Bob Barr Conference Call
posted at 2:50 pm on July 17, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
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: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Well said NoDonkey, I agree. The MDS sufferers And the personal hatred spewed at McCain sadly make me hope he doesn’t win, the poor guy gets it bad enough from the Obama tanked press. I’m glad I don’t have to carry that anti-McCain chip on my shoulder. Barr is trying to win over some disaffected Republicans, and I really hope he succeeds. I’ll still listen to Rush to hear him give Obama hell, but from now on, I don’t plan to vote hard right. Period.
myamphibian on July 17, 2008 at 5:17 PM
Anybody remember the Huckabee/Romney controversy? Just about every time you heard someone spouting off against Romney, you merely had to poke them with a stick a little before they start singing the praises of Mike Huckabee.
On YouTube, if you look up John McCain and look at a lot of the attack videos (especially the tinfoil-y ones like blaming him for the Forrestal fire), then look at what other videos by the same person, you see a lot of Ron Paul supporters. Like the attacks on Romney by Huckabots, a lot of Ronulans seem to have turned their fire on McCain. So if you are going to come on here and bag on McCain, don’t get all prissy if people want to poke you with a stick to see if you are a Worshipper of the Blimp.
Sekhmet on July 17, 2008 at 5:19 PM
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 5:21 PM
Dammit…
You have yet to disprove a single one of my claims. He is a global warming believer, he is anti-tax-cuts, he is an amnesty shill, and he is anti-first-amendment through CFR.
Now, I have purported McCain to be liberal on these issues, as well as smaller issues that he has also proven to be liberal on either through his words or his votes. Nearly every single claim has either been verified through posts made on this very site, or through links to other articles or posts on other blogs. You never actually show them to be inaccurate, you merely attack me in response. Prove me wrong, or shut the hell up, you mindless drone. Prove. Me. Wrong.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 5:22 PM
Yes, I do indeed. All rounded up in one place, it seems…
Gilda on July 17, 2008 at 5:30 PM
And now you are spanning this site by posting the same thing twice. You must really love to look at your own words, over and over.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 5:40 PM
You McCain hacks have long been trying to beat this straw man to death with no result. Isn’t it about time to devise a new line of attack? Why not try some fire and burn it to the ground? At least that way your precious straw man will be finished and perhaps you’ll finally realize that the real issue, convincing people to vote FOR McCain, has been left unattended.
So far your arguments are vacuous and unconvincing. Why waste your time writing such drivel over and over again, often in the same words?
FloatingRock on July 17, 2008 at 5:41 PM
It’s too bad you can’t comprehend such a simple concept of how presidents are elected.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 5:45 PM
Woah! Good post!
eforhan on July 17, 2008 at 6:00 PM
So you are admitting I’m not wrong about McCain? By doing nothing but bitching about me messing up the formatting in a post and then posting it properly?
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 6:00 PM
This was the funniest post of the thread. This guy really believes that conservatism has something to do with voting for one party or another.
Mixing ideology/philosophy with party politics is, well, retarded.
LOL!
fossten on July 17, 2008 at 6:16 PM
No, that’s not it at all. MadisonConservative has been a consistent and articulate voice of conservatism on this blog and liberal McCain hacks trying to fallaciously position themselves to the right of stalwart conservatives, simply because they won’t respond to their invectives and fall inline behind their liberal candidate, is absurd.
FloatingRock on July 17, 2008 at 6:25 PM
Is that supposed to convince me of anything? Pathetic.
FloatingRock on July 17, 2008 at 6:28 PM
I don’t get how an Obama win is supposed to lead to anything that is good for conservatism. While Carter in 1976 gave us Reagan in 1980, we knew who Reagan was in 1976. If we don’t know who the Reagan in this scenario is, how is an Obama win supposed to benefit him or her?
We are still cleaning up after the mess left by the first Carter, how is another one supposed to benefit the Republic any?
Sekhmet on July 17, 2008 at 6:29 PM
Nothing anyone says here is capable of convincing you of anything logical whatsoever.
Sucks to be you.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 6:31 PM
Ohhh boy. Why do I suspect this is going to be the way the comments section populates from now ’till November? Pro McCain and anti McCain forces locked in heated and honorable battle! ‘Till the very end! I think I’ll skip comments until after the election.
Dawnsblood on July 17, 2008 at 6:33 PM
It all boils down to their candidate lost, and they want to punish McCain and let Obama be the next president so that – by magic – we’ll have a more conservative president (their candidate) in 4 years.
Meanwhile, their candidate, such as Fred Thompson and others who lost to McCain has pledged their support for the man who won the republican primaries and is the only man in the race against Barack Obama. Yet these people are comitted to brining down the ship, with all of us with them.
That, and/or they are Ron Paul supporters who now support Bob Barr. And they listen to podcasts of Alex Jones.
There is no attempting to use logic with these people. It’s their own “operation Chaos” against the republican party, which they’d like to see destroyed because their candidate lost to McCain and against conservatism, because that’s what Obama is going to do when the most liberal senator in 2007 becomes president.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 6:38 PM
Wise_man, I’ve noticed on several occasions that you’ve recommended conservative commentators switch to KOS, yet your comments are consistently among the most KOS-like that I’ve ever read here at HotAir. You come across as immature, insulting and irrational, and along with the venom laced comments by other McCain acolytes, are doing McCain more harm than good.
If you think that your childish insults are going to convince anybody to vote for McCain you are not nearly as wise as you like to think you are.
