See other (s)Elections Articles
Title: Unreality At The Barr Campaign
Source:
Nolan Chart
URL Source: http://www.nolanchart.com/article4508.html
Published: Aug 15, 2008
Author: Walt Thiessen
Post Date: 2008-08-15 16:06:28 by Rotara
Keywords: None
Views: 301
Comments: 26
The wheels are just beginning to fall off the Barr campaign. The latest email sent out yesterday by the Libertarian Party on behalf of the Barr campaign demonstrates this fact beyond any doubt. In that email Andrew Davis, National Media Coordinator for the LP, states the following: As the days roll on, things are getting worse for Barack Obama and John McCain. The love-fest following a heated primary is wearing off, exposing the two candidates for the empty suits that they are. The email message goes on to mention that this will help the LP as a whole and that if party members give just a little more money, their dreams might come true. The only problem is that the analysis is divorced from reality. The truth is that Barr is nowhere near 6%. He did hit 6% nationally in one poll in June, but now he is polling in the 1-2% range in national polls...or at least, in those polls that are willing to include his name in the polling. By election day, if we use history as our guide, he likely won't even be at 0.3%. USA Election Polls tracks all the polling it can get its hands on for the Presidential campaign. They have an entire page devoted to Bob Barr in the polling. The polls reported on that page show that while Barr was indeed in the 5-7% range in various polls taken in June, he has since plummeted into the 1-2% range in every poll taken in August where his name has been included in the polling questions. Nationally, Gallup has Barr at 1%, Ipsos has him at 2%, and Zogby also has him at 2%. Regionally, he is in the 1.0% to 1.6% range, with his highest 1.6% number coming in Red States. Among individual state polls, he is at 2% in Florida (down from 3% in June), at 1% in Massachusetts (down from 5% in June), and at 1% in Alabama (down from 4% in June). No other state polling numbers are available for Barr at the USA Election Polls website for August. The simple fact of the matter is that Barr is not catching on among libertarian-leaning Americans outside of the LP, and he doesn't even have solid support within the LP. He is losing ground rapidly (as any neutral observer of third party politics could have predicted) and is in clear danger of becoming an asterisk in the campaign. Another clear indicator that Barr is not catching on with American supporters of liberty, particularly Ron Paul supporters, is that his FEC filings show absolutely meager amounts of fundraising. Reported fundraising through June 30, 2008 shows that only 334 individuals had given a grand total of $181,082. While that averages out to a respectable $542 and change per donor, the 334 figure is pitiful in contrast to the literally hundreds of thousands who have given to the Ron Paul campaign this same year. What's particularly weird about all this is that the home page of the LP's website shows that the campaign has only raised $153,202 as of August 15, 2008 at 7:35 AM EDT. Why so little? Perhaps this just represents how much money the LP has raised on behalf of the Barr campaign, not all funds raised by Barr himself. The party's website is unclear on this point. Overall, this is an unimportant mystery. The much bigger mystery is: why is Barr failing in fundraising so utterly and completely? By contrast, the LP's 1996 candidate, Harry Browne (one of those "purist" candidates whom libertarian pragmatists have long railed against, a man who had absolutely no political experience of any kind) raised over $3 million that year and over $1.5 million in 2000. Ron Paul raised over $30 million this year. Barr can't even seem to raise $1 million. Or can he? Party co-founder David Nolan, in an article published yesterday on this website, reports that the campaign raised $500,000 in June and July. If that's true, and if the FEC reports from the Barr campaign through June 30th are also true, then it means that the Barr campaign raised roughly $350,000 in July. But that doesn't make any sense either, because as Nolan acknowledges (and as the Barr website confirms) Barr's campaign has raised a mere $50,000 in August. Was July a blip? A statistical anomaly? Nolan says that Barr is still on track to raise between $1 million and $1.5 million, but given the actual numbers reported to the FEC by the Barr campaign through June 30th, I'd say there is serious reason to doubt that will happen. UPDATE AND REVISION After "Steve" left his comments under this article, I used the search information he provided and found two reports (actually two reports and one amended report) that I hadn't seen before at the FEC website. They are as follows: March 27, 2008 thru May 31, 2008 June 1, 2008 thru June 30, 2008 The total amount collected for that period is $393,559, or just under $400,000. So Steve may be correct that the total amount raised through July is $600,000. But even if Barr does raise $1 million for the election cycle, how can this be characterized as anything but sub-par? Again, it falls far short of what Browne raised in 1996, and it isn't even close to what Paul raised this year. Surely, it was reasonable to expect much better than this given all the hype and promises from his supporters. With the support of VP candidate Wayne Allyn