Skip to comments.Bob Barr Implodes (Russ Verney mismanaged campaign)
Posted on 10/01/2008 10:58:03 PM PDT by Kurt Evans
Bob Barr Implodes:
Two weeks ago the Libertarian nominee pulled out of a press conference Ron Paul had called with the four leading third-party candidates (Barr, Baldwin, Nader, McKinney) to highlight their common ground. Barr decided to hold a press conference of his own down the hall. He also sent Paul a snide note transmitted to Barr's e-mail list as well suggesting that Paul ought to replace the hapless Wayne Allyn Root as Barr's running mate. This ploy could hardly have been more ham-handed: If Barr wanted to appear generous, he should have offered Paul, obviously by far the bigger attraction, his own slot at the top of the Libertarian ticket. Paul would not have accepted, but Barr at least would have received credit from some libertarians (note the small "l") for making a serious offer.
After the press conference, Paul's supporters, not to say Paul himself, were furious with Barr. And now, as a result of all of this, Paul is officially giving his blessing to Constitution Party nominee Chuck Baldwin... I don't think Paul wanted to choose between Baldwin, who faithfully supported Paul's Republican presidential bid earlier this year, and Barr, the nominee of the party whose ticket Paul had headed in 1988. But Barr's behavior forced a decision, and the Libertarian Party is the loser for it.
I say "Barr's" behavior, but it has to be kept in mind that Barr has some rather nefarious characters working for him, starting with campaign maestro Russ Verney, who made his name as a top adviser to Ross Perot, but who is also well known to some of us for helping to turn the Reform Party into a radioactive environment for Pat Buchanan in 2000. Verney, who thinks George W. Bush "showed incredible leadership" by standing atop a firetruck on 9/11, is not known to be a libertarian, big "L" or small. He's a political mercenary who, at best, utterly misunderstood how a Libertarian nominee should relate to libertarian voters. And at worst ... Well, let's put it this way: The Libertarian Party won't be the first party Verney has wrecked.
when asked for his solution to the crisis, bob barr said “prosecute fraud”
Chuck Baldwin’s campaign website:
Ross Perot forever soured me on 3rd party tickets.
Is it an implosion when no one was going to vote for you in the first place?
The Libertarian Party won't be the first party Verney has wrecked.
This is almost technically impossible. The LP was wrecked a long time ago when it imposed absolutely no controls on the people who ran under the LP banner (e.g. smurfs, whores, and other assorted oddballs) and decided to focus next to exclusively on the Drug War. I support its end, but that's not the top issue on most voters' minds.
Verney is incompetent. I oved Bob Barr whenhe was in Congress and this would be a better country if we had more Bob Barrs and Ron pauls in Congress. But I don’t understand where Bob is coming from these days.
Like McCain and Palin, Barr needs to stop listening to his advisors.
As for Verney, well, just ask him about the Reform Party (AKA the Deformed Party.)
Bob Barr USED to be a conservative til he joined the Losertarian Party and lost his mind.
That's not a press conference, it's a therapy group!
I believe he was TOO, in 1998. He's bitter since losing his Congressional seat, and for some inexplictable reason wants to punish conservative Republicans who elected him instead of legalize dope crowd that campaigned AGAINST him.
There's no execuse for the positions Barr is taking now. Barr, the man who led the fight to impeach Clinton, now claims Bush is worse than Clinton. There's nothing conservative or even "libertarian" about that. It's just plain liberal. It's a lie and Barr knows it. The only reason he says it is to get the liberal media to pay attention to him. They're very happy about how Barr's positions have "evolved".
Barr sold his soul and sold out his conservative values at a moment's notice to get the Libertarian nomination, and there's nothing good or principled about that. Look how Bob Barr, once one of the most forceful advocates against abortion on the house floor, now avoids the issue like hell for fear of offending the pro-choice wing of the LP. How can you, as a former Huckabee supporter, believe Barr was being principled?
When Bob Barr joined the LP, Reason Magazine asked him if he had changed his mind on drugs and he said there would always be "differences" between himself and the LP but he was okay with that because they were committed to limited govenrment. Again, Bob Barr flat out lied. There were no "differences" between him and the LP because he changed his position on drugs 180o degrees overnite when he decided to seek the LP nomination for President. Suddenly, Bob Barr, (who had spent the last 30+ years of his CAREER working to crack down on illegal drugs in his various jobs), instantly decided the war on drugs was a failure and we should legalize pot. Talk about craven opportunist. His "conversion" rings as hollow as if the head of the local slaughterhouse decided to run for President of PETA.
Bob Barr used to be a good man, til losing his seat in Congress caused him to lose his mind and do and say anything to claw back into the spotlight.
If Bob Barr's ex-wife is right that Barr really did pressure her to seek an abortion while he was out in Congress on the house floor decrying abortion as murder, maybe he's always been a wolf in sheep's clothing. We're never know.
And BTW, I speak as someone who has an autographed copy of Barr's book "The Meeting of Is". Sad to see Bob Barr destroy his legacy like this.
It seems Mr. Barr has a remarkable knack for distorting the truth. Blasting Sarah Palin for not being "vetted enough" and not having enough "experience" when his running mate was a TV producer from Las Vegas that he had meet a few hours before he selected him was the most laughable and hypocritical statement I've heard this campaign season. If Bob Barr was really "libertarian" he would have been quite happy with the Palin selection.
Glad to see you finally realized how badly Barr's "libertarian" campaign has screwed up.
I have to agree with you on Mr. Barr’s basic moral compass. I don’t care for the LP and would have much rather seen him go to the Constitution Party. But that is of little consequence.
Barr is not a religion. He is not the “One.” he’s just another politician, like mccain...but at least mccain has a chance at beating obama.
I’m for the war on drugs and barr’s position was even tougher than mine. I guess the LP has really moved beyond the drug issue and that’s a good thing, but this is too funny.
When only 25 senators voted against the bailout and some were democrats who wanted even more socialism there is such a opportunity for libertarians to make their case on fiscal issues.
Barr basically did the same thing Buchanan did, got himself nominated by a party he didn't agree with, just so he could get ballot access in 50 states and some funds and existing network in place. Buchanan's campaign made even more screwups than Barr, but in hindsight, at least Buchanan didn't flip-flop on many of his major "core" values and become a Perot clone to get the Reform Party nomination (instead Buchanan has his brigagers slowly inflitrate the RP and take it over from within). Barr, on the other hand, was perfectly willing to toss social securities and national security conservatives under the bus and campaign on whatever issues the LP wanted to get their nomination. Of course the LP was skeptical, but held their noses to get the "well known, credible" former Congressman on the ballot. They probably have massive buyer's remorse now.
I defended Bob Barr several times here when others were blasting him. Alot of conservatives were dissing this guy when he joined the ACLU, but I shrugged it off and figured it was just one of those odd quirks and that Barr was still with conservatives. But sadly, the actions he's taken over the past year have shown me he's not. It really seems to be that Barr is doing this to get revenge on conservative Republicans after John Linder defeated him for the Republican nomination. There's no execuse for many of the things Barr is doing because it doesn't endear him to conservatives, or make the case he's a libertarian -- like his newfound love for Al Gore's "global climate change" seminars. Barr is just sucking up to the enemy, because he loves the media attention and being a thorn in the side to Bush, McCain, and the GOP's election prospects in general. I don't think he's doing this a crusade to bring attention to smaller government. While he was pretty good on less government in Congress, he was just a typical conservative Republican and NOT the Ron Paul "abolish the federal reserve/abolish the IRS/return to the gold standard/do away with the dept. of education/energy/etc." type politician he pretends to be now.
That's my opinion of Barr's motives. What would you attribute his kooky new liberal "values" to?
Can you run in the Republican Primary up to the national convention and then switch to accept the nomination of another party for the fall presidential election? Wouldn't you HAVE to run as an independent at that point?
Cynthia McKinney says 5000 executed Katrina used as cover. (Newsvine Sep 30, 2008)
Do any of the other leading candidates support her charge?
I have to wonder how much Bob Barr (and Pat Buchanan before him) went the major Third Party route to take them out of the election equation since Ross Perot definitely had an impact that gave Clinton the opportunity to be elected twice. Maybe with as much as they claim to have broken with the GOP, they still want to keep them viable and are taking one for the team.
There are a lot of people on the Left and Right who disapprove of the policies and attitudes of the Democrats and Republicans.
Now how the heck can you argue with logic like that?
Barr is pro ACLU.
That being said, I continue to be amazed by the infighting between fringe groups and even between rational groups (like the Constitution Party) who have been consigned to the fringes. There has to be something else involved (ego, money, something) than the support of 1 out of every 300 or so voters.
FWIW, I voted for Ed Clark in 1980 even though I had campaigned hard for Reagan in 1976 and wanted him to win in 1980. My brother was actually on the state ballot as a LP elector in 1976. My reasoning: I was voting in North Dakota, a state I knew Reagan would carry by a large margin. A stronger libertarian party would have been good insurance against a Republican drift leftward.
McKinney is still running? I would have thought she would investigating the murder of those 5000 prisoners in NO that forced the killers to cause Katrina. /s
That is one seriously disturbed woman. Fruity bats like her are one of the reasons it is hard to get a true third party that represents America!
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish
the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” —John Quincy Adams
I was thinking of voting for him before Palin was put on the ticket, since I’m in AZ and McCain will obviously win here, but now I’m not even considering it. He’s lost much of his previous luster, IMO.
That's news to me....
Principles like surrender to Islamic and Russian fascists?
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.