While Hillary has been working super hard to be the spoiler of the 2008 Presidential race, it looks like former Congressman Bob Barr may end up being the new Ralph Nadar or Ross Perot.
Barr is a very, very scary man. He was the author of the Defense of Marriage Act, which President Bill Clinton ended up signing, which states that only marriages that are between a man and a woman can be federally recognized. He's pro-gun, anti-abortion, hates the IRS, hates just about every government program, from welfare to public education. He also was the first to ask for impeachment hearing of Bill Clinton.
Of course, he's a disgusting hypocrite. It was discovered that he forced his wife to get an abortion and then spent many years cheating on her with numerous women. In 2003, Barr served on the defense team for white supremacist Chester Doles.
Anyway, Barr is running for President as a Libertarian. He's already polling at about 5%, which is directly eating away at McCain's base.
While the McSame camp is trying to marginalize Barr, the Republican candidate also has his hands full with Ron Paul, who is gearing up to lead a mutiny at the Convention in Minneapolis. Paul has been working over delagates who were pledged to Huckabee and Romney and plans on attacking McCain as a weak conservative.
Paul and Barr may end up being Obama's biggest supporters........
Comments (5)
You're wrong again Jason. DOMA, "Defense of Marriage Act" does not say anything about the fact that marriage only applies to people of the opposite sex. It's actually a federal law that simply says that one state's marriage laws have nothing to do with another state's marriage laws. In signing it, Bill Clinton protected gay couples' potential rights to marry in some states, just as much as he prohibited their ability to do so in others. He basically made marriage a state's rights issue. So if Massachusetts wants to legalize gay marriage, they can do it without the Federal Supreme Court overuling it. On the other hand, in signing the law, he made a gay marriage in Massachusetts, for example, totally invalid in evey other state. So, it's a double edged sword. As a gay man, I think it's frustrating, but I don't fault him for signing the law. It would be a hell of a lot easier for people to overturn any advances for LGBT Civil Rights without it! So, I guess what I'm saying is thank you Mr. Barr! Your plan backfired.
Posted on May 13, 2008 2:25 PM
And I'm also saying,Jason, stop trying to undermine the Clintons' record by making these not-so-subtle and entirely ignorant/ incorrect insinuations about their record.
Posted on May 13, 2008 2:29 PM
I never understand actions such as these and have to write it off as a desperate attempt at publicity. As someone who subscribes to many libertarian ideals, I would think that any libertarian would be so frightened at the thought of obama/clinton presidency to do anything to hinder defeating them (not that Mccain is exactly Thomas Jefferson regarding govt limitations). I understand that they are trying to make a point and bring prominence to their party at a national level, but the stakes are too high at this level to make that sacrifice. If it were not for perot, we never would have had bill clinton.
Posted on May 13, 2008 3:15 PM
How can Barr call himself a libertarian anyway? Libertarianism's definition is "a broad spectrum of political philosophies, each sharing the common overall priority of maximum limitation of government combined with optimum possible individual liberty. Its goals...prioritize freedom of speech and assembly, freedom of association, freedom to bear arms, freedom of and from religion, Press freedom, economic freedom, and freedom of ownership." According to that definition, how can a man who is pro life and who fought for DOMA, a law that is the very definition of governmental intervention in private lives, be a libertarian? Doesn't make sense to me....But OK. But anyway, Jason, you call him a "very, very scary man" because he is "pro-gun, anti-abortion, hates the IRS, hates just about every government program, from welfare to public education." I have no doubt that the man has differing political views than most mainstream Americans, but I'm pro- 2nd Amendment (NOT "pro-gun" as you say) and I'm not too choked up about the IRS...(why should I be? they're mismanaging my money for an unjust war)...I subscribe to a lot of Libertarian ideals, so why is that so bad? Last time I checked, we were aloud to have differences of opinion. Why is that "scary"?
Posted on May 13, 2008 4:16 PM
Hmmm....I agree with him on these points...
"Barr, 59, quit the Republican Party two years ago, saying he had grown disillusioned with its failure to shrink government and its willingness to scale back civil liberties in fighting terrorism. He has been particularly critical of President Bush over the war in Iraq and says the administration is ignoring constitutional protections on due process and privacy."
Posted on May 13, 2008 6:22 PM