Root, Barr nailed down the LP nomination at last May's convention, nudging out LP stalwart Dr. Mary Ruwart for the nomination. This was supposed to mean a new era of growth and prosperity for the party. The pragmatists had finally gotten their way, and a candidate who wasn't "purist," who didn't espouse all those embarrassingly pure positions all the time finally had been nominated, backed by another pragmatist who held similar political views as his VP running mate. This was supposed to bring hordes of more moderate conservatives, more pragamatic voters into the LP camp. Finally, the LP would be able to shed the label of being a political afterthought. Now that a candidate with real political experience had been nominated who knew how to win an election, who knew how to not say anything "stupid," the tide would finally turn for the LP. Ron Paul supporters would gratefully turn to Barr as being the next-best alternative to Paul himself, since Congressman Paul had withdrawn from active campaigning for the presidency in 2008. So what went wrong? Well, actually two things went wrong. First, the pragmatists have always been 100% wrong about why the LP wasn't (and isn't) getting anywhere. It has nothing to do with being too "purist." It has nothing to do with its prior candidates saying something "stupid" or "embarrassing." It has nothing to do with whether they have presented themselves in a "professional" manner. Rather, the LP's long string of failures has been due to two key facts: (1) it is a third party, and third parties have every aspect of election laws written against them, including the Constitution itself, and (2) the party has never learned how to build from the ground up. Instead, it has always insisted on growing from the top down. The other thing that went wrong with the Barr campaign is that he failed to win over the party faithful. Unlike the realities that all third parties suffer under which are beyond their control, this situation was completely within the control of Bob Barr himself. Many, many LP activists have bemoaned (both on this website and in other forums) Barr's political record while he was in Congress. Barr has never satisfactorily addressed that record. Dr. Ruwart pointed out in a conversation overheard on C-SPAN toward the end of the LP's convention that Barr had received nothing but "softball" tosses under questioning during the party's presidential candidate debate. He did apologize for the harm that was caused by his opposition to gay marriage, and he and his supporters have struggled earnestly to show that he was really an opponent of the War in Iraq, of Real ID, of FISA, and of a whole host of other unconstitutional indiscretions which he supported while in Congress. Thus, he never had the support of thousands of long-time LP members who didn't trust him when he claimed that he had "changed" his views. And worse, he did nothing about it. Nolan threw in a third point. He pointed out that the campaign is being mismanaged. He wrote: Which brings us to the final measure of the Barr campaign: its management. And from the reports I've been getting from the grassroots, most Libertarians are monumentally unimpressed with the team running the campaign. There seems to be little or no strategic vision, response to requests from the grassroots is sluggish, and the campaign has made some bad choices in key personnel. Longtime, well-known Libertarians are conspicuous by their absence. Aside from a snazzy-looking website, the Barr campaign effort seems adrift. And who is managing the Barr juggernaut? None other than Russ Verney, who was campaign manager for Ross Perot. This was supposed to be yet another reason why pragmatists wanted to believe that the LP was finally growing up. They were bringing in people who knew how to win. I wonder what excuses they're preparing to utter now? For a politically savvy former Congressman, Barr has demonstrated very little understanding as to how to garner support and snowball it. His decisions regarding campaign staff have proven to be disastrous, and his failure to satisfactorily address questions regarding his libertarian principles has been conspicuous. One of the most important rules that any "pragmatic' politician follows is that once he vanquishes the other candidates in the party's nomination process, he makes peace with them and reaches out to their supporters. Failure to do so is always catastrophic. Yet, that is a mistake that Barr has clearly made. He has done absolutely nothing to satisfy those party members who simply don't trust his supposed conversion to libertarian principles. Instead, he has assumed that they'd all rally behind him from the day he won the party's nomination. The utter stupidity of this failure in calculation is almost beyond reckoning. I've said in comments I've left under other columnists' articles on this site that I'm convinced Barr is going to perform dismally in November. Now I want to state my prediction clearly in this article. Because of Barr's totally incompetent campaign in 2008, not only will he fail to gain 1,000,000 votes, not only will he fall far short of breaking the 1% barrier, not only will he fall short of Harry Browne's 465,000 votes in 1996, he'll even fall short of Michael Badnarik's 397,000 votes in 2004. Barr's campaign will likely end up as one of the least productive and most embarrassing campaigns in LP history. You read it here first.