FloatingRock on July 17, 2008 at 6:46 PM
I’ve never recommended “conservative” commentators go to kos.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 6:52 PM
And the smart ones here don’t need to be convinced to do anything at all. They understand the importance of not allowing a liberal, practically a socialist that the democrats nominated to be allowed to become president. As long as they can help it. I treat reasonable people very reasonably. I’m sorry that your feelings are hurt. Maybe they need to be to shock you into seeing the truth, because what we as a nation are about to decide in 4 months time is very important – not for just 4 years, but for decades to follow.
The people who don’t mind Obama, or actually want him to be the president so they can punish ‘the GOP’ for choosing McCain, are the ones who are immature, insulting and irrational. Sorry you can’t see the obvious truth.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 6:58 PM
Really? Clearly it’s you who’s the lier, not those you’ve accused.
MadisonConservative is one of the most articulate conservative members of HotAir. Anybody who’s been here long knows this to be true. You, on the other hand, I don’t recall seeing you here until around the time McCain was nominated.
FloatingRock on July 17, 2008 at 7:14 PM
You have a short attention span. Not my fault.
and nodonkey already answered your statement the first time.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 7:17 PM
There you go again.
- Ronald Reagan
Amazing how so many of the McZombies are like Carter and then some.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 7:27 PM
Still waiting for you to disprove my claims, since you’ve claimed me to be lying, you party shill.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 7:27 PM
Your claims are without merit and do not deserve the wasted time of a reply.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 7:29 PM
Take a good guess as to why that is. Before he got the nom, he got next to no talk on this site because he was the least conservative of the candidates running. Or, what could also be said, the most liberal of the candidates.
Now this conservative site is taking the most liberal of republican candidates to task for being liberal while demanding conservative votes…and the McCain acolytes are attacking anyone who joins in. I think what they need is their own version of Democratic Underground, where they can ban people who they disagree with, and make that one of the main rules.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 7:30 PM
I just got back from getting a haircut and at the barbershop McClueless was on TV praising Al Gore and saying how he was the great leader on “Climate Change”. I think that if Al had walking in the studio door and pulled down his pants Juan would have kissed his feet and a$$ right on the spot.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 7:31 PM
My claims are backed up by his own quotes and his own votes, documented on this site and others, you little troll. You know it, as do most here. You’ve called me a liar. Prove it, or never respond to me again.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 7:32 PM
Ah, so we can now look forward to four years of increased restrictions on industry and technology, and a stop to all this lifting of restrictions on oil exploration that has dropped the price of oil 10% in three days. Viva McCain!
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 7:34 PM
You are such a waste of time. I wonder if you are going to be one of the people here complaining the loudest when your president Barack Obama does yet another thing to screw all of us conservatives over again …
When you had the same opportunity as the rest of us to do something about it and add your vote to all the people who voted for Obama. I wonder if anyone else here will remember that you were part of the problem. People have such short memories some times.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 7:36 PM
Viva Hernandez!
Viva LaRaza!
Viva Gore!
Viva Kennedy!
Viva Feingold!
Viva McCain points!
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 7:39 PM
Happy to have missed most of this thread. But glad to see this moment of clarity on behalf of the anti-McCain forces.
You seem to agree that Barr is not a viable candidate for anything, including the seat he most recently held in congress. His voting record is virtually identical to McCain’s on every important issue, and yet he is somehow heralded here as a “true conservative”, while McCain is labeled a “liberal”.
This is strange to me.
Since being thrown out of office, Barr has nuanced various of his positions to meet with his new anti-war Paulian philosophy. That’s great, but please, and I say this to all of the nouveau Barrians – Madison (heart-ache) Conservative, fossten, St. Olaf, NoDonk – none of you have articulated much of an argument for supporting the Quixotic tilting of Barr, so much as you are claiming to vote against McCain, and yet you criticize those of us who will support McCain as partisans locked into an R v D mentality.
I don’t agree that your philosophy – voting for a guaranteed loser with whom you find more agreement (suddenly; sorry to say it) and thus ensuring the election of the candidate with whom you find the least agreement – is noticably better than ours – voting for a guy with whom we have found frequent disagreement, because we like him infinitely better than the socialist maggot that is his opponent.
I will agree to disagree.
Jaibones on July 17, 2008 at 7:41 PM
Bednarik was pretty good in 04, he just was not visible.
Squid Shark on July 17, 2008 at 7:42 PM
No Donk is supporting Barr????
I say good day, sir!
Squid Shark on July 17, 2008 at 7:43 PM
One day, a man named John McCain looked around at the senate where he was a long time senator and decided that he wanted a change. So he set out on a journey through caucuses and primaries. He climbed over some candidates and went around others until he reached the Republican nomination.
The coming Presidential race would be a tough one, and so John McCain stopped to reconsider the situation. He couldn’t see any way to win on his own. So he thought that he would probably lose. Suddenly, he saw some naive conservatives blogging at a conservative web site. He decided to ask them for help in winning the election. “Would you be so kind, my friends, as to give me a hand in winning the election?”
“Well now, Senator McCain! How do we know that if we help you, you wont betray us?” asked the conservatives hesitantly.
“Because,” senator McCain replied, “If I betray you, then I would fail too, for you see I cannot govern without your support!”
Now this seemed to make some sense to the conservatives. But they asked. “What about when you get close to being elected? You could still start to betray us and might still win anyway!”
“This is true,” agreed senator McCain, “But I might well not be able to get enough conservative turnout to win the presidency!”
“Alright then…how do we know you wont just wait till you get elected and then betray us?” said the conservatives.
“Ahh…,” crooned senator McCain, “Because you see, once you’ve helped to make me president, I will be so grateful for your help, that it would hardly be fair to reward you with betrayal, now would it?”
So the conservatives agreed to take help senator McCain get elected president. He edged out Barak Obama in a nail-bitting race and was inaugurated in January of the year 2009. Now president McCain immediately got a democratic majority in congress to enact full amnesty for all illegals in the United States and all of their relatives. He also nominated Hillary Clinton to the U.S. Supreme court along with Senator Teddy Kennedy’s wife. Both were confirmed. Juan Hernandez was named to be the new head of Homeland Security and Al Gore was named to both of the two newly created posts of Grand Economic Czar and Climate change Imperial Master.
.
“You fool!” croaked the conservatives, “You have betrayed us and you will never get a second term. Why on earth did you do that?”
Now president McCain shrugged and snickered and did a little jig….
“I could not help myself. It is my nature.”
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 7:48 PM
No, no, MC. For my part, I reserve the right to spend the better part of four years spitting blood and venom here every other week when McCain does something idiotic. But I am still supporting him, because he is infinitely better for me than Obama.
If he is elected, I will be agitating for a conservative to run against him in the primary in three years. But the primary is over, and incidentally Bob Barr wasn’t in it. He isn’t going to be elected to anything, so maybe he should just take his spot on the roster at Fox and wait for 2012.
This is the general election, and there are two candidates.
Jaibones on July 17, 2008 at 7:49 PM
Don’t know how convincing this will be to the anti-McCain faction and I have mentioned this before but I am voting for McCain because he is not Obama.
I am conservative but not THE most conservative guy in the room (that’s what you guys are arguing about, right?)and McCain has some pretty liberal positions so yeah, I guess it comes down to Republican vs democat and I’ll vote Republican!
Vince on July 17, 2008 at 7:51 PM
What you said.
Jaibones on July 17, 2008 at 7:51 PM
What I wonder is: What will the McCainiacs do after November 4th? If he wins, then they will say “I told you so!” If he loses, then they will still say “I told you so!” and probably grumble in the New Year. I mean, at some point or another, they have to go back to their normal, everyday jobs. They compromise their ideals for a few months and let the conservative bandwagon pass them up for a little while. It will be interesting seeing them try to jump back on, especially if the best 70+ year-old Democrat candidate in history wins and governs like most reasonable people are afraid he will.
MB007 on July 17, 2008 at 7:52 PM
One of the things that people who despise McCain like to mention is that they hate that he reaches across the isle to his “democrat friends,” and that he should do that.
I see no reason to ‘agree to disagree’ with people who will not support the republican nominee, when the republican primaries are over, and there is just two people left. Of course your comments are valid, and your reasonings above hit all the logical points as we ponder how in the hell such a rotten candidate such as McCain has emerged when there were so many better ones to choose from, and they failed. Our voters do not share the same level of conservatism as most of us here. They are as different in levels of conservatism as the country as there are conservatives an liberals. But they spoke. And McCain was the winner of this process. Don’t like it? Change the process. But if you don’t support the winner of the process, you are doing the same as the democrats who are supporting their candidate.
When Bush won the presidency, the loony liberals took no time to begin with their “he’s not MY president” BS, and now, we have the same childish behavior on display be these few idiots here that are saying that McCain is not their republican nominee. After I heard the idiot liberals acting so childish, I made a mental note not to act the same way, if a democrat was elected. And now, as I said, I am seeing these same infantile, selfish and self-destructive behavior on display here. By these so-called conservatives.
Agree to disagree if you want to be polite, it’s your prerogative, but I see these people with this mentality as dangerous to conservative as the liberals are. And McCain may want to reach across the isle and make nice with his political enemies, but I have no intention to do the same.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 7:55 PM
You are wasting your time. They will never accept this basic fact. It’s like speaking to a brick wall.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 7:59 PM
George Will’s question for McKoolaid drinkers -
“The more McCain talks — about wicked “speculators,” about how he reveres ANWR as much as the Grand Canyon, about adjusting the planet’s thermostat, etc. — the more conservatives cling to judicial nominees as a reason for supporting him. But now another portion of his signature legislation has been repudiated by the court as an affront to the First Amendment, and again Roberts and Alito have joined the repudiation. Yet McCain promises to nominate jurists like them. Is that believable?”
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 8:11 PM
We all know John McCain is terrible on immigration. For years he held America’s sovereignty and security hostage to amnesty and increased immigration, and his newfound support for “enforcement first” is so insubstantial and transparently insincere that it insults our intelligence. He’s so bad that Americans for Better Immigration ranks his performance in office as the worst of all the presidential candidates — including Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. (See the GOP grid here and the Democratic one here.) And as Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation has pointed out, passage of McCain’s bill “would represent the largest expansion of the welfare state in 30 years.”
But his support for de facto open borders is merely one manifestation of a larger problem — John McCain is a multiculturalist.
Take bilingual education. McCain has been an enthusiastic proponent of this divisive and discredited program for years.
McCain’s ideological multiculturalism is also apparent from his longstanding opposition to official status for the English language; as he boasted on Hardball in 2000, “I have fought against English-only ballot initiatives.”
Rick Santorum, in his recent interview with Hugh Hewitt, describes how McCain racialized the immigration issue to his fellow Republican senators:
[McCain] lectured us repeatedly about how xenophobic we were, lectured us, us being the Republican conference, about how wrong we were on this, how we were on the wrong side of history, and that you know, this is important for his . . . because having come from Arizona, knowing the strength of the Hispanic community, that we were going to be seen as racists, and he wasn’t going be part of that, that he was not a racist, and that if we were for tougher borders, it was a racist thing.
- Mark Krikorian
Ronald Reagan = Republican rebirth
John McCain = Republican suicide
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 8:14 PM
Yet another excellent reason not to vote for McCain during the republican primaries.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 8:15 PM
Go ahead RINO’s elect the traitorous McCain. Drive a stake through the heart of what was once the conservatives party. He’ll have to be elected without my vote and hopefully the vote of every true conservative and patriot.
That’s right, I said patriot because helping to elect anyone who disrespects our country’s sovereignty and it’s most basic principle, the rule of law, is complicit in the treason.
I’ve heard and read the attempts at justifying a vote for McCain. They ring hollow. It’s foolish to preoccupy yourselves with the war and Supreme Court justices if the integrity of the country is violated from within, facilitated by McCain’s treasonous initiatives.
We will be a country without borders. We will no longer be country subscribing to one set of laws for everyone with no one above the law. The very basis of any country and our country will no longer be.
We will solidify ourselves as country run by corporations and special interest lobbies with no regard for even the most basic principles that made this once great country great.
The lesser of two evils. What a sad joke.
It is what it is.
- voiceofreason
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 8:17 PM
Yes yes yes you have posted your McScorpion story about 400 times, we get it.
Moving on…
Squid Shark on July 17, 2008 at 8:18 PM
Hey, that’s odd. A lot of reasons not to vote for McCain, he sure does sound like an idiot. But wait – the democrats also want us to not vote for McCain. This is so very odd that you are wanting the exact-same-thing as what the democrats want, MB4.
Did you know that MoveOn PAC has launched a new anti-McCain site to battle the conservatives that plan to vote for him, and give tips as to what to say? You might want to look into this, these same people who claimed that Bush was Hitler, and that General Petraus was General Betray-Us – have a lot of useful information that you could use in your fight: to attempt to make as many conservatives not vote for McCain.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 8:19 PM
Somehow, I thought this thread was about Mr Barr. I must have been mistaken.
Squid Shark on July 17, 2008 at 8:19 PM
When you refuse to pick the “lesser of two evils,” and the “greater of two evils” prevails because the greater’s supporters will be voting while you sit on your thumb on election day ….
How is this victory of the greater of two evils supposed to be a better choice, MB4?
Care to answer that question, or are you too busy searching for more anti-McCain material at thinkprogress or the huffington post to reply?
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 8:21 PM
+1
Spirit of 1776 on July 17, 2008 at 8:22 PM
You are void of substance and could not have misnamed yourself more. I doubt that you get very many McCain points at all.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 8:22 PM
Yeah.
Don’t vote for him. Unless you want to contribute to Barack Obama being the next president. He is the most recent incarnation of Ralph Nader and Ross Perot.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 8:23 PM
FloatingRock,
Amen! About time the McCain moonbats understand that the whole voting against McCain makes you an Obama supporter be put to bed. If these idiots are so damned loyal to McCain, why can’t they argue the positive instead of the negative? Because even the idiots who support the man can’t articulate why we should be voting FOR a political traitor, liberal, hater of evangelicals and social conservatives.
McCain’s supporters need to either come up with a winning reason to support the man or understand that he lacks the support of a significant portion of the base. It’s not the votes in November that matters at this point as much as it is being able to rally the grassroot constituency to go out there and sell the candidate. McCain isn’t getting that support and no amount of stupid commentary about why Obama is worse is going to get the enthusiasm and support to put McCain in office. Had the Democrats put up a legitimate candidate, the election would already have been decided since fools of the liberal wing of the GOP chose now to throw a temper tantrum eight years in the making. Many of them are spewing their bile on this site.
highhopes on July 17, 2008 at 8:25 PM
Being an open borders guy himself, Barr must not be quite bigoted enough.
myamphibian on July 17, 2008 at 8:25 PM
You thinking is most uncoordinated.
Most of my material is my own. The rest comes from other conservatives.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 8:25 PM
You must have missed where I said “as we ponder how in the hell such a rotten candidate such as McCain has emerged when there were so many better ones to choose from,” m>on July 17, 2008 at 7:55 PM
Oh, wait. You didn’t. You are just spewing the same crap that you have since you got here. Don’t let the facts get in the way, huh, MB4.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 8:26 PM
Say we buy into your mindless and amoral view of the world. Do we get to blame you for the next four years as McCain enacts all the same stuff you claim voting for the bastard is going to prevent?
highhopes on July 17, 2008 at 8:27 PM
Before I knew Amnesty’s name
And heard it’s wail and whinin’
I had a country and it had me
And the sun was always shinin’
But then one day McCain betrayed me
And left me far behind them
And now I’m lost, so gone and lost
Not even God can find me
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 8:27 PM
And it’s too bad that this ‘highly esteemed’ participant has made his career here bashing McCain in the hopes that Obama is the next president.
Kind of selfish to do this just because the man he voted for lost the republican primaries.
Talk about vindictive. F*k the entire country by dissing McCain because he didn’t get his way. Maybe he thinks that by doing all of this, that his guy, or another conservative will win in 4 years. I hope its worth it. For him.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 8:28 PM
“What’s this?” thought John McCain. “I can feel nothing warmer at all! That is terrible. Am I stupid? Am I a flat-earther? Am I a denier? Am I not fit to be President? That would be the most dreadful thing that could happen to me. “Oh, it is very hot!” McCain said aloud. “It has my highest approbation.” And McCain nodded in a contented way, and gazed outside, for he would not say that he felt no Global Warming. The whole entourage that he had with him looked and looked, and felt no warming, any more than the rest; but, like John McCain, they said, “It is so warm!” and counseled him to always say that he felt warm when he was out in public. “It is warm, hot even!” went from mouth to mouth. On all sides there seemed to be general warming, and John McCain gave Al Gore the title of Imperial Master of Global Warming Science.
So John McCain went in procession, and every one in the streets said, “How incomparable warm it is! What a warm day it is!” No one would let it be perceived that he could not feel warming, for that would have shown that he was not fit for his office, or was very stupid or a flat-earther or a denier. No day of John McCain’s had ever been as warm as this one.
“But I’m fressing my ass off out here!” a little child cried out at last. “Just hear what that innocent says!” said the father: and one whispered to another what the child had said. “But it is cold out here!” said the whole people at length. That touched John McCain, for it seemed to him that they were right; but the thought within himself was, “I must go through with feeling all the Global Warming. I do not dare to do otherwise” And so he held himself a little higher, and his aides held on tighter than ever, and proclaimed the Global Warming which did not exist at all.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 8:28 PM
By John McCain’s McCain/Kennedy amnesty bill, by his McCain/Feingold anti free speech bill, by his Al Gore Global Warming worship, by his Gang of Fourteen, by his “My freinds” snicker, by his “FUC# you, I know more than anyone else in this room!” by his expression – By each of these things the man’s calling is plainly revealed. That all united should fail to enlighten the competent inquirer in this matter is almost inconceivable.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 8:30 PM
Do you actually believe that Barack Obama will be a better choice than voting for the winner of the republican primaries, the same person who is now endorsed by Fred Thompson?
With a straight face, are you telling me that the most liberal man in the senate who has a better chance of being president, going up against McCain is going to be a better president?
You’re totally fine with Obama?
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 8:30 PM
That’s cool. I see merit to all sides of the argument, I only take issue with the choice that wise_man and some of the others have made to resort to personal attacks instead of reason.
I’m not excited about Barr. I have serious problems with him based on what little I know, but I also have serious problems with McCain. I don’t know enough about Barr to measure who the lesser-of-three-evils is, which was the purpose of my first comment encouraging further discussion here at HotAir.
FloatingRock on July 17, 2008 at 8:32 PM
Reporter: Senator McCain, is it true that if you become President you will put a real fence along the border with Mexico rather than just some phony so called “virtual fence”? And a follow up question sir, if so what will the physical fence look like?
John McCain: That is a very good question and yes when I become el President I will put up a physical fence. What will it look like? Well it will run the full length of the border and have special security gates every 100 feet.
All the security gates will have on them:
1) Press one for Spanish (with a response of “Welcome Amigo, my country is your country and please take a free map to the wonderful plantation owner employer of your choice. Also please feel free to enroll you children in our schools and demand that they be taught in Spanish and please also feel free to avail yourself of all the free medical care that you want. If there are any Gringos in line in front of you, just go to the head of the line. If you want to fly any Mexican flags plese feel free to just take down an American one and use it’s flag pole”).
2) Press two for English (with a response of “#uck you! I know more than any of you damned bigoted nativist lazy madre fornicario gringos who do not want what is right for America del Norte!!!”).
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 8:32 PM
That was amazing. Did you get that from an anti-McCain site, or did you come up with that venomous BS all by yourself this time again?
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 8:32 PM
HELP PICK LETTUCE AT $50 PER HOUR FOR SENATOR JOHN McCAIN
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 8:34 PM
That’s factually inaccurate.
As for f’g the whole country. To embrace McCain wholly seems as foolish to me as believing we can sweet talk Iran out of nukes with Obama. I understand Mac’s strategy – he is looking for Reagan democrats and independents, so by necessity he has moved away from the conservative base of the Republican party.
You can get anti-social about that, but that should be obvious to everyone. For people who care about the values of the conservative base, it makes no sense to ignore what McCain represents. He fathered CFR, which is a bill so atrocious it scarcely can be described, as well as the liv bill that was overturned. Moreover, he was the author of the non-transparent Amnesty bill.
These are simple facts. But they are facts that have more consequence then what color the drapes are. McCain may be the pragmatists choice, but with Iraq settling into victory, it’s not difficult to see why people would vote their conscience at the end of the day and not rally one more time to the ‘but he’s not a D’ vote.
Spirit of 1776 on July 17, 2008 at 8:37 PM
Anti-McCain site? You are blowing smoke again.
You can’t handle the truth!
- Nathan Jessup
The venom is McCain’s. I just point it out.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 8:39 PM
You know, I really don’t think that you get any McCain points at all. You sure do not earn any. I dunno maybe they give you some out of charity. No, they probably dock you some more. For McCain’s own good you should probably quit his campaign.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 8:42 PM
There are two candidates but, IMO, there is only one party. The Democrat Party has split into liberal and moderate factions and the moderate faction has commandeered the Republican Party.
In order for there to be a two party system we need two distinct parties, hence my hope for a new party. Although I registered as a Republican when I turned 18, shortly thereafter I decided that my differences with the party were too great to continue to identify with them…. Un-coincidentally it was about the same time that Reagan was leaving office. I don’t have any loyalty to a party, only to the country, so if I can add my number to a third party with the hope that, someday, we can reestablish a two party system, so be it. I’d also be happy if, whether McCain wins or loses, conservatives can retake the Republican Party in the near future. But still, I’ve never truly identified with the party, especially, for example, creationism being taught as science, so speaking for myself I might prefer some realignment in our political system now that the fissures have widened far enough that an opportunity has presented itself. I’d love for religious fundamentalists to start their own loony party and relegate themselves to the dustbin of history.
FloatingRock on July 17, 2008 at 8:47 PM
Nice way of deflecting answering the question. No, I’m not “fine” with either Obama or McCain. They are equally bad choices and America is screwed no matter what.
You are as foolish as Quisling if you think that making deals and supporting bad candidates will lead to good results. I voice my objections about both Obama and McCain. McCain is the more evil of the two because he has fools like you convinced that somehow supporting him without qualification will make a difference. It won’t.
Unlike you, I strive to be honest in my analysis of both candidates. Frankly, your uncritical and unqualified adoration of McCain disgusts me.
highhopes on July 17, 2008 at 8:48 PM
Maybe I haven’t pointed out my support of Barr because, um, I haven’t spoken of any plans to vote for Barr, or that Barr has made me interested enough to vote for him. Don’t conflate my defense of those who choose to vote for Barr against McCain acolytes with support for him.
This is the general election, and there are more than two candidates. Now, the likelihood that one of the two major candidates will win is pretty much assured. However, I refuse to accept the growing misconception that you have to vote for one or the other. This is a democracy, and as such we have the freedom to vote for whomever we deem the best for the job, and to not vote for those we do not want to have the job. I do not want Obama to be president, nor do I want McCain to be president, because they are both liberals.
Now, I can understand that you have accepted that the only way to defeat Obama is to vote McCain. Many people are working on that logic, and it’s sound, and there is nothing wrong with it. However, the blaming of an Obama victory on those who refuse to vote for McCain is straw man, because there are other candidates, and they have caused upsets before. The blame for Obama being one of the two candidates lies with the democrats, and, some would argue, partially with Rush. The latter I forgive. Some would argue that McCain’s liberal stance makes it easier for Obama to win due to the aversion to McCain by conservatives. There’s plenty of blame to go around. However, the “Vote for McCain because if you don’t, we’ll blame you even if you didn’t vote for Obama!” crap needs to stop, and its Goracle-like doomsayers (foolish_boy being their leader) need to crawl under a rock for the next four years and leave the sane world alone.
As you said, agree to disagree.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 9:01 PM
So folks, here’s reason when it comes to voting for McCain:
In 1976 we knew Reagan, we knew who he was, and we knew if we had lost in 1976 (and we did), there was always Reagan to fall back on. This is 2008, not 1976. The Dems have Hillary to fall back on, should Obamajebus lose in 2008. We have…..exactly who?
The reason for this lack of a “bench” is due to the success of the media smear machine at keeping good conservatives afraid of going for higher office. A Democrat win does nothing to discourage the continued funding and operation of this smear machine, and your next Reagan may just keep his or her head down in the State Senate out of fear someone may dig up that cow-tipping incident on Prom Night.
If you want better conservative leadership, we need to get the Democrats and media eating their own the next four years. An Obama win won’t accomplish that.
Sekhmet on July 17, 2008 at 9:01 PM
Care to disprove what I have said about McCain, since you have called me a liar? Or are you going to continue to be as dodgy as Obama, and to have as much integrity as him?
I made a claim and backed it up. You made a claim and ran like a coward. Let’s see your chops, you party hack.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 9:04 PM
Hmmm, I dunno. Mitt Romney? Rudy Giuliani? Fred Thompson? The guys who all made themselves household names? Just because they haven’t proclaimed themselves to be the leaders of a new conservative movement doesn’t mean their impact is any less.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 9:05 PM
I agree, I think you guys are dead wrong on this one, but you are not for Obama.
Squid Shark on July 17, 2008 at 9:08 PM
I don’t need any tips from them. I get my tips from McCain.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 9:09 PM
I haven’t forgiven Barr for what he said about Wiccans and Pagans. Barr can say anything he wants, but he has a voting record that says much the opposite. Only when it became clear Ron Paul was not going to do an independent run did Barr decide, “Hey, I can pick up his supporters and make a name for myself.”
And Lady be thanked Ron Paul finally went away (more or less). I am sick of Ron Paul and his followers.
Sekhmet on July 17, 2008 at 9:11 PM
But Reagan was a leader of a movement. All three men you name had issue sof their own with parts of the base. There was more to Reagan than just being the alternative after four years of Carter.
Sekhmet on July 17, 2008 at 9:14 PM
As I said, I didn’t follow the entire thread. Sorry for the false conflation (?).
It is a metaphysical certainty, unless Hillary bounces Obambi in a DNC convention coup d’etat. And huh? Who? When? The only upset a third party candidate has caused in my forty nine years is to tip the election to one or the other of the two parties. So let’s be clear – it’s either Obama or McCain.
And your equation of Obama and McCain as “liberals” is hardly a fair description of either. Obama is a leftist, unlike anyone who has ever been nominated, less experienced, and more left(ist) than even the Dems have nominated before.
McCain is wonderfully conservative on a variety of important (to me) issues. He is more conservative than the great majority of GOP Senators on government spending, which is my number three issue in all of politics. He is perfect on number one – twot. He is a bit suspect on issue number two – SCOTUS – mostly because I am an absolutist there, and because Stevens, Souter, and Kennedy are products of mushy Republican presidents.
So, I think it is terribly unfair to write him off as a liberal, despite his sometimes antagonistic comments on illegal aliens. I have said before, though, that I am not too far from him on that issue.
Jaibones on July 17, 2008 at 9:23 PM
Be wary of Bob Barr as Thirsty McWormwodd (pseudonym) warns in a recent edition of The Anerican Spectator.
onlineanalyst on July 17, 2008 at 9:50 PM
Nicely said. I tend to lose myself in cheesy metaphors and sarcasm and my points go somewhat awry. But you hit it on the head for me. Bravo.
austinnelly on July 17, 2008 at 10:10 PM
A well-reasoned defense of why you support Triceratops.
The only weakness in your logic, IMO, is that there is no getting around the fact that McCain is far more centrist than the party when it comes on virtually all domestic issues. He waffles back and forth on gay marriage, global warming, and the whole list of Dem talking points when many (me included) want somebody to take a stand. Whenever McCain has done THAT it has been co-sponsoring unacceptably liberal legislation with Democrats.
highhopes on July 17, 2008 at 10:13 PM
What did you say, That McCain isn’t the most conservative republican out there?
Thanks for that newsflash. We knew that already.
The republican voters knew that when they voted for him. The election is now at the stage when the democrats and republican primaries are over, and the winners of both will get millions of votes and the person who has captured the most electoral votes is going to be the next president.
Obama or McCain.
By bitching about how McCain isn’t as conservative as you’d like, you are more interested in re-arranging the deck chairs than to get into one of the two last lifeboats.
Time to act like an adult and choose between the two candidates. Because one of them will be the next president.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 10:14 PM
Does anyone here honestly believe that Bob Barr would be such a huge factor in this Presidential election, if the GOP had nominated a libertarian-leaning Conservative like Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, or Fred Thompson?
Of course not! For all you GOP whiners out there, we Republicans did this to ourselves. We nominated the second most unlibertarian candidate of the field. OF COURSE! libertarians are going to react by running a credible candidate outside of the GOP.
You blatantly thumb your nose at someone, they are certainly most likely to just turn and walk away.
ericdondero on July 17, 2008 at 10:15 PM
What did you say, That McCain isn’t the most conservative republican out there?
Thanks for that newsflash. We knew that already.
The republican voters knew that when they voted for him. The election is now at the stage when the democrats and republican primaries are over, and the winners of both will get millions of votes and the person who has captured the most electoral votes is going to be the next president.
Obama or McCain.
By being an ass about how McCain isn’t as conservative as you’d like, you are more interested in re-arranging the deck chairs than to get into one of the two last lifeboats.
Time to act like an adult and choose between the two candidates. Because one of them will be the next president.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 10:16 PM
yeah, lets go out and vote for the ny times endorsed republican candidate!!
do your realize how much damage he will do to republican hopes for congressinal gains? he will have no coattails. most candidates will have to run against his platforms to have a chance of getting elected, even republicans in safe districts or states. very few politicians will speak out for him, they see what happens if you say something that angers obama, mccain kicks you in the nuts (ask gramm, completely true and defensible statement) same w/ the 527’s. they wont help mccain. if they accidentally say something that angers mccain he’ll punish them. remember the swiftboats vets? mccain came down on them hard, called them dishonorable, well if anyone knows dishonorable its the adulterer mccain
chasdal on July 17, 2008 at 10:35 PM
First off, weren’t you just bitching at me about posting twice? At least there was a difference between my two posts.
No. I said he’s a global warming shill, an amnesty shill, an anti-tax cut politician, and an anti-free-speech politician due to CFR. You have said on numerous occasions that I tell lies about him. You have yet to prove it. Then again, you also doubted my conservative beliefs, and you have also called me an Obama supporter. You have yet to prove a single one of these things, and that is because all of those claims are utter and complete horse crap. So put up or shut up already.
A real adult knows the way the electoral system was set up in this country. It was not set up as a two-party system, and it is still not. Everyone has the right to vote for whomever they wish, regardless of what party ticket they are on, or even if they are on the ticket. You are obviously not an adult, evidenced by your making baseless claims about those who converse with you, your continued projection onto others of your own lack of actual facts to back up your frivolous and worthless insistences, and your blaming of others for your plight.
When you grow up, come on back. Until then, don’t you dare call me a liar again unless you have proof, you little slime.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2008 at 10:38 PM
I am voting for Barr.
And listening to the wonderful logic on this blog only reinforces the reasons that I will vote for Barr. It is truly sad to see the “conservatives” on this site put forth such vacuous tripe that would fit right in with the vacuous tripe over at the HuffPo or DKos.
Barr is for smaller government (McCain/Obama are not). Barr is for less taxes (McCain/Obama are not). Barr is for reining in entitlement programs (McCain/Obama are not). Barr is for a free market solution to the energy problems (McCain/Obama are not). Barr is for free market solutions and less government involvement in education (McCain/Obama are not).
But I should vote for McCain or Obama might get elected? Who cares? Neither Obama or McCain believe or advocate what I believe in or stand for.
King of the Britons on July 17, 2008 at 10:38 PM
YOu do realize that the New York Times is going to endorse the democrat for this year’s elections, right?
.
(drat. My previous first comment that didn’t show up now shows up.)
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 10:52 PM
Sekhmet at 6:29 PM, July 17, makes an important point that needs to said again and elaborated on. Yes, in 1976 we knew who Reagan was. In fact, in 1964, we knew who Reagan was; he gave the most articulate national GOP speech that year. In the years that followed (in the 1960’s), he out-debated Robert Kennedy on TV. In 1968, he was a contender for the GOP Presidential nomination. In 1976, he almost displaced a sitting President as the GOP nominee. So, when Reagan ran successfully in 1980, he had been a Presidential contender for 12 years and a recognized national political figure for 16 years. No one today on the conservative side remotely approaches any of that.
Nancy Reagan’s advice to you is that you should vote for John McCain. That is sound advice, and I for one think that Ronald Reagan would tell you the same.
Phil Byler on July 17, 2008 at 11:18 PM
Triceratops. Heh. That’s a new one for me.
As for your McCain being more liberal than the party, I don’t necessarily agree. There are many more conservative thinkers, and better thinkers for that matter, in the party. There are also many more idiotic and liberal members, and corrupt to boot. I think those who want to paint McCain as some sort of consistently liberal and anti-conservative figure are deluding themselves about the party.
The party is a mess. It’s full of closeted gays playing I-M with 18 year old intern boys, drunk, coke-snorting, pork-sucking spendaholics, wife abandoning whore-schtuppers, and financial crooks running scams for their brother-in-law’s business.
It’s not nearly as sickening as the Democrat party, but it’s good and damn sick. So when McCain bucks the party and screams about the Boeing deal, or a $50 billion Pentagon boondoggle, at least consider the possibility that he’s right. And when he spews his idiotic crap about illegal aliens and global warming, let’s not forget that he’s five-by-five with Bush on both subjects – whom we joyously elected to two terms – and any number of other Senate RINOs.
There are lots of issues on which I disagree with McCain, but unless you guys and Rush want to engage in a spittle-flecked, vein-popping, fist-slamming tirade against that other pansy, illegal alien-knobbing, Hollywood RINO, Ronald Reagan, then let’s maintain a little decorum and perspective.
Jaibones on July 17, 2008 at 11:37 PM
(King of the Who?, if you expect an intelligent response, you’ll need to make an intelligent comment.)
Jaibones on July 17, 2008 at 11:39 PM
An excellent proposition.
Jaibones on July 17, 2008 at 11:42 PM
For what it’s worth, Barrios, my brother is the most reasoned conservative I talk to, and he says the only intelligent conservative thoughts he has heard in months are coming from Bob Barr.
I don’t doubt that in any way, and I hope Barr continues to speak his mind throughout the election campaign. The sooner he ends his “campaign” and focuses on putting those ideas out in the public square, the better, imo. Gingrich needs help (and a good, swift kick in the ass).
Jaibones on July 17, 2008 at 11:46 PM
Yeah, but do they have fire in their bellies? :)
FloatingRock on July 17, 2008 at 11:46 PM
Losertarian.
YAWN…..
seanrobins on July 17, 2008 at 11:49 PM
Very reluctantly, the second time. Bush took what should have been a 10% blowout and turned it into a 3% crawl. And I don’t know how many were voting for Bush so much as for his Iraq policy and those around him (at least that was my thinking on it). If Bush had been pushing for amnesty as publicly as McCain he might have even gotten crushed in the second election as turnout would have been very depressed.
I will probabaly end up voting for McShame (and then wretching for a week after) but I understand anyone who votes for someone else. I put the fault squarely on McCain, who knew that he would tear the GOP apart if he won the nomination and should have quit the primary back in the shamnesty days. It’s like an injured athlete using his final burst of energy to win the Olympic Trials only to fall apart in the real race. If he cared about the team, he would not have entered the trials.
progressoverpeace on July 17, 2008 at 11:49 PM
Triceratops- the Rhino-like dinosaur as a nickname for the RINO dino…. Get it? ;-0
With the exception of Iraq he IS consistently out-of-step with the party. That would be okay if he didn’t make it so clear that he hates social conservatives and evangelicals- the base of the party. I’m not talking simple disagreement- McCain loathes anybody to the right of his centrist positions. They “denied” him his nomination in 2000 and after an eight-year temper tantrum (that included flirting with becoming
Kerry’s VP) the man is out for revenge. That isn’t how a candidate wins an election. Showing some tolerance for social conservatives would be a good first step if McCain really wants to win in November. Instead the man is still attempting to get cross-over votes from disgruntled Clinton supporters. His base isn’t secure enough for that.
He screamed about the Boeing deal for the wrong reasons- as evidenced by the fact that the resulting rebid was thrown out because of all the procedural problems caused by the DOD attempting to accomodate McCain’s objections. My biggest beef with McCain though is his rabid irrational attacks on Secretary Rumsfeld. They appear solely based in reforms over cutting defense programs that was providing pork to McCain supporters. It was wrong of McCain to feud with the SECDEF in public no matter what the motive. The President has the right to pick his cabinet without a cranky bastard in the Senate playing armchair general over every single decision because his backers are being hurt financially.
You must be talking about Ronald Reagan, Jr.
President Ronald Reagan was wrong about some things (amnesty 1986 for example) but his positions were based in solid conservative values not pandering for centrist votes the way McCain is whoring for support. Reagan’s writings show a brilliant mind that formulated a well-reasoned world view.
McCain is a dim bulb in comparison who seems intellectually unconcerned about his positions beyond what they do for him politically. He goes out of his way to avoid talking about faith or values. He will speak endlessly about how the GOP needs to be more accomodating of illegals, homosexual marriage, and the “right” for a woman to kill off life. McCain and Reagan might have been similar at one point but McCain has become a Judas to all that Reagan advocated.
I’ll leave you with this:
One of the most dangerous inclinations of human nature, Thomas Jefferson once said, is appropriating wealth produced by the labors of others rather than producing it with one’s own labor. He said government was the usual vehicle for this abuse. And as he put it: The stronger the government, the weaker the producer. And he added: The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.
Ronald Reagan, 1987
John McCain is neither an advocate of these ideas nor does he have the intellectual ability to communicate them. He speaks openly about greater corporate taxation. He’s already abridged the First Amendment in the name of campaign finance reform and he wanted to ignore the rule of law to grant no-questions-asked amnesty to illegals. How dare you suggest that McCain and Reagan are kindred souls.
highhopes on July 18, 2008 at 12:32 AM
Bob Barr huh? seems like there is finally a candidate i can vote for without going to a confessional afterwords, and telling the priest: “forgive me father for i have sinned: I voted Republican/Democrat”
RMC1618 on July 18, 2008 at 1:07 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »