Bob Barr Conference Call
posted at 2:50 pm on July 17, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Normally, I participate in John McCain campaign conference calls, but today I had the opportunity to join Libertarian Party candidate Bob Barr’s first blogger conference call. The invitation explained that “Bob Barr loves bloggers, [and] values your role in informing the public,” and their outreach appears to confirm that attitude. The invitees went beyond the Libertarian/Ron Paul Internet nexus, which indicates that Barr’s team wants some traction across the Internet spectrum.
Bob Barr joined us after a few minutes. He’s in Washington, in the middle of a tough travel schedule. He thanked us for our efforts, and acknowledged that he doesn’t have a great deal of knowledge of the blogosphere, but said it was a “fantastic” way to communicate on politics. He asked for ideas on how to communicate his ideas and policies most effectively.
I asked him what he hoped to accomplish in his run. Barr replied that he felt that politics had become overwhelmingly sour; 86% now say the country is on the wrong track. People recognize that the current system does not serve them well, and that provides “fertile ground” for a new party. That’s just an opportunity, of course, but the Libertarian Party has matured, and with himself as a credible candidate, they have a chance of winning in a three-way race.
Another reason: he wants to free America from the artificial restraints of the two-party system. Also, he wants to recast the current issues in a manner more consistent with the Constitution. FISA reform is one area that Barr wants discussed in real, substantive terms, and not just slogans. Eliminating earmarks will not dismantle Leviathan, and we need to grasp the realities of a $3.1 trillion budget.
Jazz Shaw asked about the elimination of the Department of Education, and where else Barr could make reductions in the federal government. Barr talked about what Presidents can do on their own, and what needs Congressional approval. He wants to institute a 10% reduction in executive-branch staffing and budget to set an example for Congress. Afterwards, he wants to work with Congress to pursue similar reductions. A Libertarian could negotiate between Republicans and Democrats to make those changes, and voters would join in the pressure to accomplish it. He would veto appropriations that raised spending at all over the previous year.
Barr says that he would follow the path of the Grace Commission in reducing the costs of government and eliminating abuse. He would clearly identify the cost-benefit and Constitutional standing of every department in the federal government, and anything that didn’t pass muster would get axed. DoE would probably be at the top of the list for closure. Department of Commerce would be next, followed by most of the Department of Energy.
James Joyner wondered what states Barr thought he could win. He referred James to the campaign’s manager, who also managed Ross Perot’s campaigns. They have a complex campaign strategy, and prioritization of scarce campaign resources will be key. The mountain West states might be strong for Barr. New Hampshire has a clear sympathy for libertarian impulses, as does Barr’s home state of Georgia.
James reminded Barr that Perot didn’t win any Electoral College votes, but Barr says the political landscape has changed quite a bit. That 86% dissatisfaction gives a real opportunity for people outside the two-party system. They’ll need to get poll numbers up to qualify for the national debates, which would give them credibility. It will take 15% to qualify.
Jazz asked about Israel and Iran. Barr committed to a strong alliance with Israel, but he doesn’t want expanded hostilities in the region. Barr used to work at the CIA, and from “everything I’ve seen”, Iran isn’t close to posing a threat from either nuclear or missile weapons. It’s a concern, but it’s not an imminent threat. He wants to take advantage of “all sorts of other opportunities” to work with elements in Iran to reduce the threat. Iran, he says, wants better relations, and we should work in that direction.
Barr, it should be emphasized, sounds eminently more reasonable and competent than Ron Paul. Even on issues where I’d disagree, Barr gave reasoned, thoughtful answers, as opposed to the kind of conspiracy-theory kookiness Paul spouted at debates and in interviews. The Libertarian Party has its most credible candidate in years, if not ever. However, unless he suddenly finds a way to organize Libertarians and convince vast swaths of Americans to start pitching money into the kitty, his best hope will be to influence the major-party candidates to start addressing some of the legitimate concerns of the Libertarian Party.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
I like it.
kc8ukw on July 17, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Great write up, Ed. Barr reminds me of Dave.
Ian on July 17, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Damn. A reasonable Libertarian.
Not good for McCain, and by that definition, wonderful for Obama.
So, who’s carrying the green party banner this year? Is Nader back in?
Mew
acat on July 17, 2008 at 2:55 PM
D.O.E. also have the USGS included in that “scheme”.
