, most of whom will be Hispanic. In 1965, Hispanics were 1% of the US population. In just 85 years they will be 30% of the population without an amnesty.
I do not support amnesty and would fight it. However, you are citing past bills and not future legislation. I hope we can do border security as its own bill so we can fight amnesty on its own.
PS: Fighting Obama and what will probably be a strong Democrat majority House/Senate is a fool's dream.
That strong Dem majority will be happy to support a McCain amnesty, which will make the Dems the permanent majority party. And McCain will be pleased as punch to sign the bill. The corporate and political elites have sold us down the river. The country will be finished with the stroke of a pen.
I will NOT support a candidate who believes in gay marriage, continuing the status quo on abortion, and immediate withdrawal from Iraq (not to mention he's running to the LEFT of McCain on Gorebull warming and denounced McCain for not worshiping Al Gore's latest speech) It's sad to see Barr destroy his legacy by selling his soul to the very party that threw him out of office (namely, the Losertarians)
You want to see someone who was once a God on FR, didn't sellout on ANY of his conservative policies from earlier in his career, and was never-the-less back-stabbed and betrayed by freepers, check out Mike Huckabee's 2008 primary campaign... I'm just sayin'.
BARR/ROOT ON THE ISSUES:
TREE HUGGING:
Barr now fully embraces the idea that “global warming” is a major environmental crisis around the world and entirely due to human activity. Barr recently applauded Al Gore’s work on the issue, saying he is “deeply” indebted to Gore for “laying the challenge out there” and stated that Gore’s energy proposals “makes sense”. Barr was the ONLY presidential candidate to attend Gore’s speech on the matter, and Barr believes none of his opponents have, as yet, “sufficiently addressed” the issues of climate change.
SOURCE: http://www.bobbarr2008.com/press/press-releases/58/bob-barr-statement-after-attending-fmr-vp-al-gores-we-campaign-event/
GAY MARRIAGE:
Barr now supports lifting the Defense of Marriage Act and giving gays and lesbians the “freedom” to marry. At the 2008 Libertarian National Convention, he profusely apologized for his past efforts to defend traditional marriage and prevent the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages and other unions that did not consist of one man and one woman.
SOURCE: http://www.gaywired.com/Article.cfm?ID=19163
ILLEGAL ALIEN AMNESTY:
Barr now supports amnesty for illegal aliens. He stated on Neal Boortz’s radio show that it “makes a lot of sense” to allow illegal aliens to stay in the U.S. indefinitely if they pass a background check that shows they are not dangerous. (Barr also recently said we "need to allow more legal immigrants", into the U.S., even though the U.S. currently grants 1.7 million legal immigrants U.S. entry each year.) He is also vocally opposed to building a border fence along the Mexican border, saying it gives the same impression as the Berlin Wall.
SOURCE: http://lonewacko.com/blog/archives/007625.html
LEGALIZE DOPE:
On the Colbert Report on June 4, 2008, Barr, formerly known as “the worst drug warrior in Congress”, confirmed that he now supports not only ending marijuana prohibition, but favors the Libertarian Party plank to legalize drugs and end the War on Drugs. His recent campaign fundraiser headline boomed “Vote for Bob Barr if you want to End the War on Drugs”
SOURCE: http://leisureguy.wordpress.com/2008/06/10/bob-barr-war-on-drugs-is-a-failure/
OUT-OF-IRAQ NOW:
Barr has called for immediate withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq, leaving no permanent military bases. This is the same position Obama has been campaigning on for months and only recently retraced. A press release from Barr’s presidential campaign stated: “The next president should commit to a speedy and complete withdrawal from Iraq, and tell the Iraqi people that the U.S. troops will be going home”
SOURCE: http://blog.bobbarr2008.com/2008/06/03/libertarian-barr-urges-iraq-withdrawal/
REPEAL ANTI-TERRORISM MEASURES:
Barr does not just want to repeal certain parts of the Patriot Act that have come under fire, but has called for the repeal of the ENTIRE Patriot Act. Barr, who had voted for the act, is now one of its major critics. He continually attacks that which has kept us from further attacks since 9/11. Barr has also been a vocal opponent of President George W. Bush’s claim of authorization to wiretap transnational phone calls without individual judicial license. (Another favorite of the left.)
SOURCES: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/10/AR2006021001799.html
PRO-ACLU & CRIMINAL RIGHTS:
More recently, Barr has become a prominent member of the American Civil Liberties Union, sometimes doing paid consulting on privacy issues. He also used his ACLU position to fight state and local law enforcement from going after illegal aliens, saying it was a ‘federal only’ responsibility.
SOURCE: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,71553,00.html
ABORTION STATUS QUO:
Barr acquiesced to his then-wife having an abortion in 1983. He had also invoked a legal privilege during his 1985 divorce proceeding so he could refuse to answer questions on whether he’d cheated on his second wife with the woman who is now his third. Although Barr was an outspoken opponent of abortion while in Congress, he now rarely speaks about the issue except when asked. His website doesn't even bother to address the issue. In any case, his official position is that he is supposedly “pro-life” but thinks we should “leave the government out of it”. I guess he’s offended by the federal government passing the partial-birth abortion ban nationwide and feels Massachuttes liberals will just end abortion on their own.
SOURCE: http://www.tylwythteg.com/enemies/Barr/barr1.html
BUSH DERANGEMENT SYNDROME:
Barr, formerly the leader of the Bill Clinton Impeachment Team in the House, now actually claims CLINTON himself was better president than Bush ever was. He says Bush is one of our worst Presidents and far worse than Clinton. Check it out in this fascinating MobLogic.tv video.
SOURCE: http://www.moblogic.tv/video/2008/06/20/bob-barr/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You will note that McCain does NOT support repealing the defense of marriage act, nor does McCain attend Gore speaking events and hail Gore’s “leadership” on the enviroment , thereby making McCain to Barr’s RIGHT on both issues (not to mention McCain is not a surrender moneky and supports staying in Iraq until the job is done)
Yeah, like this ACLU stooge would ever follow through on sealing the borders.
Barr is a fanatic for surrender in Iraq and for Al Gore’s “enviromental” seminars. Those issues alone prevent him from being considered a conservative. If Barr was still a conservative, he’d be running for office with a conservative party and not the Legalize Dope party who worked to DEFEAT him when he WAS a conservative.
Bob Barr is but a pretender, in insignificant pimple on the ass of the Libertarian party.
How about a Chuck Baldwin / Ron Paul ticket?
I don't think this country would know what to do with to true statesman & constitutionalists.
Illegal Immigration/Broken Borders/Reconquista/MS-13/Bankrupt Hospitals and Bloated Public Services/Sanctuary Cities, etc. for the rest of 2008 as issues are DEAD (if the RNC has anything to say about it).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.