Topic: Presidential Campaign 2008
Unreality At The Barr Campaign
Ron Paul supporters aren't flocking to Bob Barr, and neither is America, while the Barr campaign continues to avoid directly addressing troubling questions about his political past and while the Libertarian Party's leadership seems to have lost touch with reality in this election.
by Walt Thiessen
(Libertarian)
Friday, August 15, 2008
This is why it is so important that we get Bob Barr into the national debates, opening up the door for a Libertarian Party victory in 2008.
We saw what happened to Ron Paul's campaign after the first national debate, and the same could be possible for Barr if he is allowed to participate!
So, how do we get him into the debates?
First, we must get him up to 15 percent in the polls. With Barr polling already at 6 percent nationally, we have a great foundation to begin the drive to 15 percent.
How do we get Bob to 15 percent?
Getting him on the ballot, which paves the way for Bob and all the other Libertarians to have a banner year in 2008, is a great way to build his numbers!
To help get Bob to 15 percent, we're asking for $15. Your generous donation will help launch Bob into the debates, showing America there is another choice in 2008.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Rotara (#0)
The candidates and the voters should all be "embarrassed" because elections are a complete scam.
"Every effort has been made by the Federal Reserve Board to conceal its power but the truth is the Federal Reserve Board has usurped the Government of the United States." "Mr. Chairman, the people of the United States did not perceive that a world system was being set up here that the United States was to be lowered to the position of a coolie country. . and was to supply financial power to an international superstate -- a superstate controlled by international bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the World for their own pleasure."
I rather wish Ron Paul had said that when people other than us were listening. He buys into the system so much that he's incubating his revolution inside of the GOP wing of the National Party. Sigh
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
I supported Ron Paul financially throughout his run in spite of my disgust towards the system. His timid withdrawal just prior to the Texas delegate convention and determination to hold a separate convention in Minnesota (so as not to openly confront the Republican Party's dirty tricks) have led me to believe that he was simply a distraction that allowed the farce another cycle. Freedom is lost until the next revolution, voting is bullshit.
"Every effort has been made by the Federal Reserve Board to conceal its power but the truth is the Federal Reserve Board has usurped the Government of the United States." "Mr. Chairman, the people of the United States did not perceive that a world system was being set up here that the United States was to be lowered to the position of a coolie country. . and was to supply financial power to an international superstate -- a superstate controlled by international bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the World for their own pleasure."
Bob Barr never had a chance. He started out as a neocon/rino but never made it all the way proper side of the Constitution according to the GOA: It's a truism in Washington that a politician's voting record gets worse the more time he spends in Congress. Even the most fire-breathing constitutionalist has buckled under the pressure of party politics to vote for pork barrel projects and other anti-rights measures which are completely contrary to the positions on which he or she campaigned. There are exceptions to this rule, however. And one notable exception is former Rep. Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president this year. Barr arrived in Congress in 1995 as a former U.S. prosecutor. Sporting a law- and-order mindset, his voting record was often antithetical to gun rights, as he only voted right in 8 out of 14 votes in his first term. Many of his early votes in Congress showed his strong support for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms -- an agency which has spent several decades terrifying and abusing gun owners. In his first term, Barr voted to allow the ATF to conduct warrantless searches of gun owners, to increase the agency's pay by $40 million, and to federalize many state crimes which would have increased the scope and jurisdiction of the ATF. Moreover, Barr also voted for an appropriations bill which contained two pieces of pernicious gun control: The Lautenberg gun ban which disarms gun owners for small (misdemeanor) offenses in the home -- "offenses" as slight as spanking a child or grabbing a spouse; and The Kohl gun ban which creates a virtual one-half mile wide "gun free" circle around every American school (or a 1,000 foot zone going in any one direction from any school). Needless to say, Bob Barr's first term was certainly not memorable in the minds of most gun owners. But what happened after that can only be described as remarkable, as over the following years (until his retirement in 2003), Barr voted right on 27 out of 31 votes affecting gun rights.3 Not only that, Barr sponsored bills to prevent frivolous lawsuits against the gun industry and spearheaded the fight against a National ID card and the so- called "sneak and peek" provisions in the PATRIOT Act. So what happened during his first term that so drastically affected his conduct during the rest of his career? While certainly many factors may have been in play, two notable confrontations between Rep. Barr and Gun Owners of America could certainly explain his epiphany. BATF-enhancement provision During his first year in office, Rep. Barr was tasked by the Republican leadership to sponsor legislation that would repeal the very unpopular ban on semi-automatic firearms (which had been enacted by President Clinton the year before). While Barr introduced the bill, HR 1488, his bill also did much more, as it would have increased the power and scope of the ATF. GOA met with Rep. Bob Barr several times and brought the problematic provision to his attention. GOA also launched a grassroots campaign which lasted for several months -- a campaign which resulted in several key Representatives demanding that the offending provision be removed from HR 1488. In the end, GOA was able to persuade Rep. Barr to drop the provision. Instrumental in this decision was the outpouring of letters and faxes from GOA members. Even Rep. Barr himself stated that GOA's grassroots efforts were extremely effective in the campaign to get the BATF-enhancement provisions deleted. In a personal meeting between GOA lobbyists and the Congressman, Barr told GOA Executive Director Larry Pratt, "Your mail has been very successful [on Capitol Hill]." At this point, GOA was asked by the Republican leadership to help clean up the bill. Roll Call, the newspaper of record for events in Congress, reported in October of 1995 that GOA "won a match" in forcing changes in H.R. 1488. Other sources on Capitol Hill also stated that the postcards, letters, faxes and emails from GOA members were instrumental in getting Congressmen to demand that the changes be made. Before the avalanche of mail, there had been little support for striking the dangerous provisions from the bill. Government terror legislation The second confrontation during Barr's first term involved the Republican- sponsored anti-terrorism bill (H.R. 2703). As one of only three cosponsors on the bill, Rep. Barr was intent on pushing his terror bill through the Congress instead of the Chuck Schumer version that was also getting some attention. GOA opposed the Barr bill, as it would have -- among other things -- jeopardized the gun industry by punishing gun dealers for selling a firearm to someone that they should have known was going to use or threaten to use the gun in a crime of violence. This would have driven all gun sales underground, as only the clairvoyant know who is going to use a gun in a crime! Sparks flew at a meeting on Capitol Hill after GOA challenged the bill's contents at a meeting of conservatives where Barr was present. Barr defended his bill vociferously. But after thousands of faxes and postcards were dumped on Capitol Hill, GOA's grassroots pressure encouraged freshmen Congressmen to hold tight and kill the terrorism bill in late 2005. Roll Call remarked that: The [terror bill] compromise unraveled as conservative House Republicans -- many of them freshmen -- backed the Gun Owners position and refused to follow Barr. One of those freshmen, Rep. Joe Scarborough (R-FL), noted that it was "Gun Owners of America [who] led the fight in defeating the terrorism bill in 1995. They generated grassroots pressure that made it possible for us to hold tight and keep the bill from passing." While the terror bill eventually passed the following year, it only did so after Rep. Barr introduced an amendment to delete most of GOA's concerns from the bill. The Barr amendment passed 229-191. Yes, Barr did end up voting for final passage of the bill (which was still rated by as an anti-gun vote by GOA). But the entire struggle had left an indelible mark on Barr. From this time on, he would generally be walking with us (even if it meant opposing his party). The transformation nearly complete The late U.S. Senator Everett Dirksen was fond of saying, "When I feel the heat, I see the light." Gun owners exerted tremendous grassroots pressure for two full years on Bob Barr. He felt the heat and, for the most part, he was changed forevermore. Yes, there were exceptions. For example, he never quite fully recanted his support for the Lautenberg gun ban, which he had voted for in 1996. While he later introduced a repeal bill, it would have only applied to the retroactive part of the gun ban, leaving the misdemeanor ban in place for the future. Barr defended his "repeal" bill, telling USA Today that, "This [misdemeanor gun ban] is important and worthwhile legislation, and we cannot allow its effectiveness to be reduced." In the end, one might conclude that Barr's voting record on firearms issues is not quite 100 percent in line with the Libertarian Party. That is true. But as noted above, his voting record after his first term in Congress improved tremendously (voting right in 27 out of 31 votes) -- a record that is certainly better than 99 percent of most Republicans and Democrats. When political pundits look back on his congressional career, they don't typically remember the first term, but rather the civil libertarian that emerged during the ensuing years. Jesse Walker, writing in Reason magazine, says that during his congressional career, "Barr was one of Washington's loudest critics of the federal government's abuses of power, taking the lead in investigating the raid on Waco and in opposing Bill Clinton's efforts to undermine due process in terrorism cases." Barr himself -- when introducing the staunch pro-gunner, Ron Paul, at the Conservative Political Action Conference this past February -- told the cheering delegates that, "If there was ever, ever any doubt in my mind ... about how to vote on a particular bill, the answer was easy ... you see where Ron Paul stands on an issue, and you know that's the right place to be." Given the fact that Ron Paul is a strong constitutionalist and a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment, that's not a bad endorsement to hear from a presidential hopeful. To be sure, Barr supported Paul's efforts to withdraw the United States from the United Nations while he was still in the Congress. Many gun owners support such a withdrawal due to the strong anti-gun advocacy of the global organization. Currently, Bob Barr serves on the NRA Board of Directors and works with national organizations on issues ranging from privacy to national security.
Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin are just two more weasels willing to modify their outward appearance enough to compete with McInsane long enough for O'Bummer or Hitlery to win. Gives me reason to barf.
"Every effort has been made by the Federal Reserve Board to conceal its power but the truth is the Federal Reserve Board has usurped the Government of the United States." "Mr. Chairman, the people of the United States did not perceive that a world system was being set up here that the United States was to be lowered to the position of a coolie country. . and was to supply financial power to an international superstate -- a superstate controlled by international bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the World for their own pleasure."
I supported Ron Paul financially throughout his run in spite of my disgust towards the system. His timid withdrawal just prior to the Texas delegate convention and determination to hold a separate convention in Minnesota (so as not to openly confront the Republican Party's dirty tricks) have led me to believe that he was simply a distraction that allowed the farce another cycle. Freedom is lost until the next revolution, voting is bullshit. You have a knack for often posting exactly what I'm thinking. ;-)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
gunowners.org/pres08/barr.htm The GOA is a group I support. ;-)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
You have a knack for often posting exactly what I'm thinking. ;-)
"Every effort has been made by the Federal Reserve Board to conceal its power but the truth is the Federal Reserve Board has usurped the Government of the United States." "Mr. Chairman, the people of the United States did not perceive that a world system was being set up here that the United States was to be lowered to the position of a coolie country. . and was to supply financial power to an international superstate -- a superstate controlled by international bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the World for their own pleasure."
I'm going to vote for him. Futile as it is, at least I'll know there should be ONE vote for Baldwin in my precinct. ;-)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
You have a knack for often posting exactly what I'm thinking. ;-) hehehehehe
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Something smells fishy with Barr. I'm thinking he might be some kind of plant or something. I'm thinking Baldwin is fairly legit, though. Not that he has any chance at winning anything, but I think his ideals are real and legit...
Baldwin's been consistent and sincere near as I can tell. What do I know?? ;-)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
I like Chuck Baldwin and would have loved to have been able to vote for a Paul/Baldwin ticket.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. I agree. Something just doesn't seem right.
This election cycle is perfect for an upset of the system since so many are frustrated and disappointed with the status quo. The media has done an outstanding job of demonizing anyone (Ron Paul) with the ability to win election that would shut down the federal reserve and veto unconstitutional legislation. The only CREDIT the American people should receive is for being too stupid, too lazy, too spoiled and undisciplined to run their own lives, so they will continue to let the television and 20 second sound bites do it for them. I often wonder about those awakened individuals that continue to keep one foot in the socialist system while trying to escape its costs, which exceed the monetary expense of maintaining it when you consider the lives lost or ruined both here at home and abroad through wars necessitated by the nations collective greed, the rewards of which 90% remains with 2% of the population.
"Every effort has been made by the Federal Reserve Board to conceal its power but the truth is the Federal Reserve Board has usurped the Government of the United States." "Mr. Chairman, the people of the United States did not perceive that a world system was being set up here that the United States was to be lowered to the position of a coolie country. . and was to supply financial power to an international superstate -- a superstate controlled by international bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the World for their own pleasure."
We can now look back at the days of legitimate and valid election processes in America with a sense of history. ;-)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Please elaborate. I'm not aware of 'awakened' individuals as you describe, but then I live a sheltered life. ;-)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Walk into a room filled with alleged "conservative Republicans" and ask them to hold up their hands if they are "socialists" ? After no one holds up their hands ... ask how many have a Socialist Security Card in their wallet ... and witness 100% participation. While we all know that the federal reserve system is bankrupting the country both financially and morally through taxation that supplies warmongers with the tools of their murderous trade and causes the break-up of families by forcing both parents to work to earn the living once earned by the husband and consequently leaves the kids to their own devices (and we know what that means) ... the backbone necessary to abandon this self destructive system eludes even those that know about it but continue to participate.
"Every effort has been made by the Federal Reserve Board to conceal its power but the truth is the Federal Reserve Board has usurped the Government of the United States." "Mr. Chairman, the people of the United States did not perceive that a world system was being set up here that the United States was to be lowered to the position of a coolie country. . and was to supply financial power to an international superstate -- a superstate controlled by international bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the World for their own pleasure."
After no one holds up their hands ... ask how many have a Socialist Security Card in their wallet ... and witness 100% participation. While we all know that the federal reserve system is bankrupting the country both financially and morally through taxation that supplies warmongers with the tools of their murderous trade and causes the break-up of families by forcing both parents to work to earn the living once earned by the husband and consequently leaves the kids to their own devices (and we know what that means) ... the backbone necessary to abandon this self destructive system eludes even those that know about it but continue to participate. Ah yes, I totally agree. I'm not totally positive, though, that those "Conservative Republicans" even know what Conservative means. As in conserving Constitutional America. ;-)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Too many of those that either promote or deride "socialism" are unaware that it originated as the offspring of capitalism. Robert Owen, its Father, espoused it before Marx was born.
Have you read this? ;-)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
Socialism is promoted by its beneficiaries at both ends. Independence should be available to those prefering it to a FORCED nanny state. And, while I use Socialist Security as an example, it wasn't presented to the people as an entrapping agreement that would revolutionize the laws of the country, but more like an insurance policy with the funds being kept in trust. The people were never fully informed regarding the totality of the program. The politicians have raped previous generations and intend to continue the rape of all subsequent generations until the system becomes so top heavy it collapses upon itself. Simply put, we can't afford to allow frauds to be perpetrated upon us continually. We're grown ups, the violators are grown ups, and a direct confrontation is long over due.
"Every effort has been made by the Federal Reserve Board to conceal its power but the truth is the Federal Reserve Board has usurped the Government of the United States." "Mr. Chairman, the people of the United States did not perceive that a world system was being set up here that the United States was to be lowered to the position of a coolie country. . and was to supply financial power to an international superstate -- a superstate controlled by international bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the World for their own pleasure."
Robert Owen, a wealthy capitalist that made his money from child labor, finally found his conscience bothering him. From that sprang "socialism". Clinton Roosevelt came along with his book, "The Science of Government Founded on Natural Law" and then came Marx who melded the two together into his "Communist Manifesto"... The idea that socialism and capitalism are at different ends of the spectrum are false. They are one and the same, both with one thing in mind, total controlling power. Russia is a prime example. Socialism collapsed but the same people remain in control, still own and operate the country.
No argument from me. Freedom doesn't need an "ism" behind its description. Liberty doesn't need to be called libertyism. Ism's are religious titles that require faith and adherence to dogma. Liberty is a STATE of mind that requires work while demanding honesty. Those that would deny liberty to others by attempting to force "ism" compliance at the point of a gun should be seen as enemies and shot on sight. I had a friend once that said to me "you have as much freedom as you are able to enforce". He was right.
"Every effort has been made by the Federal Reserve Board to conceal its power but the truth is the Federal Reserve Board has usurped the Government of the United States." "Mr. Chairman, the people of the United States did not perceive that a world system was being set up here that the United States was to be lowered to the position of a coolie country. . and was to supply financial power to an international superstate -- a superstate controlled by international bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the World for their own pleasure."
Because of Barr's totally incompetent campaign in 2008, not only will he fail to gain 1,000,000 votes, not only will he fall far short of breaking the 1% barrier, not only will he fall short of Harry Browne's 465,000 votes in 1996, he'll even fall short of Michael Badnarik's 397,000 votes in 2004. Barr's campaign will likely end up as one of the least productive and most embarrassing campaigns in LP history.
#2. To: noone222 (#1)
The candidates and the voters should all be "embarrassed" because elections are a complete scam.
#3. To: Rotara (#2)
#4. To: Rotara (#2)
He buys into the system so much that he's incubating his revolution inside of the GOP wing of the National Party.
#5. To: Rotara (#0)
“The best and first guarantor of our neutrality and our independent existence is the defensive will of the people…and the proverbial marksmanship of the Swiss shooter. Each soldier a good marksman! Each shot a hit!” Schweizerische Schutzenseitunt (Swiss Shooting Federation) April, 1941
#6. To: X-15 (#5)
#7. To: noone222 (#4)
He buys into the system so much that he's incubating his revolution inside of the GOP wing of the National Party.
#8. To: X-15 (#5)
Bob Barr never had a chance. He started out as a neocon/rino but never made it all the way proper side of the Constitution according to the GOA:
#9. To: Rotara (#7)
You have a knack for often posting exactly what I'm thinking. ;-)
#10. To: noone222 (#6)
Chuck Baldwin
#11. To: noone222 (#9)
You have a knack for often posting exactly what I'm thinking. ;-)
#12. To: noone222, All (#6)
Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin are just two more weasels willing to modify their outward appearance enough to compete with McInsane long enough for O'Bummer or Hitlery to win. Gives me reason to barf.
#13. To: Vitamin Z (#12)
(Edited)
Something smells fishy with Barr. I'm thinking he might be some kind of plant or something. I'm thinking Baldwin is fairly legit, though. Not that he has any chance at winning anything, but I think his ideals are real and legit...
#14. To: Rotara (#10)
I'm going to vote for him. Futile as it is, at least I'll know there should be ONE vote for Baldwin in my precinct. ;-)
Lord Acton
#15. To: Vitamin Z (#12)
Something smells fishy with Barr. I'm thinking he might be some kind of plant or something.
#16. To: Rotara (#13)
#17. To: James Deffenbach (#14)
I like Chuck Baldwin and would have loved to have been able to vote for a Paul/Baldwin ticket.
#18. To: noone222 (#16)
I often wonder about those awakened individuals that continue to keep one foot in the socialist system while trying to escape its costs..
#19. To: Rotara (#17)
We can now look back at the days of legitimate and valid election processes in America with a sense of history. ;-)
Lord Acton
#20. To: Rotara (#18)
#21. To: noone222 (#20)
Walk into a room filled with alleged "conservative Republicans" and ask them to hold up their hands if they are "socialists" ?
#22. To: Rotara (#21)
#23. To: Cynicom (#22)
Too many of those that either promote or deride "socialism" are unaware that it originated as the offspring of capitalism. Robert Owen, its Father, espoused it before Marx was born.
#24. To: Cynicom (#22)
#25. To: noone222 (#24)
#26. To: Cynicom (#25)
the same people remain in control, still own and operate the country.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest