Bob Barr's candidacy

I just discovered your site two weeks and have enjoyed it very much but your link without comment is a great disappointment.
"Adolescent rebellion in nominal grown-ups is called libertarianism. ... They don't know it yet, but human freedom died a couple of centuries ago when the government started carrying the mail."
. . .Rick Darby, Reflecting Light

Absolute freedom among civilized people is anarchy, yet that's what libertarians espouse.

Does the Constitution allow for "absolute freedom?" I find it humorous that the statists among us try to make a respectful, subservient government sound undesirable.

there's no commenting allowed on that story. unfortunately, the only mention of "war" is item number 11, and it addresses a non-issue.

barr's position on the war on drugs and the war in iraq (or, the occupation, i should say) falls far, far short of what libertarianism is all about. "was for it but now against it" and "redeeming aspects" are nothing but apologetic shying-away.

anarchy, the logical conclusion of the true, populist libertarian system, is indeed what libertarians espouse -- but not what the Libertarian Party espouses, not any more. members of the LP would do good to recall their radical roots; it would give them something to believe in again.

"Libertarians - Republicans who smoke pot."

I'm a Libertarian and I don't smoke pot. Although, I believe it should be legal to do so if I so desired. I also don't agree with a lot of the GOPs views. So, Letalis Maximus, your statement is untrue and a stab that falls short of it's target.

Our bodies belong to us, that means we should be able to do to them whatever we want; drugs, abortion, suicide, etc. as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of anyone else.

Why is it that Libertarianism is usually opposed with hyperbolic and inane statements?
I am sorry, till Republicans actually put somebody in power that actually doesn't just pay lip service to limited government, then maybe they would have a leg to stand on to criticize Libertarianism.

ATL

DJK:

Chill. The quote actually comes from either James Watt or one of his minions. Either way, its just a joke.

"Our bodies belong to us, that means we should be able to do to them whatever we want; drugs, abortion, suicide, etc. as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of anyone else."

I think quite a few people have problems with the idea that you should be able to have an abortion performed simply because it's your body, seeing as it could be construed that there is a victim. Right to life, liberty, and all that other declaration of human rights nonsense.

The Libertarian party platform recognizes that reasonable people can come to diametrically opposed positions on the abortion issue and explictly does not take a position other than that government funds should not be used to pay for them because that would involve forcing people who are morally opposed to abortion to subsidise them.

I'm registered as an independant and generally agree the most with the Libertarians, but the idiotic views on the Iraq war and national security that the leaders of the party have espoused over the last few years have pushed me away from them and back towards the Republicans.

I always find it interesting when people claim that abortion does not impact the rights of anyone else.

Voting Libertarians, Republican answer to the green party.

I will *not* vote for Bob "Bar the door against pagans and gays" Barr. Top his dish of issues with long standing support for the Lautenberg amendment and I don't understand how he even got in the door at the LP National Convention.


BTW:

I support the Global War on Terror.

I oppose the Drug War.

I don't smoke pot. (It's not compatible with
my employment in the military-industrial complex.
But I do own a VW bus & a school bus RV & tend to wear flowered shirts under my long hair and bushy greying beard. So I find it humorous how many people assume that I do.)

I oppose No Knock Warrants.

I oppose government laws on who can marry who.

I support abortion choice.

I oppose government funded abortions.

I target shoot with a .357 & a .308.

I am actively religious.

I don't believe something is a person with inalienable rights until it has lived outside of the host body. Some ancient Indo-Europeans would not name a child until it had lived out of the womb for 3 days.

I support capital punishment, but not as it's currently handled legally.

I support a bullet to the head as an execution method. I also like the idea of putting into a car crusher drunk drivers that kill when driving drunk.

And I am a former vice-chair of the local libertarian org. Anybody who tries to stereotype L/libertarians doesn't really know them. On the otherhand I have liked the joke about Republicans who smoke pot. Even if it is older than some of the people who use it.

MichaelG

"What part of 'shall not be infringed' don't you understand?"

Michael,

Except for the short list of firearms, I match your list and views 100%. I think the libertarians lost their way when with Barr. What happened to Gravel being the candidate? I think the people believe they are playing to the disenfranchised republicans with Barr. Gravel may have been a democrat 20 years ago, but he sure as hell represented us much better (not great, but much better.)

Ryan,

I believe that the Libertarian party has been spun by competing interests for years. There are people that insist on seeing the world as they wish it to be from both the far left and moderate right in it. Sometimes it seems that the only thing they have in common is a desire for smaller government - one side so that they can grow pot and the other side so that they can make and own explosives and fully auto guns.

For example, I believe that the constitution requirement about providing for the common defense allows defense of our borders against undesired border crossings. But others believe that I can't be considered a libertarian unless I want free and open borders.

As a result of such conflicting points of views is there any possibility of competing interests coming behind a strong candidate that will appeal to the vast number of American moderate voters?

I liked George Phillies as a person when I met him. But I didn't see him as a potential president. As for Gravel - Not even close. His support for national health care would have doomed him for me. And lets consider this:
"While Senator Gravel fully supports the 2nd Amendment, he believes that fundamental change must take place with regards to gun ownership. The senator advocates a licensing program where a potential gun owner must be licensed as well as properly trained with a firearm before they may own one."

Gravel & Barr probably represent what is wrong with the entire political process: if even the Libertarian Party can not find candidates that actually know the US Constitution what luck can any other party have?

In my mind - none. Until we once again have the real US Constitution taught to the children of this country. In English.

MichaelG

The right to peacefully assemble means that I do not need the city's permission to share my house with my friends.