As I am for smaller government, but Barr’s idea on D.O.E. is bad. Because lets say there is a Volcano about to blow… not USGS employees to cover the Volcano… a bunch of dead people possibly.
D.O.E. also sends out Geologists to look at environmental water issues (hydro geologists) for rivers, dams, wells, underground water and rivers AND aquifers.
Government agencies, I think is Over the head of Barr… and the reason I cringe away from him. Not because of what he wants to do… but what impacts he may have on the country.
upinak on July 17, 2008 at 2:56 PM
Our very own Nader-like spoiler. Yay.
aero on July 17, 2008 at 2:57 PM
I am voting for Barr.
King of the Britons on July 17, 2008 at 3:00 PM
There’s no way around it, Losertarians:
A vote for Barr is half a vote for BO.
jgapinoy on July 17, 2008 at 3:00 PM
There’s nothing like losing an election in your own congressional district to make you realize that America is clamoring for you to be President.
Moron.
JayHaw Phrenzie on July 17, 2008 at 3:02 PM
Let me jot down a reminder to send Bob a thank you note next spring, for the lovely tax increases and $9 per gallon gasoline that he helped Obama to give me.
Think_b4_speaking on July 17, 2008 at 3:03 PM
Cynthia McKinney!
Bob's Kid on July 17, 2008 at 3:03 PM
Excuse me? Do you remember the end of Dave?
When he actually ran for office? He had a totally socialist platform – he was for some sort of guaranteed job program and some other bull crap.
Ugh.
lorien1973 on July 17, 2008 at 3:05 PM
#1. They have not.
#2. He is not.
#3. Only when hell freezes over.
If he wants to be the ‘libertarian’ Ralph Nader, then fine. But drop all pretenses that he is anything other than that.
In 1992, Ross Perot, the most recent ‘credible candidate’ for a third party got 18.9 percent of the vote and ZERO electoral votes. What is Bob Barr supposedly polling at? 6 percent? Well, now. He’s only 13 more percentage points away from matchings Ross Perot’s 92 numbers, and losing the election with zero electoral votes.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 3:05 PM
Barr once proposed that the military ban the practice of Wicca.
He once called medical marijuana “bogus witchcraft”.
What’s next?
SalemGeorgia witch trials?jgapinoy on July 17, 2008 at 3:06 PM
Hey I’m sure Obomba will be appreciative of Barr’s efforts to get him elected. I’m also sure Obomba, in gratitude, will be scrambling to adopt some of Barr’s platform after his inauguration.
Can’t wait to see that.
elduende on July 17, 2008 at 3:09 PM
A vote for Barr is a vote for Obama.
D’uh
pseudonominus on July 17, 2008 at 3:09 PM
“End of the two-party system”, good lord.
Votes wasted on the so-called “Libertarian” Party will achieve that – by making it a one-party system.
The thing is, whether we have three parties, eight parties or twenty, to get anything done Congressmen will have to work within coalitions.
Wasting time and energy building another party apparatus is pointless. If you can’t get your ideas aired or your candidates elected, it’s not because “your message is not getting out”, it’s because you have dumb ideas and bad candidates.
Like Bob Barr.
NoDonkey on July 17, 2008 at 3:13 PM
Tru dat, playa.
What’s Barr’s thought on the gold standard?
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on July 17, 2008 at 3:14 PM
Hint: Not a single fricken one.
A dissatisfaction with the current state of the country doesn’t mean people are looking to 3rd parties. Ask anyone who supports Democrats and they’ll tell you the country’s going the wrong way.
In what world? I must’ve misinterpreted their “rotting corpse” and “A World Without America” slogans.
amerpundit on July 17, 2008 at 3:14 PM
upinAK, DOE = department of education, not department of energy.
Education is supposed to be the domain of the states. . . the SOLE domain of the states. The federal government doesn’t have anything to do with it. . . that’s why you have STATE SPONSORED schools, and not FEDERALLY sponsored schools.
That was a good and fair write up Ed, well done.
ThackerAgency on July 17, 2008 at 3:14 PM
I like Bob Barr. He has some policies that concern me, but he is an intelligent guy who makes both McShame and Husein look like .. what they are.
I totally agree with his assessment about the Perot comparison. When Perot ran people were much more satisfied with things, and while they didn’t love the candidates, it wasn’t like a choice from hell. Then, Perot did the hokey-pokey in and out of the race, rambling on about his daughter’s wedding being disrupted, a total VP meltdown on TV (unfortunately, from a really impressive guy who was in the wrong position) … and still got almost 20%!
Today, we have the worst choice ever offered by the major parties and Barr is far more credible than Perot ever was. I think we still have many big surprises in store, this election.
progressoverpeace on July 17, 2008 at 3:15 PM
Didn’t take the McCain moonbats long to come out and start telling everybody to STFU and vote for McCain because he isn’t Obama.
Here’s a more reasonable suggestion, and one McCain’s cadre of apologists, ideologues, and useful idiots should consider. Barr is more than likely going nowhere in his campaign but if he comes off sounding reasonable and McCain continues down this track of alienating all but the most liberal of the GOP, Barr might well peel off votes.
That wouldn’t make Barr a “spoiler” because his votes would come from the message and values that McCain rejects and a portion of the electorate McCain hates. If Barr’s stock rises it is because team McCain continues down their current path of setting McCain up as a centrist Democrat instead of a conservative Republican. Defeat would be of cranky old bastard’s own making.
highhopes on July 17, 2008 at 3:16 PM
Bob Barr:
Opposes the war in Iraq, Voted for It.
Opposes Eavesdropping and Expanded Powers, Voted for the Patriot Act.
Opposes Runaway Spending, Voted for Medicare Part D (Which McCain Even Voted Against).
Don’t even get me started on his consulting for the ACLU.
amerpundit on July 17, 2008 at 3:17 PM
barr is off base on part of the constitution.
he is for getting rid of the Patriot act and all Terrorist Survellience and adopts the “its unconstitutional’ rhetoric in doing so. not as bad as Paul, but still…
check out his debate from last year against Andrew McCarthy, Yoo and Frum. Barr teamed up with the ACLU in this.
Domestic Surveillance Debate – Bob Barr (3 of 12)
McCarthy starts in part 4, and owns the debate in my opinion.
jp on July 17, 2008 at 3:17 PM
Bob Barr = Mccain lite
SaintOlaf on July 17, 2008 at 3:17 PM
barr has alot of skeletons in the closet I think to, if he ever gets traction. Not racist/kook newsletters like Paul, but other stuff like forcing his wife to get an abortion while he was publicly pro-life
jp on July 17, 2008 at 3:18 PM
Likelihood of voting for…
Barr / 3rd party candidiate: 90%
Obama: 9.99999%
MexicCain: 0.00001%
HYTEAndy on July 17, 2008 at 3:19 PM
Listen to the fearmongering of “a vote for Barr is a vote for Obama etc.”
Barr wouldn’t even be a discussion if the Republican Party had nominated a conservative.
fossten on July 17, 2008 at 3:21 PM
I think you are too quick to write off the viability of a third party candidate in a race where you have an inexperienced Democrat on one side and a hate-filled liberal political Judas on the other. Nobody is happy with the choices this year.
That being said, Barr isn’t the guy with the ability to tap into voter anger over having to vote for two equally unfit candidates. The Libertarian message isn’t the one that would rally voters either. It would have to be a real centrist candidate (not a political whore like McCain) with a real centrist message (not the lies of a Marxist like Obama).
highhopes on July 17, 2008 at 3:23 PM
its a mathematical fact that a vote by a conservative republican for Barr, only helps Obama’s chances. Now if Barr gets up to 45% polling and McCain at 5% or less you can reverse the argument if you wish. until then, he gets Socialism, WITH A DEMOCRAT CONGRESS, elected.
jp on July 17, 2008 at 3:23 PM
i wonder how much Barr and Mccain are getting paid to help Mr. Hussein become president?
SaintOlaf on July 17, 2008 at 3:24 PM
Is it his “Smart glasses” that turn you on?
Chakra Hammer on July 17, 2008 at 3:27 PM
“Barr wouldn’t even be a discussion if the Republican Party had nominated a conservative.”
Thanks for another predictable entry from the “Paulnuts all nuts for Obama” coalition of faux “conservatives”.
Yes, if we all went collectively insane and voted for Ron Paul, you wouldn’t have been pushed into the Barr camp.
Barr has as much chance of being elected President now or forever as I have. He’s doing this merely to siphon off some campaign dollars and get his name in the press. Beats telemarketing I guess.
NoDonkey on July 17, 2008 at 3:27 PM
I know Barr and he is BS with legs. This dork sleeps with the ACLU and refers to our soldiers as occupiers……end of story.
The notion that we are better off with a 3 party system is borderline retarded. Assuming each party puts up a good candidate, how are we a more united nation when the winner takes 35% of the vote and 65% of the voters went with some other character?
At the end of the day a simple truth remains ….. libertarian rule makes sense if your entire community is small enough to live in a tree house.
David in ATL on July 17, 2008 at 3:29 PM
and maybe write his own book and try to get paid off it like paul
jp on July 17, 2008 at 3:31 PM
it is nice though that for once the LP have a candidate that if by miracle he got elected he likely wouldn’t do much of what he campaigns on and would actually govern.
jp on July 17, 2008 at 3:31 PM
Bing.
Ed, did anyone have the clarity to ask Barr if he has always been this stupid, or if there was some sort of accident? What a dishonest jerkoff.
Jaibones on July 17, 2008 at 3:32 PM
Ditto.
Thanks for the post, Ed. I already know quite enough about McCain so have not had any interest in his conference calls but would like to learn more about Barr. Some of his positions are concerning to me, but when measured against McCain/Obama? Hmmmm….
Still hoping for a viable conservative 3rd party, though.
FloatingRock on July 17, 2008 at 3:33 PM
Heh. The good news is that he will only siphon off the imbeciles from McCain. The bad news is that we need the imbeciles, too.
Jaibones on July 17, 2008 at 3:33 PM
First of all, I haven’t been pushed into the Barr camp. So you’re wrong about that. Also, got news for you, McCain can destroy his own candidacy just fine on his own. Your whining against a voting bloc that deserves representation in government is irrelevant.
fossten on July 17, 2008 at 3:34 PM
Look at the pragmatist calling those who don’t agree with him imbeciles.
Oh, the immaturity.
fossten on July 17, 2008 at 3:35 PM
It’s not just the Ron Paul crowd who believes that the GOP should have nominated a conservative instead of a Quisling like McCain. They could have at least nominated a Republican instead of a political traitor who is deemed untrustworthy by the rank-and-file Republican base.
In other words, throw out all the excuses and insults you want but please don’t kid yourself that McCain has a real problem with his base constituency because it is hard for him to connect with voters who he clearly hates, dismisses as irrelevant, and whose values run counter to his liberal agenda. McCain is going to lose in November because of his arrogance and message of Democrat-lite. I guess that means four years of people like you complaining that McCain’s critics didn’t just STFU and vote for an unfit candidate as you are demanding of them.
highhopes on July 17, 2008 at 3:35 PM
Better than
DoleMcCain.LevStrauss on July 17, 2008 at 3:38 PM
So, who’s carrying the green party banner this year? Is Nader back in?
Cynthia McKinney is the Green party candidate, and Nader is running as an independent.
I R A Darth Aggie on July 17, 2008 at 3:38 PM
Better relations with who? The Israelis after he destroys Israel? The US? (Satan). This view alone shows Barr has no awarenes of international politics (like Obama).
jerseyman on July 17, 2008 at 3:39 PM
Even 35% may result in a greater majority of the electorate being represented compared to a lesser-of-two-evils candidate from two parties…. that is, unless it simply turns the process into a lesser-of-three-evils, which may be true in this case.
FloatingRock on July 17, 2008 at 3:41 PM
Via What Ed wrote:
Umm Thatcher.. does THAT look like EDUCATION to you! I read the whole story… did you?
upinak on July 17, 2008 at 3:42 PM
McCain can still win if he gets enough middle of the road racists to vote for him. Looking at all the indicators thats the only reason how Obama could lose, unless he implodes.
McCain is old, eight years past his prime, his base is the Telecom companies that have been pushing his “maverick” persona, hates conservatives, not much of a speaker, his wife looks medicated, cannot articulate an economic policy, wants to invade the world as the country is weary of extra curricular wars, will sign probably whatever Immigration plan the Dems push through post election, and has a Teddy Roosevelt fetish which means he will be a complete egomaniac if you give him enough power.
LevStrauss on July 17, 2008 at 3:47 PM
“McCain has a real problem with his base constituency”
Oh sure, he has problems with check list “conservatives” who want everything they want, exactly as they want and if they don’t get it, they’re going to take their little ball and run home with their panties in a wad.
There are two viable candidates in this race. If you can’t see as a “conservative” that one is clearly better than the other, then you probably shouldn’t be voting in the first place. You’re clearly not competent.
“because it is hard for him to connect with voters who he clearly hates”
Oh he does? How exactly? Maybe he just unhinged, one issue, never satisfied jackasses, but then most people do.
“McCain is going to lose in November because of his arrogance and message of Democrat-lite.”
Really? Any reasonable political analyst on the right or the left, says that McCain clearly gives the GOP the best chance to win this fall, over any other candidate the GOP may have nominated.
But people like you LOVE to lose elections, just looking for that perfect candidate.
Or maybe you just like losing. By all means, vote for Barr, he’s lost already so he should be your hero and role model.
NoDonkey on July 17, 2008 at 3:49 PM
Yeah. That’s just like hugo Chavez or Putin saying:
When the GOP loses this year it will be for one reason and one reason alone…BECAUSE Mccain was nominated!
SaintOlaf on July 17, 2008 at 3:57 PM
No, a vote for Barr is a vote that is not for McCain. I know yours and foolish_boy’s logic can’t handle that, so I’m going to appeal for you to just come out as the fearful partisan peons you are, and admit that this is about R vs D, not about any principles or issues.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 3:58 PM
Clarified that for you.
Kensington on July 17, 2008 at 3:58 PM
Or, more specifically, because the focus was on getting liberal votes versus conservative votes.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 3:58 PM
Heh. I always got a kick out of that one. You really believe it?
McCain is the only one the GOP could have nominated who is unable to differentiate himself from Obama on so many issues that it makes your head swim. McCain is also the only candidate the GOP could have nominated who would jump to disassociate himself from anyone who slights islam for its violence or makes reasonable statements about BHO and the crowd around him or any of a number of reasonable things. McCain is clearly the most pro-amnesty candidate the GOP had, hands down, no contest.
progressoverpeace on July 17, 2008 at 4:02 PM
It’s in their nature.
And, well, then there are all those McCain points too.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 4:02 PM
SaintOlaf = Pat Robertson stout
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 4:06 PM
MB4 = P.J. O’Rourke web edition
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 4:09 PM
“McCain is the only one the GOP could have nominated who is unable to differentiate himself from Obama on so many issues that it makes your head swim.”
Utter foolishness. No wonder you Obamites are so confused, you really have no idea what’s going on, do you?
“McCain is clearly the most pro-amnesty candidate the GOP had, hands down, no contest.”
Oh yes, here’s the nugget of course. Part of the 900 foot, 2,000 mile Golden Shower Curtain along the Mexican border, topped with the machine gun nests, with moats lined with hungry crocodiles. The proponents of big, wasteful and useless federal government land seizures and overarching bureaucracies, the “real conservatives” who think the founding fathers came to America with the long term vision and intent to build a fence on the Mexican border.
The “real conservatives” who are so conservative, they’ve gone 180 degrees over to the “elect Obama” camp.
Gosh, what will we real conservatives do without you loons? Since you’d probably get lost trying to find your polling place on election day, I figure we’ll do just fine.
NoDonkey on July 17, 2008 at 4:10 PM
Gosh, what will we real conservatives do without you loons? Since you’d probably get lost trying to find your polling place on election day, I figure we’ll do just fine.NoDonkey on July 17, 2008 at 4:10 PM
Sounds like a Ford supporter talking to Reagan supporters in 1976.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 4:13 PM
Yeah, good luck with that mister 6 percent in the polls for being the next president. You are a partisan peon whose actions ultimately benefits the most liberal presidential candidate of all time, Barack Obama. And you attempt to mock the people who try in vain to tell you the truth of your actions.
Why is it that idiot candidates who have no chance of winning always attract the idiot supporters with no chance of getting a clue?
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 4:13 PM
Whoops, meant to quote that.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 4:13 PM
You need to learn to stop using big words you can’t understand. How can I be partisan when I refuse to support or vote for either major party candidate?
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 4:14 PM
And you sound like an Obama supporter on a conservative blog attempting to convince people not to vote for McCain, and/or vote for Bob Barr in a transparent attempt to get your boy Obama elected.
Because that’s what your words sound like.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 4:15 PM
A vote against McCain is a vote for Obama. You know this. You must want Obama to win.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 4:18 PM
“Sounds like a Ford supporter talking to Reagan supporters in 1976.”
Did the news reach Madison yet that the primary is over?
And in the general, did Reagan supporters give us Carter over Ford?
Doubtful.
If so, we’re still dealing with what the jackass who won in 1976 did in Iran. Reagan was a great President, but even he didn’t solve that one. So I would rather not take the chance that Carter II will beget Reagan II.
NoDonkey on July 17, 2008 at 4:19 PM
Whatever it is that you have been drinking, I recommend that you stop immediately. It is giving you hallucinations.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 4:19 PM
I’m an interior enforcement person, myself. The fence is not a big thing with me.
progressoverpeace on July 17, 2008 at 4:19 PM
Manson heard messages in the White Album that weren’t there too. What’s your point? I hate Obama, I almost completely disagree with and don’t trust McCain, and as for Barr, he hasn’t gotten my interest yet.
All you do is attack anyone who points out the ways McCain is liberal. Cry all you like, but you are supporting a global warming kool-aid drinker, a man who worked to break the first amendment, a man who tried to eliminate the borders and sovereignty of this country, and who doesn’t like the idea of tax cuts.
That’s what your words are. I don’t have to rely on what they sound like.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 4:20 PM
I know you are a wise man and all, but wouldn’t the people who ACTUALLY VOTE FOR OBAMA be the ones whose ‘actions ultimately benefits the most liberal presidential candidate of all time’?
A vote for Barr, is not a vote for Obama and insinuating it is is childish.
ThackerAgency on July 17, 2008 at 4:22 PM
The news is “very slow” up there. Not to mention the people.
Slow. But special.
Needs.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 4:23 PM
If you don’t want to be mocked don’t be such a McCain Quisling.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 4:25 PM
Nice bigotry about a whole section of your country. I’d expect no less from a “conservative”.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 4:26 PM
A vote for Ross Perot was a vote for Bill Clinton, and the same people who want to punish McCain because he is not conservative enough, are the same people who punished Bush senior for the same reasons, and his ‘read my lips, no new taxes’ broken promise.
And these people who want to vote for Barr to send a message, will be ignored. Just like Clinton, because of their actions, Barack Obama will be the president for the next eight years. And at that point, (in an ironic twist just like George W was elected president after clinton) McCain’s son might go into politics and become a centrist republican for the next eight after that.
These idiots never learn from their mistakes, and we all have to suffer from them.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 4:27 PM
“A vote for Barr, is not a vote for Obama and insinuating it is is childish.”
A vote for Barr is a vote for a candidate who has no chance of winning and they will largely come from people who should know better.
This is a vitally important election and it’s not the time to play silly games or to send childish little messages with your vote.
I have more respect for people who vote for Obama than I do for people who vote for Barr. At least they’re making a choice, however misguided. Silly protests are for the Code Pinks of the world.
NoDonkey on July 17, 2008 at 4:27 PM
They truly can not help themselves. It is in their vacuous nature. And then there are always those McCain points too, although I don’t think that they are earning many.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 4:29 PM
You must be new around here, because if you’d ever read anything madison has ever posted you’d know you sound like an idiot.
samuelrylander on July 17, 2008 at 4:29 PM
Nope. Just one little retarded town. Filled with retarded little people, apparently.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 4:29 PM
So what’s your favorite thing about Obama MB4, how he shared your hope for a humiliating surrender in Iraq?
Sad how that’s not going to happen. We’ll, you’ll always have Saigon.
NoDonkey on July 17, 2008 at 4:31 PM
I am not the one advocating not voting for the republican candidate, samuelrylander. I don’t want Obama to be the next president. But some people are so pissed that their candidate lost in the republican primaries, that they want to F*k us all for 4 to 8 years with Obama than to vote for the republican, and keep the democrat out.
That advocacy is NOT a CONSERVATIVE one.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 4:31 PM
I have hardly seen anyone here who said that they are voting for Barr. Mostly, people are just saying whether Barr’s ideas fall in more closely with theirs than McCain’s, or not. Is that so threatening?
progressoverpeace on July 17, 2008 at 4:32 PM
“You must be new around here, because if you’d ever read anything madison has ever posted you’d know you sound like an idiot.”
Oooo, you’ve offended the blog clique. We’re not one of the cool kids.
Who gives a hoot what he’s posted. It’s meaningless when he’s working hard to give the election to Obama. He can do what he wants with his vote, but when you’re trying to depress the vote for Obama’s opposition, you’re working for him.
NoDonkey on July 17, 2008 at 4:34 PM
I remember swearing that I would NEVER vote for Juan McLame after he capered Kennedy for ShAmnesty, didn’t millions of us swear we would NEVER vote for McCain and now they tell us we have to vote for McCain because of big bag Obama. Worked well enough to get Bush elected twice even though we knew he was a big government warhawk Democrat dressed up like a conservative. Not this time, I WILL NOT VOTE FOR MCCAIN, the lying POS.
Buzzy on July 17, 2008 at 4:35 PM
John McCain (to Juan Hernandez): Juan, can’t you get me a better class of commenter to spread my message on Hotair? The ones we got there now are just screwing me over.
Juan Hernandez (to John McCain): I’ll have our boys at LaRaza whip then harder tonight.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 4:36 PM
Say what you will. I’m working to make people aware of the liberal in Republican’s clothing. No more. If people like foolish_boy are content with voting for that, they should have no problem with what I say, since I don’t state anything not publicly known, and pretty much all proven by posts on this site and articles backing them up.
Basically, if you’re so comfortable and confident with McCain, why do you attack others that criticize him instead of speak of his merits? Why do you only attack, never defend? Hmmm…sounds like a bunch of other people I’ve criticized…oh yeah. Scientologists.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 4:37 PM
Some people think that a ‘protest vote’ will have some sort of an impact, progressoverpeace. The fact is, that when people vote for someone like Ralph Nader, they are laughed at, not taken seriously. If they think that by voting for Bob Barr that the big wigs in the GOP are going to stop what they are doing and start paying attention to what these people think, they are deluded. Just as Ross Perot ‘threatened’ and succeeded to destroy Bush senior, and that Ralph Nader ‘threatened’ John Kerry in 2004 to the point that the DNC lawyers successfully kicked Nader off of the ballots in several states – only proves that this threatens not the opposition, but the people within the same party. Or at least, should be in the same party.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 4:37 PM
Hey Buzzy, how’s that Supreme Court gig working out?
Glad to see you’re hot and heavy with the Obama campaign, we’ll keep it quiet that you’re actually a closet Marxist, your secret is safe with us.
NoDonkey on July 17, 2008 at 4:38 PM
Then you, and me, and everyone here will get Obama. When you and all your buddies do as you do.
Know the consequences of your actions.
AND – don’t come here and complain for any of the next four years to come when president Obama f*kes us all over, because you and the people like you had an opportunity to actually do something about keeping Obama from getting into the oval office.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 4:39 PM
Actually, it’s over a quarter million people with the suburbs included. But hey, what difference would that make to a bigot? You keep on generalizing anyone who disagrees with you. Us crazy xenophobic anti-immigrant racists.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 4:40 PM
You are becoming ever more delusional.
I am not hoping for “a humiliating surrender” in Iraq and I doubt that Obama is either. I don’t know to whom we would surrender anyway.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 4:40 PM
Actually, either way, I will. Either it will be president McCain implementing liberal policies that I will have every right to complain about, or it will be president Obama due to the fact that people like you supported a liberal on the Republican ticket, which made people not want to vote for him.
Of course, again, you’re right in line with McCain. Suppression of speech. Very CFR.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 4:41 PM
“Basically, if you’re so comfortable and confident with McCain, why do you attack others that criticize him instead of speak of his merits?”
Yes, that would be a good tactic, since you MDS’ers are so open to hearing about the good of the man. Yes he’s not perfect, few are. But he’s worlds better than Obama, on every issue. Patriotism. Experience. Economics. National Security. If you can’t see that yet, it’s too late for you.
How about you MDS’ers start attacking Obama so we can all agree on something? You are the same as the MSM and the Democrats who never quite get around to criticizing the terrorists, yet love to kick around our own guys.
NoDonkey on July 17, 2008 at 4:43 PM
It’s too bad that the republicans of years ago sound like the libertarians of today. Barr makes a lot of sense, but he doesn’t have a chance in hell to win. It’s really too bad, otherwise I might consider voting for him.
nazo311 on July 17, 2008 at 4:43 PM
Are you actually trying to get more people to vote for McCain or trying to get less people to vote for McCain? If you are actually trying to do the former then you have lost what little sense you might once have had, which probably wasn’t much to begin with.
No McCain points at all for you.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 4:46 PM
“or it will be president Obama due to the fact that people like you supported a liberal on the Republican ticket, which made people not want to vote for him.”
This is just complete jackassery. I had one vote and that was AFTER the primaries were long decided. And I couldn’t even cast that, as we had an ice storm here in Virginia and I wasn’t going to break my neck to cast a useless vote in a contest that was long ago decided.
Maybe if you “conservatives” had gotten your act together instead of sitting around whining, we could have had a “real conservative” to vote for this fall.
There are two viable candidates this fall. You are either for McCain or for Obama. Looks like you’re for Obama. If you can’t accept that, then you are living in denial.
NoDonkey on July 17, 2008 at 4:47 PM
“Are you actually trying to get more people to vote for McCain or trying to get less people to vote for McCain?”
I’m just enjoying ridiculing you people who claim to be “real conservatives” yet who are doing all they can to put Obama into the White House next fall.
If you can’t see who the better candidate is on your lonesome, I nor anyone else will not persuade you. This is something you’re going to have to do on your own.
NoDonkey on July 17, 2008 at 4:49 PM
Done it, but it’s like beating a dead horse that everyone else is beating on. When you can say that a presidential candidate’s friends include a black supremacist, a terrorist, and a convicted money launderer, and people are STILL going to vote for him, it’s pointless to try to say anything to overwhelm them. Then again, these are the people who voted for Gore, Nader, and Kerry. I expect their partisan BS.
However, on a conservative (note: not Republican) website I expect to find people who are not towing a party line. I expect the same people who helped the movement that stopped McCain-Kennedy to not turn around and kiss his feet and ignore the mindset that let him to McCain-Kennedy in the first place. I expect them not to accept his attitude towards Gitmo. I expect them to take notice of his recruitment of Juan Hernandez. I expect them to wonder why he’s teamed up for major legislation with Russ Feingold.
I expect better. Apparently I shouldn’t from a few acolytes who are just as fanatical about McCain as the acolytes are about Obama.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 4:50 PM
Yes. I happen to be one of them. I understand those who disagree with the point of ‘protest votes’, but that’s a really long debate that has good arguments on both sides. This doesn’t mean that I am voting for Barr, but I am very open to someone still squeezing in, somehow – or a total revolution at the convention tossing McCain out would be fine with me.
But, if this is the group we have to pick from come November … I’m still thinking about it.
That doesn’t bother me. I could really not care less what others think about my opinion.
Maybe. Maybe not. As far as I see, the GOP has no interest in my input in any way, whatsoever. That’s just the feeling I get.
I think that McCain will pass amnesty, which I believe will light the fuse that destroys this Republic, so I just don’t see the same urgency for getting McCain in as you do. Do you understand my position?
progressoverpeace on July 17, 2008 at 4:51 PM
I’m going to restate this very clearly, and if you can’t acknowledge this basic bit of reason, I’m done with you.
If you’re supporting McCain, you’re supporting a liberal on the Republican ticket.
End of story.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 4:52 PM
myamphibian on July 17, 2008 at 4:53 PM
Bob Barr: For the Ronulans not ready yet to vote for Obama.
Sekhmet on July 17, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Your logic is flawed.
Barack Obama is the most liberal senator in 2007, He’s the most liberal presidential candidate. McCain is far from being the conservative you want him to be but he is NOTHING like the liberal you purport that he is. You, sir are a fraud. What you advocate is to the benefit of liberals who will get elected president. Something you claim to be against. You are a fraud and you are a liar, and no one should give your shameful sorry arse here the time of day. Go to the daily kos where you will fit in perfectly with all the other people who are working to get Obama elected president. Swap stories about how much of an idiot McCain is, because that is what their site is all about.
Leave, you disingenuous poser.
End of story.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 5:09 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »