Your vote for Libertarian Presidential candidate Bob Barr is guaranteed to improve America's future! If he gets at least 5% of the popular vote in this year's election, his party's Presidential campaign in 2012 can receive millions of dollars in voluntary taxpayer funds. It will also automatically qualify to be on state ballots, thereby avoiding long and costly signature petition drives. So do the 'most patriotic good' with your vote, help America build a 3rd major political party!!!
oh man, Bob Barr's explanation of his reaction to Paul's endorsement of Baldwin was terrible in my opinion. I agree that I won't support Baldwin cus he seems theocratic and also cus he wants economic protectionism...however, I think Ron Paul did a great thing with that press conference. I still like and support Ron Paul, and yet I'm also still, indeed, voting for Bob Barr. I just didn't like his reaction at the end there.
It is a pity there has been some stress between Dr. Paul and Barr, two friends. I listened to Paul's explanation on the Bill Press radio show, and it seems it has something to do with the LP's platform as well. Paul and Barr are closer to each other, than the LP's platform. A non-fiat currency, no-Fed, austrian school, not chicago school is fundamental to Paul. Hope Barr (and Baldwin) fares well and start a new party after the election, unifying the CP and LP etc, like Independence Party.
I hope nobody ever hears Baldwin's name in this election again! The more Paul associates with this nut, the worse his own credibility, and that of all libertarians, suffers.
Bob Barr had a real chance to further the Libetarian Party. Instead, he has made one bad and selfish decision after another over these last two months. Unfortunately, the party is going to have to wait another 4 years before they can attempt to make some headway.
good solid answers. i'm impressed with his on-the-spot answers here. much more substance given than the empty rhetoric supplied by the dems and repubs.
Well I know who I'm voting for. I was/still am a Ron Paul supporter. Barr has this one locked up for me. Both Barr and Paul have exceeded any expectations I could ever wished for.
While I agree that Paul should have endorsed Barr instead of Baldwin I don't agree with Barr's stance on the We Agree conference. I think it was very important as a message to the two party system that there are dissenting viewpoints that are dissatisfied with the fact that they are excluded, and finding common ground upon which 3rd parties can agree is a good step towards ending that. I'm still voting Barr '08.
I see Barr's point in not taking place in the conference. If he's standing on the stage with all these "losers" (to your average voter)he appears less legitimate as a candidate. Also, he is the only one of the four invited who is campaigning on the message of individual liberties, which is the cornerstone of his platform.
I don't agree with his notion of keeping oversea facilities, especially as his logic seems to be "We need facilities overseas to protect our facilities overseas."
If he's not talking about protecting bases, if he's instead referring to corporate holdings then I think it's a waste. A multi-national corporation is just that, multi-national. It's up to the owners and investors to choose to operate in dangerous locations and we shouldn't have to risk our money and lives to protect their assets.
i don't think that's what he meant. he mentioned keeping facilities available (such as port/landing rights), as well as protecting overseas facilities such as embassies, etc. i don't think anybody expects us to have NO bases outside the US, but an intensive redeployment of the largest bases back to the US is more likely the case. and he's right, baldwin has a very theocritical (is that a word?) platform, and i'm surprised at paul's endorsement pick.
I don't think I would object to a small military presence within our embassies, they would serve to protect the staff and Americans abroad seeking refuge there. I'm sure this kind of presence already exists in most if not all embassies, I recall hearing that marines are on site for security. I don't think it's necessary to have bases to protect South Korea, Taiwan, Western Europe, etc. It's not the responsibility of Americans to defend other countries.
I dig the message- I think he's on it. Let's find him on some more mainstream sources- all he has to do is speak his plan and the votes will fall at his feet.
i am voting 4 barr but i disagree with him t the end of the vid.. ron paul is showing great leadership in urging all americans to vote for whoever they want as long as they make the message that the 2 party system blows!! he is not forcing ne particular ideas on anyone he just is encouraging participation in reform of the 2 party system.. that is great leadership! Any intelligent people can look up ron paul's stance on issues and check them with the LP and see that they are very similar
I agree that it's lame that Barr got worked up over not getting Paul's full support. I commend Ron Paul for presenting all four candidates in his rally as they are the 'real' candidates that should be the rule and not the exception.
Although I'm disappointed Paul didn't fully endorse Barr, I'm glad Paul displayed the other candidates for people consider. It's nothing that Barr should have a hissy-fit over.
If Ron Paul had taken the LP nomination he would be in the debates and likely be poling around 20%.... And would only give the election to Obama! Damn I hate this two party BS, we loose no matter what we do!
I believe that if Ron Paul was in the debates - and got equal time - He would showcase to America the BS that McBama really represent, and win in a landslide.
And if Barr or Paul were at the debates and didnt win - When a 3rd party does well,it injects new ideas or a return to the roots of a party, - take 92 for example, even though Perot lost, alot of his ideas won.
