Bob Barr, impeachment manager for the House GOP back in the day, says Bush is worse than Clinton ever was:
Here's hoping the other white candidate can siphon votes in otherwise-unwinnable southern states!
« Magic Numbers | Main | Have You Heard McCain Was a POW? »
Barr: Bush Worse Than Clinton
27 Jun 2008 09:05 am
Comments (22)
Wha-- now that impeachment is off the table???
Chump change. It's certainly an encouraging sign of the times that conservatives at least feel like they have to pander in this direction-- that is, at least if we take advantage of these times, and we are not too gullible. But if liberals and Democrats are that impressed by it, they are just not wise to the game.
No more signifcant than lil Scotty McClellan doing about the same thing. Ever hear of Zell Miller or Joe Lieberman?
Ever hear of the movie She's All That?
He's not dating her because he likes her, he's dating her because he's a jock dick and he sees her as a victim.
Not that Barr is a lot like Freddy Prinze Jr.
Bob Barr is running for President as a Libertarian, and has been very critical of Bush for some time now. I'm not sure how that makes him like Scott McClellan. It's not like Barr was ever in a position to impeach Bush - he got redistricted out of his seat in 2002.
Here's hoping the other white candidate can siphon votes in otherwise-unwinnable southern states!
Georgia a bit, but the rest of the South probably won't care. Colorado and some of the other Western states with a strong libertarian presence may swing a bit more toward Barr than people realize. Especially if Ron Paul makes some noise out there for him.
The conservative coalition always seemed a little odd to me. I say let the populists and libertarians duke it out for a couple of election cycles.
Ha ha, Swan. I can see it now.
Libertarian Voters: Am I bet? Am I stupid bet?
The libertarianism of the Mountain West is one of the most absurd elements of our political culture. This an entire region whose existence is basically the result of federal largesse. What a crock.
Barr has certainly evolved since his days in the House. If he ditched the monotone delivery he might even gain a notch or two in the charisma department.
Another reason that Bush is worse than Clinton is that Barr only had to eat Borat's teat cheese milk when Bush was in office. That never happened under Clinton!
An effective spoiler campaign by Barr is likely to move the GOP itself back in a more libertarian direction down the road. And...such a GOP might be much more effective in opposition to Obama's agenda than the current version of the GOP.
Really? In the age of terrorism, biological weapons, etc. you think that a principled libertarian party would be politically viable?
Here's hoping the other white candidate can siphon votes in otherwise-unwinnable southern states!
Is this tongue in cheek or are you suggesting Bob Barr is white? I know Barr reacts violently to questions about his ethnicity, but never denies he is part black. And in the South, part Black is all Black.
A principled libertarian party is rather like an invisible violet dragon. Libertarianism is essentially an argument for using the state to enshrine hundreds of years of class warfare into law. One could argue that we've already got that and have a good case, but libertarians aren't satisfied with the current stratification, they want to ensure that no playfield leveling can ever take place. All their "anti-statist" rhetoric is ultimately a selfish desire for the state to only do those things that they imagine would benefit them. They are, in effect, the ultimate statists.
Good video clip.
DTM~ I don't see Barr helping McCain or the GOP at all. Maybe I am wrong.
Good video clip.
DTM~ I don't see Barr helping McCain or the GOP at all. Maybe I am wrong.
Good video clip.
DTM~ I don't see Barr helping McCain or the GOP at all. Maybe I am wrong.
Watch the whole video!!
Jane Hamsher and Bob Barr hale from opposite poles of the cultural divide, and they find common cause. It is wonderful to watch.
Barr hurts McCain, full stop. Nader 2000 analogies apply nicely.
Compassionate Badger,
Certainly not McCain, nor the GOP in this election cycle. But I was speaking about the GOP down the road.
Is this tongue in cheek or are you suggesting Bob Barr is white? I know Barr reacts violently to questions about his ethnicity, but never denies he is part black. And in the South, part Black is all Black.
What is the basis for this contention? A google search suggests that this is a subject which has only been raised by anonymous commenters on the internet. Are there any published sources on this issue?
"Libertarianism is essentially an argument for using the state to enshrine hundreds of years of class warfare into law."
Uhm, no. That's the definition of conservatism.
Not that Barr is a real small-L "libertarian" any more than Ron Paul is. In that respect, you might be right. Right wing big-L Libertarians tend to be disgruntled Republicans.
But small-l libertarianism has nothing to do with class war.
The distinctions matter - well, they would if anybody paid any attention to either small-L or big-L libertarianism.
I still don't know why Matt insists on making posts about Libertarians. They get at most 1-3% of the popular vote. I guess Matt likes shooting fish in a barrel because he's not good enough to take on the heavy hitters in politics.
Richard Steven Hack, you are right that this also defines conservatism, but I've never met a libertarian who felt any differently. The basic idea of libertarians is that the government should be limited to protecting the nation (so broadly defined as to include the slaughter of random brown people whose criminal acts include living and having resources those libertarians want), and protecting property (narrowly defined as real and intellectual property so as to exclude any concern for the rights of workers, or really any human beings who aren't sufficiently propertied).
Thus any attempt to level the playing field is felt to be outside the proper scope of governance. No matter how much the system has provided them, few libertarians recognize their own dependence - leading to a false bravado concerning their own ability to survive in the truly dog-eat-dog world they envision.
The stated goal of libertarianism may not be to cast the class system into stone, but the results are guaranteed. This is the real reason why they line up to give full-throated support to ultra-statists like Bush. He provides them what they are really looking to get out of the system - insurance that nothing will be done to help the less fortunate.
John, when Barr secured the nomination, NPR did a roundtable discussion about it. A journalist from Georgia mentioned Barr is part Black, but that it is a secret that only Georgians know. The other panelists laughed knowingly and they moved on.
It just seems to be known in Georgia and D.C. and nowhere else. When Barr is asked about it, he almost explodes. But he never says no. Always, "Why are you asking?" or some such.
Good find Matt. Thanks for doing your j-o-b.
Comments closed July 11, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
And then there is the other other white candidate, Ron Paul, who I suspect might help out Barr considerably, at least after the GOP convention.
That said, I think Matt has to be careful what he wishes for. An effective spoiler campaign by Barr is likely to move the GOP itself back in a more libertarian direction down the road. And while I personally have no problem with that (there is going to be a conservative party in the U.S., and I would much rather it be run by libertarian-minded folks than the current crowd), such a GOP might be much more effective in opposition to Obama's agenda than the current version of the GOP.
Posted by DTM | June 27, 2008 9:32 AM