Bob Barr?

When I heard this morning that he'd announced his candidacy for the Libertarian Party nomination my initial reaction was one of WTF?! and anger, because the last time I'd read anything about Bob Barr he was very clearly NOT a libertarian.

However I've done a little more reading today and it appears that he's recently reversed his previous positions on medical marijuana and the Patriot Act, as well as done work with the ACLU.

So what do y'all think of this?  Is he really a libertarian now, or is he just a conservative who can't get along inside the Republican Party?

Also, how much of a shot does he have at winning the nomination, given that the convention is in just a couple of weeks?  I haven't really been following the LP nomination process since after last year's LP Nevada convention (when I stirred up shit with my "Two whackjobs, a convicted felon, and George Phillies" post).  I understand that George Phillies and Steve Kubby are still in the race and the "two whackjobs" have dropped out but I don't know anything about any of the other candidates running.  I used to check Hammer of Truth for all the hot Libertarian Party gossip but that site has been down and under construction for years now! :(

Comments

[Philip Welch]

There's another libertarian candidate: former Senator from Alaska and YouTube celebrity extraordinaire Mike Gravel!

[Jacqueline]

WTF? I thought he was a Democrat.

WHY DO ALL THE CRAZIES COME TO OUR PARTY. WHY.

[Kirsten]

Neither Gravel nor Barr is a good representative of the LP (or if they are, the LP should be disbanded).

Bob Barr:
1. Bob Barr is spending all sorts of money on everything EXCEPT campaigning (see lastfreevoice.wordpress.com for details). If his PAC spending habits translate over to his campaign, less than 10% of his campaign donations will go to actual campaigning.
2. Bob Barr sat on his announcement until a couple of weeks before the convention thereby sidestepping all sorts of opportunities to be grilled on his positions. That said, it is known that
3. Bob Barr does not support a defined timetable for withdrawing from Iraq.
4. Bob Barr is financially supporting Republican candidates in elections where there is an LP candidate (see also lastfreevoice.wordpress.com).
5. Tom Knapp makes the argument that Bob Barr is part of a hostile takeover of the LP over at thirdpartywatch.com.

Mike Gravel:
1. See lastfreevoice.wordpress.com 3/28/08 entry on Gravel for his anti-liberty positions including advocacy of the "Fair Tax", plan to allow "the people" to pass any anti-liberty law they want (e.g. banning guns, banning drugs, etc.), and advocacy of taxpayer-funded universal health care among other things.
2. There is credible evidence that Gravel may be skipping out on payments to a campaign worker. See lastfreevoice.wordpress.com for both sides of the story.

[Jacqueline]

It looks like Last Free Voice is the new place for hot LP gossip. Thanks for the links.

[Scorpius]

One point:
Bob Barr does not support a defined timetable for withdrawing from Iraq.

No person with an ounce of sanity left in their skull would.

[Shawn Levasseur]

Barr's been on the LNC as a regional rep for over a year now. His joining the LP was hyped quite a bit when it happened a little earlier than that.

He's been doing the circuit of state conventions, and does at least talk the talk when it comes to Libertarianism. Whether he could walk the walk has yet to be seen. I'm still up in the air about what I think of him as a potential candidate.

I do think people are a bit overly paranoid about him, though. Some people are finding conspiracies throughout the party all the time.

As a delegate to the national convention, I received a call from his campaign (er, make that 'exploratory committee') a week or so ago. They were obviously trying to poll to find out how much actual support or willingness to vote for him existed amongst the delegates.

Gravel, he just joined the LP about two months ago. It seems he's running on his resume alone. I don't know what he thinks he can do, I suspect he just wants his campaign to continue even though he long lost any chance of the Democratic nomination. He has next to no chance.

I heard both Barr & Gravel speak at Connecticut's LP convention. Barr being undeclared wasn't part of the evening's debate, but his speech was pretty good.

Gravel cherry picked events in his career (mostly his role in readinng the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional Record) that would appeal to LP voters.

In the questions part of the debate, someone asked a question about Ron Paul and suggested we 'draft' him as the LP's nominee (though rules don't allow for it). Gravel went ballistic. Too many people in the LP have respect for Paul for that kind of response to play well.

[Shawn Levasseur]

One question:
Wayne Allyn Root has been going on about his 'fame', though I've never heard of him before his run for the LP nomination. Supposedly he's hosted shows on CNBC, and been on numerous radio talk shows, and is supposedly well known in poker circles (though not a pro player).

Is he really that big of a name despite my never having heard of him?

Or is he just "world famous in Poland?"

[Kirsten]

BTW, Jacqueline, I don't know if you already know this or not, but since you haven't listed her, Mary Ruwart is also running and is a hell of a lot better choice than Barr (or Gravel).

For anyone on the fence about Barr, how about giving him four years to prove himself (if he's going to) instead of tearing the LP apart with a highly suspect candidate.

[Jacqueline]

I've heard of him, and knew he was local and involved in gambling somehow, but didn't know anything else about him until I looked him up on Wikipedia just now. So he's not *THAT* famous, at least not in the circles I run in.

[Jacqueline]

If Mary Ruwart won the nomination and George Phillies worked on her campaign staff that would be awesome, IMO. They are both very smart people on policy, but I think she has a better image whereas he's stronger on political strategy.

[Shawn Levasseur]

In your earlier piece about the early candidates, you described Phillies as having the charisma of a wet towel.

He's gotten better. The towel's been through the dryer (though without the benefit of fabric softener).

His speaking at libertarian events around the country has him in better form than when he was running for LP Chair in 2000 and 2002. He's beginning to sound more like the congressional candidate he was when he did rather well in debates broadcast on C-Span.

Not much on the charisma, but not dull either. He seems to have enough wit and intelligence to be a very good representative of the LP, with a little fine tuning.

[Philip Welch]

He's been doing the circuit of state conventions, and does at least talk the talk when it comes to Libertarianism. Whether he could walk the walk has yet to be seen.

It's also completely irrelevant, since the Libertarian candidate for President is historically lucky to come in third.

[Shawn Levasseur]

"It's also completely irrelevant, since the Libertarian candidate for President is historically lucky to come in third."

True, but who wins the nomination will determine how many and which Libertarian Party members will have hissy fits and threaten to leave the party (then stay in spite of those threats).

That's always a good show.

[Philip Welch]

WHY DO ALL THE CRAZIES COME TO OUR PARTY. WHY.

In order to be with their own kind?

[bbartlog]

Bob Barr is a libertarian (has come around on a lot of important issues), but he's still somewhat on the right wing of the Libertarian party and as a recent convert on some of these ideas is obviously more suspect than someone who's been fighting the good fight for twenty years. I wouldn't support him for the nomination this time around.
Wayne Root has had glowing things to say about McCain in the past (bordering on endorsement) and donated $1K to Joe Lieberman. I guess he's a voice for those who like our foreign policy but are otherwise libertarian. Not someone I would support.
George Phillies, Steve Kubby, and Mary Ruwart all seem acceptable. Steve Kubby has a long activist resume (with some successes) and is definitely not going to compromise, but people who worry about health or electability might have issues with him. Ruwart and Phillies both look pretty good on the issues, though Ruwart is a little new-agey in tone and Phillies seems kinda geeky to be a strong candidate for anything.
Personally my preferences would be Ruwart>Kubby>Phillies >>> Barr>Root.

[Jacqueline]

I need to spend more time researching the candidates' backgrounds and positions and watching them speak on YouTube before I formally declare my endorsement(s), but I tentatively expect that I will be endorsing Ruwart, Kubby, and Phillies as well. (Whether anyone else will be on my list of "Jacqueline approved" candidates is what remains to be answered -- for example, Root looks good on video, but I don't know enough about him yet.)

I'll be endorsing multiple candidates because I'm not sufficiently OMG! gung ho about the LP anymore to pick one and actively campaign for him or her, but I still care enough to prefer that the nominee not be embarrassing or a non-libertarian co-opting our ticket.

[Kirsten]

Definitely check out Knappster, Third Party Watch and Last Free Voice on Root. I don't think you'll be impressed with him once you do that.

[Tom Hanna]

I always used to read Hammer of Truth and jacquelinepassey.com for the latest Libertarian Party gossip. Nice to see that one of the two is back up and running.

As far as Bob Barr, from the interviews I've heard his argument for running as a Libertarian is essentially that while the GOP is, in fundamental philosophy, a libertarian party, it's broken. It seems to me that Ron Paul's approach in 2008 had much more effect than his 1988 approach. Barr should have had the courage of his convictions and been the libertarian-conservative candidate with a spotless record in the GOP. If anyone was ever rightly accused of getting into it to be a spoiler, here's the guy. Gerrymandered out of his seat and defeated by a fellow Republican in the primary, he turns up 4 years later running as a 3rd party Presidential candidate in a year when conservative support for the GOP nominee is weak at best. Nope. This run isn't about principles, it's all about Bob Barr.

[Tom Hanna]

I always used to read Hammer of Truth and jacquelinepassey.com for the latest Libertarian Party gossip. Nice to see that one of the two is back up and running.

As far as Bob Barr, from the interviews I've heard his argument for running as a Libertarian is essentially that while the GOP is, in fundamental philosophy, a libertarian party, it's broken. It seems to me that Ron Paul's approach in 2008 had much more effect than his 1988 approach. Barr should have had the courage of his convictions and been the libertarian-conservative candidate with a spotless record in the GOP. If anyone was ever rightly accused of getting into it to be a spoiler, here's the guy. Gerrymandered out of his seat and defeated by a fellow Republican in the primary, he turns up 4 years later running as a 3rd party Presidential candidate in a year when conservative support for the GOP nominee is weak at best. Nope. This run isn't about principles, it's all about Bob Barr.