This is the part of the online debate that I missed, and it's good to see his views in an expanded format. The debate itself was hilarious, he ripped them apart with logic and intelligence... if only he'd been able to do it in person.
hell yea man.. well all libertarians are people of common sense and no party agenda.. so of course barr would destroy them with logic.. just as ron paul did in the gop debates. pbama and his socialist ideas and mccain and his " ima conservative but i believe n increased gov't spending" platform are awful candidates and they simply wont bring any change.. they are basically the same, neither care about our privacy, neither care about the nat'l debt, neither care about ending the war.. Vote BARR
perhaps.. same with mccain and obama.. their advisors met before the debate and agreed on questions to be asked.. so that both candidates can know what they are saying going in.. obama is awful without a script that is why he is declined mccains request for a townhall meeting with questions from everyday folks. because he wouldnt have a script to read.. hopefully, the people will soon be hungry for real change and demand that the republican party embrace libertarian ideas or b replaced by the LP
This is a good Q&A, but I get the feeling that Bob knew every question that was going to be asked and in what order, so it was basically reading a script.
I don't believe that was the case. This thing was put together at the last moment. With Bob's schedule, he would have had time to memorize the questions or develop answers. He was shooting from the hip the entire time.
He needs to shave his mustache badly, but I still support him.
jameswswanson 3 years ago
Vote Barr, the only legal candidate on the Texas ballot. End the duopoly! Liberty for America!
pfoifry 3 years ago 2
vote for Bob Barr America!
frikkiladi 3 years ago 4
Is the guy interviewing Barr the keyboarder for Wilco? I saw him at Lollapalooza - he was wearing a neon green suit!
Go Bob Go!
FreedomFox1 3 years ago 3
After Obama wins this election (OMG!) America will hit rock bottom and it will take someone like Barr to bring us back to the top.
VOTE BOB BARR
Liberty4ev63 3 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
Your vote for Libertarian Presidential candidate Bob Barr is guaranteed to improve America's future! If he gets at least 5% of the popular vote in this year's election, his party's Presidential campaign in 2012 can receive millions of dollars in voluntary taxpayer funds. It will also automatically qualify to be on state ballots, thereby avoiding long and costly signature petition drives. So do the 'most patriotic good' with your vote, help America build a 3rd major political party!!!
22KingRat 3 years ago
oh man, Bob Barr's explanation of his reaction to Paul's endorsement of Baldwin was terrible in my opinion. I agree that I won't support Baldwin cus he seems theocratic and also cus he wants economic protectionism...however, I think Ron Paul did a great thing with that press conference. I still like and support Ron Paul, and yet I'm also still, indeed, voting for Bob Barr. I just didn't like his reaction at the end there.
stealthswimmer 3 years ago 3
Agreed, 100%, Dr. Paul was simply showing that their are other choices, not just for us Libertarian leaners,
krioux810 3 years ago 2
Bob Barr needs to stop referring to himself in the third person. It's definitely off-putting.
IndependentOhioan 3 years ago
Whereas I partly agree with you, he has a valid point that it gets his name out there. ;0)
mcbluefire 3 years ago 2
lulz
stealthswimmer 3 years ago
yeah i agree, makes him seem like Bob Dole. Must be a Bob problem.
notmarcofilms 3 years ago
Bob Barr 2012
_____ 2008
To find out who... click on "PublicFoodie"
I love Ron Paul but am voting for someone else this election... guess who...
PublicFoodie 3 years ago
It is a pity there has been some stress between Dr. Paul and Barr, two friends. I listened to Paul's explanation on the Bill Press radio show, and it seems it has something to do with the LP's platform as well. Paul and Barr are closer to each other, than the LP's platform. A non-fiat currency, no-Fed, austrian school, not chicago school is fundamental to Paul. Hope Barr (and Baldwin) fares well and start a new party after the election, unifying the CP and LP etc, like Independence Party.
vryheid88 3 years ago 3
I hope nobody ever hears Baldwin's name in this election again! The more Paul associates with this nut, the worse his own credibility, and that of all libertarians, suffers.
thirdwheelfilms 3 years ago 2
yea, there isnt much of a difference (that i know of) between the 2, maybe ron paul would run for them in 2012, but i doubt it.
spawk1993 3 years ago
Bob Barr had a real chance to further the Libetarian Party. Instead, he has made one bad and selfish decision after another over these last two months. Unfortunately, the party is going to have to wait another 4 years before they can attempt to make some headway.
mad3moyer 3 years ago
good solid answers. i'm impressed with his on-the-spot answers here. much more substance given than the empty rhetoric supplied by the dems and repubs.
cgraham1930 3 years ago 2
Mr. Barr,
You, sir, have sand-dragging brass balls.
Signed,
An Impressed American Citizen
Conchaga 3 years ago 4
Well I know who I'm voting for. I was/still am a Ron Paul supporter. Barr has this one locked up for me. Both Barr and Paul have exceeded any expectations I could ever wished for.
tbirdpunk 3 years ago 2
Bob Barr 2012
_____ 2008
To find out who... click on "PublicFoodie"
I love Ron Paul but am voting for someone else this election... guess who...
PublicFoodie 3 years ago
Barr has a point about ron paul although he should respect paul more for what he has achieved so far
kakahass 3 years ago
While I agree that Paul should have endorsed Barr instead of Baldwin I don't agree with Barr's stance on the We Agree conference. I think it was very important as a message to the two party system that there are dissenting viewpoints that are dissatisfied with the fact that they are excluded, and finding common ground upon which 3rd parties can agree is a good step towards ending that. I'm still voting Barr '08.
Garboth 3 years ago
I see Barr's point in not taking place in the conference. If he's standing on the stage with all these "losers" (to your average voter)he appears less legitimate as a candidate. Also, he is the only one of the four invited who is campaigning on the message of individual liberties, which is the cornerstone of his platform.
jcliffb1 3 years ago
Interesting point.
Garboth 3 years ago
I don't agree with his notion of keeping oversea facilities, especially as his logic seems to be "We need facilities overseas to protect our facilities overseas."
If he's not talking about protecting bases, if he's instead referring to corporate holdings then I think it's a waste. A multi-national corporation is just that, multi-national. It's up to the owners and investors to choose to operate in dangerous locations and we shouldn't have to risk our money and lives to protect their assets.
OvaltinePatrol 3 years ago 3
i don't think that's what he meant. he mentioned keeping facilities available (such as port/landing rights), as well as protecting overseas facilities such as embassies, etc. i don't think anybody expects us to have NO bases outside the US, but an intensive redeployment of the largest bases back to the US is more likely the case. and he's right, baldwin has a very theocritical (is that a word?) platform, and i'm surprised at paul's endorsement pick.
cgraham1930 3 years ago
I don't think I would object to a small military presence within our embassies, they would serve to protect the staff and Americans abroad seeking refuge there. I'm sure this kind of presence already exists in most if not all embassies, I recall hearing that marines are on site for security. I don't think it's necessary to have bases to protect South Korea, Taiwan, Western Europe, etc. It's not the responsibility of Americans to defend other countries.
OvaltinePatrol 3 years ago
I dig the message- I think he's on it. Let's find him on some more mainstream sources- all he has to do is speak his plan and the votes will fall at his feet.
tatianamarie 3 years ago
Keep up the work! You'll be getting alot more votes than people expect!
justice720 3 years ago
I love this man.
stunt420 3 years ago
Bob Barr is a friggin genius.
pm5k8136 3 years ago 3
i am voting 4 barr but i disagree with him t the end of the vid.. ron paul is showing great leadership in urging all americans to vote for whoever they want as long as they make the message that the 2 party system blows!! he is not forcing ne particular ideas on anyone he just is encouraging participation in reform of the 2 party system.. that is great leadership! Any intelligent people can look up ron paul's stance on issues and check them with the LP and see that they are very similar
texanpilot23 3 years ago 3
I agree that it's lame that Barr got worked up over not getting Paul's full support. I commend Ron Paul for presenting all four candidates in his rally as they are the 'real' candidates that should be the rule and not the exception.
Although I'm disappointed Paul didn't fully endorse Barr, I'm glad Paul displayed the other candidates for people consider. It's nothing that Barr should have a hissy-fit over.
PikePat 3 years ago
If Ron Paul had taken the LP nomination he would be in the debates and likely be poling around 20%.... And would only give the election to Obama! Damn I hate this two party BS, we loose no matter what we do!
natesohl 3 years ago
I believe that if Ron Paul was in the debates - and got equal time - He would showcase to America the BS that McBama really represent, and win in a landslide.
And if Barr or Paul were at the debates and didnt win - When a 3rd party does well,it injects new ideas or a return to the roots of a party, - take 92 for example, even though Perot lost, alot of his ideas won.
CruiseCarter 3 years ago
I was at the chat, Reason Chat in '12!
Andy43213 3 years ago
I think that the conflict with ron paul/chuck baldwin is stupid, the LP is cracking up
NeonKnight88 3 years ago 3
This is the part of the online debate that I missed, and it's good to see his views in an expanded format. The debate itself was hilarious, he ripped them apart with logic and intelligence... if only he'd been able to do it in person.
becolt 3 years ago 2
hell yea man.. well all libertarians are people of common sense and no party agenda.. so of course barr would destroy them with logic.. just as ron paul did in the gop debates. pbama and his socialist ideas and mccain and his " ima conservative but i believe n increased gov't spending" platform are awful candidates and they simply wont bring any change.. they are basically the same, neither care about our privacy, neither care about the nat'l debt, neither care about ending the war.. Vote BARR
texanpilot23 3 years ago 2
perhaps.. same with mccain and obama.. their advisors met before the debate and agreed on questions to be asked.. so that both candidates can know what they are saying going in.. obama is awful without a script that is why he is declined mccains request for a townhall meeting with questions from everyday folks. because he wouldnt have a script to read.. hopefully, the people will soon be hungry for real change and demand that the republican party embrace libertarian ideas or b replaced by the LP
texanpilot23 3 years ago 2
This is a good Q&A, but I get the feeling that Bob knew every question that was going to be asked and in what order, so it was basically reading a script.
eurohim 3 years ago
I don't believe that was the case. This thing was put together at the last moment. With Bob's schedule, he would have had time to memorize the questions or develop answers. He was shooting from the hip the entire time.
JaseLP22 3 years ago