Will the future of the rEVOLution now move to Barr/Root?

[Don Wills]

There is a case to be made that today we witnessed the birth of a viable third party - the pragmatic LP! If and when Ron Paul gets snubbed by the Republicans by not allowing him to be nominated or speak at the convention, what are you gonna do? And what if Ron Paul then implicitly or explicitly endorses Barr/Root?

The rEVOLution needs a future. Ron Paul was the founder, but he's 72 years old. We need to look past our next web posting folks. Think about what will be going on 3 months from now, 3 years from now. Don't let the rEVOLution die, regardless of what political party its associated with.

[Bradley in DC]

For whom to vote is a very personal decision. The general election isn't until November which is eons away in the political calendar.

One could expect some direction from the good doctor himself. Of course, he's already said more than once he expects his supporters to drift to Barr or Baldwin.

Needless to say, ballot access will be a factor.

The rEVOLution is more than just the presidential vote. There are good candidates running now for other offices, such as Vern McKinley for Congress in the Republican primary on June 10th.

And, of course, some of us are on record hoping that some kind of accommodation could be made to enable us to all work together more.

[slacker921]

If the Paul supporters are going to get behind Barr they need to do it today. If they wait until September it will be far, far too late for Barr to do anything. If every Paul supporter donated $40 to Barr then he'd have funds to advertise and get on the TV talk shows constantly for weeks and start affecting the polls. If he can get 15% in the national polls then he's in the debates. If he's in the debates then...

It's a catch-22 situation. If we wait until September then Barr has no chance.
If we jump on board with Barr now and then Paul does something surprising or is somehow by some miracle picked as the GOP nominee then we'll have to defeat Barr whom we just worked hard to build up.

The 64 cent question is.. what is Paul going to do with the 4+ million bucks he has sitting in the bank?

[WRellim]

Nope.

[OptionsTrader]

Nope. As much as I like sound money, to me the war is my number one issue. The iraq war vote and patriot act vote are enough to make him unsupportable in my eyes and in the eyes of a large percentage of the movement IMO. Barr is no Paul and anything less than Paul cannot beat Obama anyway. Support him if you like, but don't expect me to or anyone else whose main issue is the anti-war anti-patriot act stance of Paul.

[RSLudlum]

It's a catch-22 situation. If we wait until September then Barr has no chance.
If we jump on board with Barr now and then Paul does something surprising or is somehow by some miracle picked as the GOP nominee then we'll have to defeat Barr whom we just worked hard to build up.

?


If this is the problem, then there's even more of an incentive to push harder the ISSUES/IDEAS we have been supporting in this campaign and by doing so, if Barr is honestly adhering to the Libertarian platfom, we will also be helping Barr's campaign. As far as money goes, that's definitely up to each individual, some may want to organize 'bombs' while others may vehemently oppose such measures esp. if they are advertised on this forum, at which case I guarantee that would definitely be debated ;)

[Luft97]

I will support Barr/Root for president. On the other hand, I will always support Ron in any elections he is trying to win.

[Kotin]

I will support Barr/Root for president. On the other hand, I will always support Ron in any elections he is trying to win.

same here.


besides CP isnt on the Texas ballot.

[chipvogel]

By the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes.

I haven't forgotten that Paul has a lifetime of upholding the same principles I hold dear. I don't believe for a second that Barr has suddenly become reborn as a fighter for freedom.

[OptionsTrader]

Who we (on this forum) vote for is irrelevant. We account for 0.001 % of the electorate. The question is who could you support enough to campaign for and believe in enough to convince friends and family to vote for. If Barr can't get people to do that, he is toast. If "we" can only reluctantly vote for the man, he is fucked.

[Printo]

I will support Barr/Root for president. On the other hand, I will always support Ron in any elections he is trying to win.


Same here. I am going to be in Ohio come November and I've checked & neither the LP or CP is on the ballot in Ohio. What does it take to get ballot access in a state? If worse comes to worse, can't I just write in Barr's name on the ballot?

[torchbearer]

If the Paul supporters are going to get behind Barr they need to do it today. If they wait until September it will be far, far too late for Barr to do anything. If every Paul supporter donated $40 to Barr then he'd have funds to advertise and get on the TV talk shows constantly for weeks and start affecting the polls. If he can get 15% in the national polls then he's in the debates. If he's in the debates then...

It's a catch-22 situation. If we wait until September then Barr has no chance.
If we jump on board with Barr now and then Paul does something surprising or is somehow by some miracle picked as the GOP nominee then we'll have to defeat Barr whom we just worked hard to build up.

The 64 cent question is.. what is Paul going to do with the 4+ million bucks he has sitting in the bank?

+1.

[Melissa]

Nope. As much as I like sound money, to me the war is my number one issue. The patriot act vote are enough to make him unsupportable in my eyes and in the eyes of a large percentage of the movement IMO. Barr is no Paul and anything less than Paul cannot beat Obama anyway. Support him if you like, but don't expect me to or anyone else whose main issue is the anti-war anti-patriot act stance of Paul.


+1

[Don Wills]

Those of you who can't stand Barr should read this before you decide he's the devil -

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=13262

[torchbearer]

Those of you who can't stand Barr should read this before you decide he's the devil -

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=13262

Now that is too reasonable.
We rather see optionstrader going around defaming one of our teammates.
I love how he is single-handedly uniting all of us around his "view" of how all things should be.
To him, there is no reason. And he will not read what you post because it doesn't fit his agenda.

Now other people... may actually see for themselves, and I hope they do.

I wasn't a barr supporter, but i do support the people who are on his staff.
They are trusted, long time libertarians who know and support him.

[Libertarian Ideals]

Now that is too reasonable.
We rather see optionstrader going around defaming one of our teammates.
I love how he is single-handedly uniting all of us around his "view" of how all things should be.
To him, there is no reason. And he will not read what you post because it doesn't fit his agenda.

Now other people... may actually see for themselves, and I hope they do.

I wasn't a barr supporter, but i do support the people who are on his staff.
They are trusted, long time libertarians who know and support him.

The PATRIOT Act, the Drug War and the War on Terror are the things where the intelligence community has the most knowledge about. Even former CIA agents like Barr would know a thing or two about decision making at the very least. Barr also seems to like party politics. He supports Bush's policies but when Mr. Clinton does something in the Oval office, Barr is one of the first to use it against him.

I try not to support hypocrites and I hope the rest of the freedom advocates will call Barr out on his past behavior.

[bobdobbs]

Let's hope not...

http://www.nostate.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/mock-teh-vote-300x264.jpg

http://www.nostate.com/71/libertarians-for-statism/

[torchbearer]

The PATRIOT Act, the Drug War and the War on Terror are the things where the intelligence community has the most knowledge about. Even former CIA agents like Barr would know a thing or two about decision making at the very least. Barr also seems to like party politics. He supports Bush's policies but when Mr. Clinton does something in the Oval office, Barr is one of the first to use it against him.

I try not to support hypocrites and I hope the rest of the freedom advocates will call Barr out on his past behavior.

"Saul"s record on christians wasn't that great either until 'he saw the light'.
People still see his letters as credible.
I believe people can genuinely change their positions, and will give them that benefit until they prove otherwise.
Imagine, you vote for the patriot act because you were caught up in the fear of that moment, and later, you see how the government is abusing people with it.... would that not change your mind?
Then after that change.. you start to look around you at the other deceitful things the government is doing to people...
I can see how the guy could change... and he isn't totally a johnny-come lately like Gravel was...
Plus, he surrounds himself, with long time libertarians, some i personally know and trust.

[damon04]

As long as Paul is still in it, my full support is behind him. When and if he loses the nomination, I will fully back Barr.

[zaphod2016]

I just read the "Why I Like Barr" article offered above, and I must confess, I am simply not convinced. For me, issues such as the PATRIOT ACT, our out-of-control foreign policy and the draconian drug war are a higher priority than a fair tax compromise.

Call me the devil if you must, but assuming things follow their current trajectory, I'm voting Obama come November.

For your consideration:

http://zaphodforpresident.com/2008/05/22/some-more-thoughts-on-president-obama/

[OptionsTrader]

December 2008?

[Perry]

There is a case to be made that today we witnessed the birth of a viable third party - the pragmatic LP! If and when Ron Paul gets snubbed by the Republicans by not allowing him to be nominated or speak at the convention, what are you gonna do? And what if Ron Paul then implicitly or explicitly endorses Barr/Root?

The rEVOLution needs a future. Ron Paul was the founder, but he's 72 years old. We need to look past our next web posting folks. Think about what will be going on 3 months from now, 3 years from now. Don't let the rEVOLution die, regardless of what political party its associated with.

The revolution will support any candidates who follow the constitution and uphold their oath. The Ron Paul revolution will never get behind anyone like they got behind Ron Paul. Either they are like Barr and only partially follow the constitution or they are like Baldwin and wear their religion on their sleeve. Ron Paul followed the constitution to the -T- and although he is very religous he did not bring that into the political arena in an overt way.

[Working Poor]

I ain't voting for him...

[Bradley in DC]

Same here. I am going to be in Ohio come November and I've checked & neither the LP or CP is on the ballot in Ohio. What does it take to get ballot access in a state? If worse comes to worse, can't I just write in Barr's name on the ballot?

If I read this table right (not necessarily true), then both the LP and the CP have finished their ballot petitioning in Ohio but that there is a court dispute. That's all I got.

[WRellim]

"Saul"s record on christians wasn't that great either until 'he saw the light'.
People still see his letters as credible.
I believe people can genuinely change their positions, and will give them that benefit until they prove otherwise.
Imagine, you vote for the patriot act because you were caught up in the fear of that moment, and later, you see how the government is abusing people with it.... would that not change your mind?
Then after that change.. you start to look around you at the other deceitful things the government is doing to people...
I can see how the guy could change... and he isn't totally a johnny-come lately like Gravel was...
Plus, he surrounds himself, with long time libertarians, some i personally know and trust.

Saul also spent several years completely OUT of the "spotlight" (in Damascus) and then a significant amount of time doing rather "lowly" menial missionary work in Arabia, etc.

It was only several YEARS later that he returned to Jerusalem and Judea, and then he did NOT assume to make himself "king" over the entire church. In addition, the church elders were careful to NOT have him perform his main ministry in Jerusalem, in part because even after the previously stated number of years in service they feared for his life -- so he was sent as a missionary to Antioch, and later to the Gentiles.

Regarding Mr. Barr, I think this (ridiculous) comparison to Paul (Saul of Tarsus) is completely inane:

1) To begin with exactly what and when did this supposed "Damascus" event actually occur? Was there in fact some "literal event" and what was it's cause? (RP saw a baby cast aside during his internship that established HIS view on abortion.) Did Mr. Barr see dead bodies of soldiers? Or perhaps meet with families of people convicted of drug offenses? Or is this meant merely in a "proverbial" sense... (in which case is it anything more than BS and "spin"?)

2) What exactly constitutes his real "repentance"? What REAL penitence has he undertaken -- what actions (torn clothing? ashes? self-flagellation?) -- is there ANYTHING that shows TRUE sorrow for the lives he has ruined with his previous actions? If not, then how does this differ from "Theater of the Absurd"?

3) Why is he expected to be crowned HERE... why not send him as a "missionary" to some OTHER country's "libertarian" party and let him perform his penitence there! After several years, THEN... perhaps... he can return.



Because absent THOSE THINGS... there is no real "repentance" here -- no true "conversion" -- and thus there is NOTHING of similarity to Paul or Luther or anyone else who has had a TRUE "Damascus" road conversion... (so quit with the fallacious "Damascus" road BS already.)


All that has happened is a shyster who has slapped on a few elements of new color "camoflage" in order to TRY to continue his career (hey, big fish in small ponds at least they get to FEEL they are important, and with pols, EGO and FAME is often as important as money). All we have here is a *politician* who lost his job, found nowhere in his old party to go, and has decided to change to another party (jeepers, it's NOT unheard of Strom Thurmond, Joe Liberman and a host of others) and in this case Barr is really simply working as a TOOL for Viguerie in an opportunistic con-game to the Libertarian Party as a means of "milking" the RP movement.

I predict that in the end, the LP (if it even continues to exist) will very much regret that they came within 10 miles of either of those people. The LP has just committed suicide in a WORSE way with Barr, than the GOP did with McCain.

[Athan]

I'm not voting for Barr. I'd rather vote Nader (former Nader Raider here).

I would definitely vote for Badnarik.

[bobdobbs]

Libertarian Party:

Baked. Done, take out of oven and let cool.

It's finished.

denounce, renounce: http://www.nostate.com

[bobdobbs]

I'm not voting for Barr. I'd rather vote Nader (former Nader Raider here).

I would definitely vote for Badnarik.
Does he still have a party? *confused*...

[mediahasyou]

I could see the conservative population rallying around this barr guy. Especially considering mccain is the other option. Talk radio is disgusted with mccain. The right will go for barr because he supports protecting America. Barr can win, if the cards are played right.

[Meatwasp]

Nope. As much as I like sound money, to me the war is my number one issue. The iraq war vote and patriot act vote are enough to make him unsupportable in my eyes and in the eyes of a large percentage of the movement IMO. Barr is no Paul and anything less than Paul cannot beat Obama anyway. Support him if you like, but don't expect me to or anyone else whose main issue is the anti-war anti-patriot act stance of Paul.

Ditto Kiddo

[brianewart]

The problem with Bob Barr is the ridiculous smears against him being perpetuated here. People believe the smears, rather than the truth.

[maeqFREEDOMfree]

Nope. As much as I like sound money, to me the war is my number one issue. The iraq war vote and patriot act vote are enough to make him unsupportable in my eyes and in the eyes of a large percentage of the movement IMO. Barr is no Paul and anything less than Paul cannot beat Obama anyway. Support him if you like, but don't expect me to or anyone else whose main issue is the anti-war anti-patriot act stance of Paul.

+1 OptionsTrader, as usual, you're right on.

[american.swan]

Will the revolution now move.....?

I sure hope not. That would be a HUGE mistake.

[Don Wills]

Will the revolution now move.....?
I sure hope not. That would be a HUGE mistake.

Then it will die.

[WRellim]

The problem with Bob Barr is the ridiculous smears against him being perpetuated here. People believe the smears, rather than the truth.

What smears exactly?

The years purportedly "working" for the CIA while procuring a MA (in 2 years) and a JD law degree (in 5 years).

The three marriages?

The dating of the (to be) second wife prior to the divorce from the first wife?
The affair with the (to be) third wife before divorcing the second wife (with two preschool children).
The lawsuit from the second wife in order to get her kids medical bills paid?

The change from Republican (via parents) to Democrat (in college) to Republican (to get a salaried job in the Reagan era) to Libertarian (after losing his seat to a pro-Marijuana candidate)?

The fact that he stayed as a US Attorney only long enough to get his name known and grab for a higher-paying job?

The complaints of grandstanding and using his position as a US Attorney to further his own career (first Fed Attorney EVER to send out Press Releases about cases -- BEFORE they reached trail?) -- the statements from the Federal Judges about way he "handled" his office?

The hypocrisy of a two-timing, twice divorced, 3 times married man authoring a "Defense of Marriage Act"?

The putting the country through the whole Clinton "impeachment" thing and the dress junk -- making "impeachment" an impossibility for Bush?

THOSE "smears"?

But they're not really smears... that's just the early factual part of his life BIO. You bought into it, you live with it... Deal.

[electronicmaji]

Barr is a slimebag, he has no chance, and I won't let him steal my vote away from the anti-iraq war candidate. Obama has some good ideas, and I don't have anything personal against him, he doesn't seem like a slimebag to me, and while he may be corrupt the amount of years in congress make him more likely to be less involved in the dirty dealings then others. He's a decent candidate with some good economic policies, especially the neo-liberal stuff. I have no true reason not to vote for him. There are things I disagree with him about, but they are not relevant in this elections. Only two things are, the economy and the war that directly affects it.

[svf]

The years purportedly "working" for the CIA while procuring a MA (in 2 years) and a JD law degree (in 5 years).

So... his employment history and educational background makes him unfit for the presidency? How exactly?


The three marriages?
The dating of the (to be) second wife prior to the divorce from the first wife?
The affair with the (to be) third wife before divorcing the second wife (with two preschool children).
The lawsuit from the second wife in order to get her kids medical bills paid?


And his personal life is relevant how exactly...?


The change from Republican (via parents) to Democrat (in college) to Republican (to get a salaried job in the Reagan era) to Libertarian (after losing his seat to a pro-Marijuana candidate)?

So... it's OK for Ron Paul to go from Republican to Libertarian and back to Republican, but not for Barr to change parites?


The fact that he stayed as a US Attorney only long enough to get his name known and grab for a higher-paying job? The complaints of grandstanding and using his position as a US Attorney to further his own career (first Fed Attorney EVER to send out Press Releases about cases -- BEFORE they reached trail?) -- the statements from the Federal Judges about way he "handled" his office?

Assuming this is true (questionable), so what? Shouldn't people be free to advance their careers?


The hypocrisy of a two-timing, twice divorced, 3 times married man authoring a "Defense of Marriage Act"?

DOMA's primary goal was to leave decisions about defining marriage to state, rather than federal, government (which happens to be Ron Paul's position also). It has nothing to do with divorce or "two timing". And Barr has publicly stated repeatedly that he will work to repeal the abused provisions of his own legislation.


The putting the country through the whole Clinton "impeachment" thing and the dress junk -- making "impeachment" an impossibility for Bush?

The Clinton impeachment had nothing at all to do with Monica-gate initially. And how did that make it "impossible" to impeach Bush?


But they're not really smears... that's just the early factual part of his life BIO. You bought into it, you live with it... Deal.

Kinda like the Ron Paul newsletter thing, huh. We can overlook and make excuses about that, but no way can we believe that Bob Barr made some mistakes and has seen the error of his ways.

You know, it's really disheartening how we supposedly tolerant, accepting, and open-minded Ron Paul supporters can be so judgemental and biased about Bob Barr.

[svf]

Barr is no Paul and anything less than Paul cannot beat Obama anyway. Support him if you like, but don't expect me to or anyone else whose main issue is the anti-war anti-patriot act stance of Paul.

Barr on the Iraq War (http://www.bobbarr2008.com/press/press-releases/14/tell-iraqis-no-permanent-bases-says-bob-barr/)...


John McCain and Barack Obama are playing a petty game of “gotcha” while Iraqis demonstrate against the Bush administration’s plan to create long-term, if not permanent, bases in Iraq. “The next president should commit to a speedy and complete withdrawal from Iraq,” argues Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president, “and tell the Iraqi people that the U.S. troops will be going home.”

Barr on the PATRIOT act... (http://bluecarp.com/blog/2008/05/bob_barr_and_the_libertarian_p.html)


“My vote in favor of the PATRIOT Act was probably the worst vote I cast in the Congress. Without going into the many reasons I did vote for it, I have spent the last 5 years since leaving Congress, working to undo the damage it has wrought. I believe it should be repealed and would work to that end as President.”


So... what is your problem with Bob Barr's stance on the Iraq War and the PATRIOT act exactly...?

[electronicmaji]

Barr on the Iraq War (http://www.bobbarr2008.com/press/press-releases/14/tell-iraqis-no-permanent-bases-says-bob-barr/)...



Barr on the PATRIOT act... (http://bluecarp.com/blog/2008/05/bob_barr_and_the_libertarian_p.html)




So... what is your problem with Bob Barr's stance on the Iraq War and the PATRIOT act exactly...?

He voted for them. He is a hypocryte, as much as he Claims to be against them the only thing I have to go by is his word. And I do not trust him one bit to beleive in his word.

[svf]

He voted for them. He is a hypocryte, as much as he Claims to be against them the only thing I have to go by is his word. And I do not trust him one bit to beleive in his word.


So since Ron Paul changed his position on the Death Penalty in 2007, you don't trust him anymore either, right?

[crazyfingers]

Does Bob Barr still believe that there is a military solution in Iraq? His lack of commitment to an immediate withdrawal, as well as his statement that the surge "is working", seems to indicate that is the case.

[svf]

His lack of commitment to an immediate withdrawal, as well as his statement that the surge "is working", seems to indicate that is the case.

WTF!? Folks, where are you getting this stuff?

Here is Barr's postition on Iraq, direct from his own press release (http://www.bobbarr2008.com/press/press-releases/14/tell-iraqis-no-permanent-bases-says-bob-barr/):


John McCain and Barack Obama are playing a petty game of “gotcha” while Iraqis demonstrate against the Bush administration’s plan to create long-term, if not permanent, bases in Iraq. “The next president should commit to a speedy and complete withdrawal from Iraq,” argues Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president, “and tell the Iraqi people that the U.S. troops will be going home.”

It is “no knock against America’s brave fighting men and women to admit that the war and subsequent occupation was a mistake and has been badly mismanaged,” he adds. The next president must undertake the withdrawal which President Bush will not consider. In fact, with violence down “now is the time to accelerate the turnover of full security authority to the Iraq government, since only when we leave will they have an incentive to take the tough steps necessary to meet their nation’s many challenges – military, economic, and political,” explains Barr.

In any case, so long as Washington dominates Iraq, U.S. forces will remain the target of antagonistic groups, militias, and insurgents. America will continue to lose brave men and women and waste billions of dollars—day after day, week after week, month after month, and year after year. That must end. It has never been America’s purpose to occupy other nations in an effort to remold them, whether Iraq or anywhere else.

Is "speedy" not "immediate" enough of a withdrawl? What do you guys want? If it's Ron Paul on the ballot in November, you're not getting it, so open your minds....!

For all the complaining we do about Ron Paul being "smeared" and his positions being "misrepresented" and "distorted", now here we are doing the same thing to Bob Barr... ! Madness!

[electronicmaji]

So since Ron Paul changed his position on the Death Penalty in 2007, you don't trust him anymore either, right?

Big difference. Ron Paul supports the idea of punishing people who are guilty with death. Even today. But he thinks the system is far to error prone.

[crazyfingers]

WTF!? Folks, where are you getting this stuff?


Is "speedy" not "immediate" enough of a withdrawl? What do you guys want?


This is obfuscation. "Speedy" is a subjective term. If Barr does not believe there is a military solution to the situation in Iraq, he should stipulate a time frame for troop withdrawal. Right now, lacking specifics, his position is worthless. If he doesn’t want people to think he still supports the continuation of the war, he should take a principled stand against it. Currently, he is trying to talk out of both sides of his mouth, as career politicians like him tend to do.



For all the complaining we do about Ron Paul being "smeared" and his positions being "misrepresented" and "distorted", now here we are doing the same thing to Bob Barr... ! Madness!


Stop comparing Ron Paul to Bob Barr. Barr is not half the man Paul is.

[countrykidz4freedom]

Stop comparing Ron Paul to Bob Barr. Barr is not half the man Paul is.

100% agreed-there is only one Ron Paul-no one else quite measures up.

[svf]

100% agreed-there is only one Ron Paul-no one else quite measures up.

Yes, Ron Paul is our Lord and Savior, NOBODY else could ever possibly deserve our vote EVER in a BAZILLION YEARS.

He will always be OUR president 4EVAH, even if he doesn't want to be president.

WRITE IN rEVOLution!!!!!!

[torchbearer]

Yes, Ron Paul is our Lord and Savior, NOBODY else could ever possibly deserve our vote EVER in a BAZILLION YEARS.

He will always be OUR president 4EVAH, even if he doesn't want to be president.

WRITE IN rEVOLution!!!!!!

:rolleyes::D

[crazyfingers]

Yes, Ron Paul is our Lord and Savior, NOBODY else could ever possibly deserve our vote EVER in a BAZILLION YEARS.

He will always be OUR president 4EVAH, even if he doesn't want to be president.

WRITE IN rEVOLution!!!!!!

Well when the "libertarian" you're trying to get us to support is not much different than John McCain or Barack Obama, I don't really see the point. The truth hurts sometimes: the Libertarian Party nominated an unprincipled Washington insider who will say anything he thinks people want to hear.

[svf]

the Libertarian Party nominated an unprincipled Washington insider who will say anything he thinks people want to hear.

so... is there anyone other than Ron Paul who the LP or anyone else could have nominated who you would even consider voting for? I ask this of all the RP Forum peeps. Because I'm really disheartened by the idea that the RP movement is going to have zero impact on the 2008 election if we end up going our seperate ways -- CP/LP/not voting/write-in/McBama (!!!???).

[allyinoh]

I will not move on to Barr/Root.

If Baldwin is on my states ballot, he gets my vote. If he's not and Barr is, he still will not get my vote and I will write in Ron Paul. I absolutely refuse to vote for Barr.

[tonesforjonesbones]

This is absolutely ridiculous. I feel like I am dealing with a bunch of neo cons! This is the same crap the neo cons threw at me about RON PAUL. I am thoroughly disgusted. Ron Paul was for open borders and he changed his mind. What about that? I was a republican for 30 years..and with NEW infomation..I changed my mind! When I realized the GOP had LEFT me in the dust... I CHANGED MY MIND!!!!! So ...it is impossible for Bob Barr to become MORE ENLIGHTENED and CHANGE HIS MIND???? This is nothing more than bitter stubborn ness that will get this movement absolutely nowhere. I'm done! I am going to start a thread for those who want to support Bob Barr...maybe those of us who do, can begin some kind of stragedy to help him get elected. I dont' want to argue or try to convince anymore. It's nothing but a pissing contest now. This is so sad. This is just what the jerks who hated Ron Paul predicted would happen to the Ron Paul movement and they are going to die laughing.

[svf]

I CHANGED MY MIND!!!!! So ...it is impossible for Bob Barr to become MORE ENLIGHTENED and CHANGE HIS MIND???? This is nothing more than bitter stubborn ness that will get this movement absolutely nowhere.

I am not alone! thank you!

[tonesforjonesbones]

svf and anyone who is for Bob Barr. I started a Ron Paul Lovers support thread for Bob Barr...maybe we can put our heads together and get some positives going in the right direction. I hurts my heart to argue with FAMILY! sigh

[WRellim]

This is absolutely ridiculous. I feel like I am dealing with a bunch of neo cons! This is the same crap the neo cons threw at me about RON PAUL. I am thoroughly disgusted. Ron Paul was for open borders and he changed his mind. What about that? I was a republican for 30 years..and with NEW infomation..I changed my mind! When I realized the GOP had LEFT me in the dust... I CHANGED MY MIND!!!!! So ...it is impossible for Bob Barr to become MORE ENLIGHTENED and CHANGE HIS MIND???? This is nothing more than bitter stubborn ness that will get this movement absolutely nowhere. I'm done! I am going to start a thread for those who want to support Bob Barr...maybe those of us who do, can begin some kind of stragedy to help him get elected. I dont' want to argue or try to convince anymore. It's nothing but a pissing contest now. This is so sad. This is just what the jerks who hated Ron Paul predicted would happen to the Ron Paul movement and they are going to die laughing.


Of course he can change his mind... no one is saying he can't.

He is completely free to change his mind and slog around in the background, putting in his time, paying his DUES like everyone else, campaigning for others, learning, etc.



But what he can't do is change his mind and then
INSTANTLY expect everyone to follow him
and anoint him as their "New Saviour" and the self-appointed "King" of the movement.



The idiots at the LP convention may have fallen in line with that, but a LOT of the rest of us just aren't buying it.



(He's a little like the drunkard, the wife-abuser, or the philanderer -- who claims he's changed his ways -- and expects everyone to believe him... PROVE IT FIRST... LONG TERM SOBRIETY... and maybe in another 4 years we'll consider it!)

[tonesforjonesbones]

I guess I am seeing sore losers...people who wanted some other libertarian candidate to get the nomination. Ron Paul has pretty much endorsed Bob Barr AND Chuck Baldwin. I am voting for the Libertarian Party and the message...not particularly Bob Barr...he just has more potential to get the LP into the game.

[tonesforjonesbones]

I am taking advantage of the opportunity to utilize resources that will push the Libertarian Party and our message UP the political ladder!!! Can you think of it that way? This could be a real turning point for the LP. and the message of Liberty.

[WRellim]

I am taking advantage of the opportunity to utilize resources that will push the Libertarian Party and our message UP the political ladder!!! Can you think of it that way? This could be a real turning point for the LP. and the message of Liberty.

Or, since Barr has a habit of being rather "weaselly" in interviews and such, it will water down the "message" of the LP and make it completely irrelevant.

It probably IS a turning point for the LP... just not in the way that you think.:(

[tonesforjonesbones]

Well...I'm a more conservative libertarian..like Ron Paul. So if this takes the libertarian party a little more to the right...I won't be sad. I know there are many purist libertarians who don't want to see this happen...but if it doens't ..the LP will remain nowhere. Things change...look at the GOP ...boy ..it's not the Republican Party I once knew. I am going with the party that is for Limited Government, less taxes, states rights ...the Constitution..that can get this message out the most and quickest.