Self destruction: thy name is Bob Barr

by Jonathan Cymberknopf

What started out as the most promising Third Party campaign in years is turning out to be the most disappointing one in years.

Looking back at the Libertarian convention, the purists of the Libertarian Party did try to warn us, but we did not listen as promises of gold blinded our eyes.

We forgave Bob Barr’s despicable voting record in Congress as a Republican and gave him the benefit of the doubt that he truly had repented for his sins and hoped his transformation was true to form in exchange for going after the gold.

Unfortunately, it turned out to be fools gold, as Bob Barr has made one bad decision after another during a Presidential race that could not afford any missteps.

Campaign money was squandered, ballot access in many states mishandled and opportunities missed.

Opportunities that come once in a lifetime were missed such as earning the votes of Ron Paul’s supporters. As we all know Ron Paul earned more than a million votes during the Republican Primaries and earned a cult following much like the Grateful dead.

Instead of courting Ron Paul and his supporters, it looked like Barr went out of his way to defecate on them by tossing Ron Paul aside and skipping Ron Paul’s endorsement press conference. Newsflash to Barr: stubbornness is not a good Presidential trait, see George W. Bush. Obviously this made Ron Paul very mad and rightfully so, and we all know how the story ends with Dr. Paul endorsing Chuck Baldwin as a result.

I used to laugh at the conspiracy theories going around the internet saying Bob Barr was an infiltrator, but now I’ve stopped laughing.

I still remember seeing Barr on Fox News very early in the campaign when asked by Neil Cavuto how much money he expected to raise, Barr responded 35 million. Obviously he was counting on Ron Paul’s supporters. Way to get that endorsement Bob.

Personally, I have to admit I looked the other way, always defending Barr, continuing to donate money, write articles, blog and email the media, but all along felt uneasy doing so.

I watched with my own eyes as one of my good neighbors peeled his Bob Barr bumper sticker off his truck and replaced it with a Chuck Baldwin bumper sticker. He actually came to my door having seen my Bob Barr bumper sticker and handed me a Baldwin one along with information on The Constitution Party. Boy did this action make me think.

I did not find Baldwin appealing due to the preamble of the Constitution Party, but that was not the point, I had a bad feeling on my candidate that I could not shake, however, I kept supporting my imperfect candidate.

The final straw for me was when the first attempt at a Third Party debate was being put together and Bob Barr refused to attend. Rumors had it he would only debate Ralph Nader alone without the others. I wrote the campaign and urge them not to make this mistake, but they would not listen. What kind of message do you put forth as a Libertarian candidate not wanting to debate ideas and win over votes?

When the final debate was a done deal and announced it was being covered by C-SPAN live, I wrote in Bob Barr’s campaign web site blog as I usually did almost on a daily basis, simply that the Third Party debate was on and that C-Span was covering it live. My entry was immediately deleted and so I tried it again in case it was a computer glitch but I was in fact censored. This had never happened before, at least, not to me. How very Libertarian to censor a comment that had no foul or hateful language.

I realized I made the right decision in not casting my vote for Barr.

Today, I voted for Ralph Nader in this third day of early voting in Broward County Florida. And I feel great about my vote.

77 Responses to “Self destruction: thy name is Bob Barr”

  1. Pollster Says:

    Bob Barr has run an independent conservative, not as the LP nominee. He has undermined his supposed party and cost it valuable access. The real damage will be visible not just next week but in four years time. Barr and his team should expelled from the LP asap.

  2. John Lowell Says:

    But Jonathan, you were here every day extolling the Barr candidacy, encouraging contributions and the like, while others that had reservations, albeit whatever their nature - mine concerned whether Bob guy signed a check paying for his ex-wife’s abortion - were treated as trivial annoyances. Isn’t this change of heart of yours a little like that of Martin Neimoller when he figured out that Adolf Hitler wasn’t really a nice guy after all. And when I reported having posts deleted at Barr’s blog, did I see you jump to my defense? Why in heaven’s name should anyone now be concerned with your petty disappointments.

  3. Tom Bryant Says:

    I think that the above demostrates that Barr is actually a good candidate for the LP. If someone believes that Barr’s positions on issues is not a good fit, and that Nader’s positions are a better fit, they would probably be very unhappy dealing with most of the Libertarians. While it would be nice to have Nader’s folks be involved in the LP, that would ultimately ruin the message of the LP since Nader is so far removed from the LP’s philosophy. I’m glad that Barr was libertarian enough to show that he is much different than Nader.

    I don’t fault Jonathan for finding his philosophical home, even though it does mean one less vote for the LP. It’s far better to vote for ones beliefs, and not just vote for whichever third party candidate seems to have the momentum at the time.

  4. joell Says:

    “I used to laugh at the conspiracy theories going around the internet saying Bob Barr was an infiltrator, but now I’ve stopped laughing.”

    better late than never. following the elections, Barr will discard the LP & supporters like a used condom and take some well paying ‘think tank” like job with his republician pals.

    ps….i also felt great about my vote for nader last week. in a sense,though, it was sad, as nader, along with ron paul, are in their seventies. and there is no one trustworthy enough that i can think of to take their place

  5. No McBama! Says:

    I’m looking forward to 2010 . . . when “Bob Barr (v3.0) for U.S. Senate” launches. Better watch out there, Johnny Isakson, ‘cause Invisible Bob is a comin’ after ya!

  6. Hal Says:

    I’ve voted every year since 1997, and I’ve voted for every available Libertarian Party candidate, from presidential to local elections. Bob Barr will be the first-ever Libertarian Party candidate that I can vote for and choose not to.

    I’m voting for Nader. And no, Nader’s no libertarian either—but he’s the best option available. Even Nader’s stance on drug reform is more libertarian than Barr’s. Barr’s probably the most libertarian candidate overall, but I cannot vote for that man.

    If his change of heart is sincere, he should continue to work behind the scenes and as a lobbyist, as he’s done the last few years. His conservative baggage is just too great for him to successfully win the support of libertarian voters. Not to mention, like you said, he ran an awful campaign.

  7. Fritz Says:

    To Tom Bryant: That’s unfair. Let’s face it—there is no libertarian with ballot access this year in the Presidential race. Bob Barr is a conservative with some libertarian tendencies. Baldwin (or at least Baldwin’s party) is too Christianist by far. I may well vote for Nader also, simply out of lack of any other palatable choices. And at least his critique of the Republican and Democratic parties is dead on.

    To Hal: Dead on. I cannot vote for Barr. If he is sincere, his place is not out in front. It is working behind the scenes trying to undue some of the horrible things he did as a Congressman. Hand the man a shovel and point him at some of the mounds of his own shit that he can start cleaning up.

    I tried to get involved in the GOP this year with Ron Paul’s candidacy, but I found that all the Republican Party wants is for everyone to rally around their standard-bearers and shut up. They scammed the district caucuses here in WA state (I was a delegate that far) to make sure that almost nobody but true believers got to go to the state convention.

  8. Steve Says:

    An awful campaign? If the polls hold true and he does get ~1.5% of the vote his campaign will have been the most successful libertarian presidential run so far.

    Look, as I have said before, I am not a Bob Barr fan, but I am going to vote for him. In 2 years we will be dealing with mid term elections and in 4 with another presidential election. The Libertarian Party will still be around. Hopefully, the state parties will be stronger and better prepared to throttle the National Committee.

    I am going to vote for Bob Barr because of all the candidates running he is the only one who is talking smaller government, anti us military intervention, pro small business and pro freedom. Sure it might all be lip service but it is more then the socialist Ralph Nadar, the lets ditch the bill of rights and rule by christian theocracy Chuck Baldwin, Barak keep on fighting, free heath care, higher taxes and yea I said I was against the government spying on you but we should prosecute the telcoms Obama or John why stop with Afghanistan and Iraq when we could go into Iran McCain.

  9. Steve Says:

    I meant Obama voted to protect the telcoms from prosecution for their illegal acts of spying on telephone calls.

  10. Tom Bryant Says:

    Fritz…it seems to just be a play on the word “Libertarian” Anyone is free to apply whatever definition they want to that word. If Bob Barr is not “Libertarian” enough to earn a vote from someone, but Ralph Nader can earn a vote from that person, I would argue that person is simply not a Libertarian as the Libertarian Party defines it (smaller government).

    The original poster appears to have thought that Bob Barr stood for a different meaning of the word “Libertarian” than what the LP stands for. Bob Barr has done a good job of showing that the Libertarian Party stands for smaller government. If that position scares some people off into voting for Ralph Nader or another big-government candidate, I can’t fault the candidate.

    Jonathan voted for a very outspoken proponent of socialism. That’s not the Libertarian Party’s market.

  11. EVIL DICK Says:

    Self destruction: thy name is Bob Barr
    Posted by Cody Quirk—- October 30th, 2008

    by Jonathan Cymberknopf




  12. Thomas M. Sipos Says:

    I hope the Barr ball & chain takes Root down with it.

    After Root won the VP nomination at the LP convention, Root called Barr “a master politician” and vowed to “watch Barr closely” during the campaign, so that Root could “learn from an expert.”

    Root praised Barr when it suited him, but should Barr sink, Root will spin that he’s nothing like Barr, and that Root could have done far better were he the presidential nominee.

    Never forget, that at the end of the convention:

    Barr promised he’d raise at least $40 million.

    Root promised he get at least 2 million votes.

    If they fail on their promises, they don’t deserve to be nominated again. Regrettably, Root has already threatened to run again in 2012.

    I’m glad I live in California, where Ron Paul is an officially certified write-in candidate, with Gail Lightfoot as his certified VP candidate.

    This means that in California, a vote for Ron Paul for president, and Gail Lightfoot for VP, will be counted.

  13. EVIL DICK Says:


  14. EVIL DICK Says:

    If they fail on their promises, they don’t deserve to be nominated again.



  15. BuckeyeKned Says:

    who is Gail Lightfoot and who cares? I’m in Ohio and am looking for a national candidate. Time to get real LP.

  16. drifter Says:

    i am voting barr for one reason - I think all 6 candidates suck, but I hope the LP gets enough votes for ballot access in many states making it easier for all the other candidates

  17. Roscoe Says:

    [Sarcastic voice] Yeah, let’s all build the Nader vote. That will weaken the LP and make it even less able to recover from the Barr debacle. That’s us, the waterboys of the Barr master plan to destroy the LP.

  18. volvoice Says:

    Bob did pretty good in the debate last night. All Bob had to do for this campaign was follow Murray Rothbards advice…..Everyone knows that Bob is not completely Libertarian on all issues. On the things he disagreed with, all he needed to do was to explain the LP platform on that issue and then go with his direction. That way when he deviates he at least still lets the people know where the majority of Libertarians stand and he would have, in no way, misrepresented the LP membership. But by not doing this he has appeared to misrepresent alot of lp members stances. Nobody is going to be able to run and please everyone on every issue, but Bob made several missteps on several large issues such as inserting troops into the S. American Narco war on G. Beck that pissed alot of libertarians off. I feel that Bob’s real mistake was letting a republican like Mr. Verney run his campaign. Russ doesn’t understand Libertarians and never will. I think that if Steve Gordon had run his campaign there would be a hell of a lot less pissed of Libertarians today.

  19. David in Akron Says:

    Hmmm… my comments aren’t appearing.

  20. David in Akron Says:

    Speaking of debates Bob Barr doesn’t attend, he DID attend one yesterday in Cleveland with Nader…and even Baldwin. In fact, Nader was almost late, arriving just in time. They credited Nader for being somehow involved in getting seatbelts in your car? I’ll have to check on that. How vary un-Libertarian. Didn’t Mary Ruwart say something about seatbelts? Yes!

  21. David in Akron Says:

    I hope they’ll soon list the debate in their podcast archive:

    There is a Bob Barr pod from Oct. 28, 2005 here.
    “He spoke about the dangers of the Patriot Act on civil liberties.”

  22. Bill Wood Says:

    Here we are closing in on the Election. This has been a whirl wind year for the Libertarian Party. The nose dive the Party took after the previous Presidential Elections stopped and the Party grew. Here is a brief list.

    Our Candidates and Party have received the most media coverage than any other time in the last 8 years, and probably in the entire history of the LP.

    Since May the Party’s New Membership has grown by over 3343, that is a 10% growth rate more than 4 years ago in the same time frame.

    Donations to the Party , up.

    Percentage Candidates are polling, up.

    Number of States on ballot 45, (down from 48 in 2004)

    I think the LP will continue to grow at a fast pace after the election is over and not drop off like in years past. I agree with TIME, we are maturing as a political party.

  23. Sobriquet Says:

    Nicely done.

  24. Robert Capozzi Says:

    Bill, yes, and I do believe that the LNC will be moving the convention date forward so that ballot access isn’t such a monumental task. Good idea.

  25. Geoffrey the Liberator Says:

    Dear Lord,

    I may not be a yank, but even we on this side of the pond know who your Mr. Nader is. You sir are no Libertarian! Voting for “Mr. Regulation” is proof positive. Good day to you, enjoy your new found delusional, big government, Euro-socialist friends. How you could ever claim to have been a Libertarian or for Bob Barr (the POLAR OPPOSITE of Mr. Nader) is beyond comprehension.

    PS —In a recent speech over hear in the UK, your Mr. Nader could not have said enough good things about our not so very good health care system. His goal, he claims, is to get the USA to model it’s system to be like ours. My own family pays thousands of pounds per year for “supplemental” insurance so we can get the treatments we need when we want, and not wait years in line for sub par treatment. I have family members who, on occasion, travel to the States to get treatments they can not get over here. Thus we pay 40-60% of our wages for sub-par health care, and this is what your Mr. Nader wishes on the masses of your country? Higher taxes, more government, less freedom and less choice?

  26. Hallmonster Says:

    Well said Geoffrey the Liberator,

    Social health care systems seem to worsen and fall apart soon after they are propped up by the government. The problem with a government run health care system is simply that it is not run like a business is run. There for, there is no incentive to keep a full staff, compete for customers to drive down costs, and ensure the safest and friendliest service. Compare the service you receive at your local corner shop to the service you receive at the post office.

    Many of us in the U.S. think our health care system is a free market system gone bad but you couldn’t be more wrong. The government sticks there nose in to every aspect of the medicine industry so now we have a demented hybrid system that is going to get even worse under Obama’s staff… or McCains… or Naders…

  27. Richard G. Says:

    Barr still has my vote!! Go Barr!! Vote for Nader, what a waste! The author here either doesn’t know Nader’s positions or is not really a Libertarian. I can understand a vote for Baldwin, but Nader! Get real. Must be another socialist in libertarian clothing. Go LP!! GO BARR!! Found my home in the LP and am loving it!!

  28. Thomas M. Sipos Says:


    Who are these people who are afraid to post under their real names?

    IEA, “Evil Dick,” your ignorance shows. I’ve nothing to do with the Boston Tea Party. Not a member, not a supporter, never was.

  29. Bill Wood Says:

    Robert, I agree about holding the Convention earlier. This would reduce the chances of the Rs and Ds pulling off the stunt they did in PA. I also wonder if there needs to be someone in charge of overseeing the overall ballot petitioning drive. We can’t have another LA,WV, Connecticut problem in 2012.

  30. BuckeyeKned Says:

    Sorry, but I look to the state parties as HELP or LEADERS in getting ballot access. Specific is Louisiana, West Virginia, and Connecticut. More people need to get off the couch and not expect “big daddy” LNC or the Barr campaign to save them. Take some responsiblity.

    Get your team (field development and political) together for 2010 NOW
    Get your fundraising started NOW
    Understand your deadline dates for petition submittals NOW
    Get a strategic plan for 2009 thru 2012 NOW

    Way too loose, yet I understand it is a volunteer grass roots group.

  31. Jeffrey Quick Says:

    I guess we’ve defined the difference between TPW “libertarians” and Beltway/Reasonoid “libertarians”: the former vote for boutique socialists (Nader) and the latter for mainstream socialists (Obama).

    I share the disappointment with Barr. For a while, I even considered a vote against Obama and his criminally corrupt campaign. But I’m back on board for the sake of the state party. Besides, unlike our last Secretary of State, I think Jen Brunner is more likely to count an LP vote than a GOP one.

  32. ken Says:

    As one person said after Barr did appearances here saying government regulation of the economy is necessary, “The Self-Biden.”

    His coverage only appears impressive if you haven’t been paying attention to the LP over the years. As it is he’s getting less coverage in our state because pro-libertarian journalists feel he’ll hurt the party, and ignoring media invitations. And as I predicted here, people like Gordon and Starr are jumping ship and claiming they had nothing to do with the campaign and candidate they created.

    As far as the party ‘growth’ after the LRC purging people right and left by losinbg member lists and phone calls in the night, what we’re seeing here are stooges or ex-military who openly admit they were ordered to join our ‘domestic terrorist group’ and try and disrupt meetings or get us involved in illegal staements or crazy schemes, job one.

    I’m voting for Barr, but I have no illusions this is helping the LP, and it’s certainly not a vote of confidence for the LRC. Barr ignored those who tried to reach out, is stabbing local candidates in the back with his crazy pronouncements, and whatever he gets will be less than it should have been.

  33. Bill Wood Says:

    Well said BuckeyeKned. I know some people who are interested in getting something going in the Eastern Panhandle of WV. So that should be a big help there. Plus if they can find someone to run for Governor, he or she would need 1% of the vote to get back on the ballot.

  34. Michael Seebeck Says:

    FYI, Buckeye, Gail is a former LPCA chair, LP VP and US Senate candidate, longtime activist, and a respected member of the LP.

  35. Richard Winger Says:

    The most significant ballot access victories in court this year have been in favor of presidential substitution. Yes, we had trouble because Alabama, South Dakota, Maine, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts all refused to let us use it. And in Pennsylvania, even though it is legal, we were challenged on the theory that it is only legal when the stand-in is a sincere, bona fide candidate. But we have now won in Court in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. Massachusetts says it will appeal our victory to the First Circuit. I fully expect we will beat Massachusetts again, in the First Circuit. That will then be binding on Maine and New Hampshire.

    We would be wasting the fruits of our victories in court, if we move the convention back to the odd year before the presidential election. If we do that, it becomes legally impossible for anyone seeking our nomination to seek primary season matching funds. I know, no Libertarian presidential candidate has ever done that, and it’s got big symbolic value, but as I see our presidential candidates begging for money, and I see people like Ralph Nader pulling in almost $900,000 this year to use on ballot access, it’s always possible Libertarians will change their minds about this. Some state Libertarian Parties accept the money from the state income tax check-off system. Sometimes it is the taxpayer’s own money, but the state is still using its resources to collect the money and forward it to us.

    I haven’t seen any libertarian or other anti-tax group praising Barack Obama for refusing to accept either primary season, or general election, funding. But Obama’s refusal to take government money probably saved the taxpayers $60,000,000 ($12,000 in the primary season and $48,000,000 general election). Obama acted in a libertarian manner, John McCain, by contrast, took over $48,000,000 in general election funding. I have not seen one commentary praising Obama for refusing the money, and condeming McCain for taking the money.

  36. Jake Says:

    I am voting for Barr because if he can get at least some percentage of the vote nationally it will make ballot assess in some states automatic for the 2012 candidate and other minor office LP candidates. The future candidate will have to spend less money on ballot access. Its not that I like Barr that much but I would like to make the future a little better for the next LP election cycle.

  37. Andy Says:

    Jake Says:

    October 31st, 2008 at 1:35 pm
    I am voting for Barr because if he can get at least some percentage of the vote nationally it will make ballot assess in some states automatic for the 2012 candidate and other minor office LP candidates. The future candidate will have to spend less money on ballot access. Its not that I like Barr that much but I would like to make the future a little better for the next LP election cycle.”

    It does not matter how many votes Barr gets nationally to secure ballot access, it only matters what percentage of vote he recieves in each state, and even then, in some states this is not a way to achieve ballot status.

    The only states where Barr stands any chance at retaining ballot status for the LP are states that require 1-2% of the votes.

    In some states, Barr is on the ballot as an independent and not a Libertarian, so in these states even if he recieves 10-20% of the vote (which he doesn’t stand any chance of ge tting) it won’t matter because he would have to be on the ballot as a Libertarian instead of an independent for it to count for ballot access.

    I am a 12 year member of the Libertarian Party and I am very disappointed (but not suprised) with the Barr campaign. I warned fellow Libertarians against nominating him but unfortunately not enough listened. Mary Ruwart/Steve Kubby would have been a better ticket (maybe not the best, but the best out of the choices available at the Convention this year). What the Libertarian Party needs right now is some tough love, so I’m going to punish them by not voting for Bob Barr. I’m either not going to vote in the Presidential race or I’m going to cast a write vote for Ron Paul.

  38. Scott Says:

    With the ongoing war and financial crisis, a Ron Paul candidacy would have gotten 5-10% of the vote on Tuesday, and perhaps even more.

    Barr/Root were not able to capitalize on Paul’s momentum, partially because the 2 are ex-GOPers who only turned against the war when it was popular to do so. Are partially because they were neither interested in nor capable of building the kind of broad coalition that made characterized the Ron Paul movement.

    At a minimum, there should have been some effort to negotiate with the Constitution/Reform parties and present a unified ticket. 3rd party conservatism is hopelessly divided at a time when it ought to be breaking through. Meanwhile, the GOP is firmly in the hands of the neocons. The next few years will show if Paul’s GOP infiltration strategy will succeed—-I’m not optimistic.

    There is no longer any point in voting 3rd party in this cycle—given the choice between McCain and Obama there really is no choice. The neocons must be handed an electoral defeat or they will continue their ruinous policies.

    Barack Obabma for president—the fact that he opposed the Iraq war and supports a peaceful resolution is more than enough reason to support him.

  39. DonaldRaymondLake Says:

    Not A Gail Lightfoot Fan: Ms Mid Coastal California Lightfoot is also an RN [Retired? Active?], ran [or tried to run a public access vid cast], and tends to chew off more [much more] than she and her partner can do on any given day or election cycle.

    Not a California Libertarian: Respected? whom? Lot’s of [primarily Lib leaning non Libertarians] think of her as a Cindy Sheehan style major flake. But she’s always ready to ‘dash into battle’ for the L Team. When she runs against other Libertarians she gets slaughtered.

    [Must be that ‘respect’ thing…...]

    She [like Constitution Party lawyer and light weight Diane XXXX of Sandy Ego County] is supposedly understanding of Abused Veterans issues. But in a decade, [like Escondido’s Diane XXXX] she does not seem to make that transistion from condesending voice mail to courageous print statements!

    And from an RN whom has personally visited CALVETS veterans care campuses…....

    Libertarians, like herding cats!

  40. NewFederalist Says:

    I have already voted for Barr via absentee ballot. Like many, perhaps most here, I am disappointed with the campaign. While Barr received more media attention than previous nominees on cable outlets like CNN and FNC he still failed to crack the big three with any sustained coverage. His fundraising was awful and the attitude of the campaign was far too arrogant for my tastes. I lay much of the blame on the campaign manager, Russ Verney. His job for Barr just validates what I always believed was true… with Ross Perot’s money ANYBODY could look good. Let’s just learn from all this and move on. Bitter infighting and needless battling with the Constitutionalists won’t advance the cause of liberty. We need to focus on that which unites us and debate without anger that which divides us. If we keep going at it like this year we will get the same result.

  41. Richard Winger Says:

    South Dakota, Alabama and Tennessee are the only states in which Barr is on the ballot with “independent” instead of “Libertarian”.

  42. Andy Says:

    “There is no longer any point in voting 3rd party in this cycle—given the choice between McCain and Obama there really is no choice. The neocons must be handed an electoral defeat or they will continue their ruinous policies.

    Barack Obabma for president—the fact that he opposed the Iraq war and supports a peaceful resolution is more than enough reason to support him.”

    Obama voted to continue funding the war in Iraq.

    It isn’t going to make a rat’s ass bit of difference if it Obama or McCain as both are establisment lackeys.

  43. Jonathan Says:

    Stop the Obama Constitutional Crisis
    Sign the Petition : 61795 Letters and Emails Sent So Far

    Please help in spreading the message, sign up and forward on:

    Here is the link:

  44. David in Akron Says:

    I have a lot more respect for Bob Barr after hearing this verbal beating he took from ‘the American View’. Do you think Joe Biden would have put up with this? I doubt it.

    Check it out and let me know what you think:

  45. Steve Says:


    My personal integrity doesn’t won’t allow me to make an accusation about where Obama was born unless I have evidence that he wasn’t born within the United States.

    My take is this is really lame.

  46. Steve Says:

    yea i see where some clown is making an accusation that Obama’s birth certificate isn’t right. But why hasn’t this same individual found one from the same county in Hawaii that is noticeably different? Seems like it would be so easy to do. I suspect this is what we in the linux world refer to as FUD. Fear Uncertainty and Doubt. Put a bunch of unsubstantiated claims out there and hope they stick before the election.

  47. Michael Seebeck Says:

    Earth to Donnie Ray Flake: Gail has done more for the LP and LPCA in one single day than you think, and she also continues to do so, despite the opinions of non-LPCA people like yourself. SLO is lucky to have her. She pulled together the DP electors without much if any help, and she deserves all credit for doing something that most people in the country didn’t do.

    Just because YOU don’t like her is no reason to diss her or her accomplishments.

  48. Tom Bryant Says:

    You heard it hear first: REAL Libertarians vote for Obama or Nader!

    Now wonder these folks are so against the LP. Does anyone think they will have a shot in hell of getting the LP to nominate Ralph Nader in 2012? Or could you imagine the reception they will receive when they ask the LP to endorse Obama’s re-election campaign?

  49. DonaldRaymondLake Says:

    Mikey [Seebeck], Oh you are her domestic partner!

    [If so, we have talked briefly on phone a time or two.]

    As I have had one bad experience with her lack of organizational skills time and time again, to the point where I cancelled a trip to Santa Barbara County as I just could not count on her being at the appoint place and on time, shouldn’t I warn others and share my FIRST HAND, SPOT ON, DOCUMENTED experiences? This includes HER hints at disorganization and possible ADDH morphology.

    And since I am NOT having sex with the woman, could my FIRST HAND, SPOT ON, DOCUMENTED opinions be slightly more objective than your’s?

    As I am

  50. Sean Scallon Says:

    I think how Barr will be perceived depends on how many votes he gets. If he breaks one million, and recent polls show he just might, and if he’s shown throwing some swing states like Georgia into Obama’s column, then it will be percieved as a success even though it didn’t live to earlier expectations. If he falls significantly under a million votes then it willl be seen as a failure and his bunch will probably go back to the GOP leaving the LP once again in the hands of the radicals and once again irrelevent.

  51. Clark Says:

    ...good one, lowell!...but take it easy on him…he appears child-like…wet behind the ears.. an aside…recently i’ve been hearing a lot of republican and bob barf ‘Libertarian’ stoooooooooops working their ass-kissers about ‘socialism’ if it were something new to america..

    ...i would these republicrat shmegeggies (?spelling, lowell) that a fundamental precondition for/to ‘wealth creation’ is land and the resources upon which..

    ...i would also remind you republicrat dopes that you don’t truly ‘OWN’ any land/ merely rent them from ‘the state’..(hint for republicrats: think ‘property tax’..’payable’ in federal reserve token$ only) again, any goddamned fool republicrats yacking about some ‘socialism’ really ought to STFU and maybe learn a little as to the origin, nature, etc. of a fucking ‘dollar’ before working their blow-holes about any of the ‘isms’..

    ...but have a good day!..

  52. Steve Says:


    your opinions might be right or they might be wrong but the use of your language and your doing so in such a public forum is do disrespectful.

    When I read what you wrote it is you that I am left with a bad opinion of. And I don’t know you or gail.

  53. Steve Says:


    That will be part of the test of Bob Barr what does he do after the election. Does he continues to be a member of the LP or does he return to the Republican Party?

    If Barr gets greater then 1.5% of the popular vote then he will have done significantly better then Ed CLark and with a lot less cash.

    On the fund raising Barr has only done a little better then Badnarik. Badnarik raised about 1 million adding in 12% for inflation would make that 1.12 million today. Barr as of today has reached 1.27 million.

  54. Michael Seebeck Says:


    That’s funny, Don!

    I could come back with a devastiatingly destructive set of putdowns, and they’d go something like this:

    “Calling Gail my domestic partner? We don’t even live in the same county and our relationship is political, MORON! And I’ve never talked to you on the phone either—I don’t take crank calls.”

    “Even my wife is laughing at your ineptitude!”

    “Besides, what would you know about human sex?”

    “Sorry, Don, just because you canceled one event because you got lost doesn’t mean Gail is a bad person. In fact, she’s just fine.”

    “And call me Mikey all you want, because I have and like my Life.”

    But I won’t say that. Instead I’ll just smile and shake my head.

    And so, off of my break, I’ll be returning to painting my house and campaigning against Prop 8.

    And people wonder why TPW has gone the drain in favor of LFV and IPR

  55. john w Says:


  56. Geoffrey the Liberator Says:

    Interesting video clip here between your Mr. Nader and Mr. Barr:

    The comments are equally good fun:

    Matt Says:

    Wow, in that little clip Nader advocated minimum wages, price controls, socialized medicine, and welfare entitlement programs (I might of missed one or two…).

    Michael Says:

    Nader showed his “hammer and sycle” approach to politics like usual.

    So my dear Mr. Cymberknopf, based on all the comments above, please do remove the word “Libertarian” from your name since you sir, clearly can not be one and vote for Mr. Nader.

  57. Joe Says:

    If Republicans are afraid to vote for Bob Barr please pass on the following thought and hopefully it will bring them into the libertarian fold. Republicans, we have to look ahead to ensure long term conservative leadership. We need to defeat the democrats by letting them take the fall for the next 4 years. With the democrat’s in power and things as bad as they are we know they will make things even worse over the next four years. It will be clear that they are to blame and we can return to power in the next election cycle because everyone will see that we were right. There is a good chance Senator McCain won’t be able to make things better over the next 4 years either, which would definitely keep us out of power till 2016! This cannot happen. Besides, John McCain has never been a completely loyal conservative. So this conservative says vote Bob Barr on Nov 4th and let the democrats destroy themselves.

  58. Bill Wood Says:

    Badnarik spent 18 months fundraising, Barr started in March or May so that is about 6 months. So if Barr had started at about the same time that Mike did Bob might have been able to raise 4 million.

  59. Andy Says:

    “Bill Wood Says:

    November 1st, 2008 at 7:17 pm
    Badnarik spent 18 months fundraising, Barr started in March or May so that is about 6 months. So if Barr had started at about the same time that Mike did Bob might have been able to raise 4 million.”

    The bulk of Badnarik’s donations came AFTER he got the nomination.

    Badnarik was also a nobody. Considering that Barr has minor celebrity status the fact that his fundraising isn’t doing much better than Badnarik’s is pathetic.

  60. georgia jawjacker Says:

    So my dear Mr. Cymberknopf, based on all the comments above, please do remove the word “Libertarian” from your name since you sir, clearly can not be one and vote for Mr. Nader.

    Good one Geoff

  61. Jeremy Bauserman Says:

    I bet Bob Barr does better than Ron Paul did in 1988.

  62. DonaldRaymondLake Says:

    Mike Seeburg and Lake responses:

    “Calling Gail my domestic partner? We don’t even live in the same county and our relationship is political, MORON! And I’ve never talked to you on the phone either—I don’t take crank calls.”

    Dear President of the Gail Lightfoot Fan Club, your overly emotional response to my FIRST HAND, SPOT ON, DOCUMENTED comments indicated an inflated attachment beyound that of comradeship.

    You indicated that you also live in the mid coast region. That I am possibly not knowing in every little detail of this nurse whom starts a dozen projects and shifts to neutral on a bunch of them? That I am possibly not knowing on the ins and outs of LPCa operations?

    Guilty guilty guilty and proud of it. Altho in the last decade in California both Libs [especially in SoCal] and alternative party Dem and GOP haters [state wide] snort and grin at her name. [First hand, Spot on, Documented!]

    Please tell me that Gail [never publically recommended, endorsed, or spot lighted by any group
    out side of LP Ca] did not get her head handed back to her by party neophyte, Judge Jim Grey, recommended by a broad spectrum of non Lib groups, including Citizens For A Better Veterans Home and the Reform Party of California!


    “Even my wife is laughing at your ineptitude!”

    Dearest Doctor Gallup, glad to be of service.


    “Besides, what would you know about human sex?”

    Dearest Doctor Kinsey, I know humans to be social animals. Regular, positive sex inspires irrational loyalty known as pair bonding.


    “Sorry, Don, just because you canceled one event because you got lost doesn’t mean Gail is a bad person. In fact, she’s just fine.”

    Dearest Politics as Usual, if you say that Snail Gail is respected, well respected, greatly respected, do you imply in general or just in her little cabal of Personality Cult loyalists? If the later, I will have to take your word for it. If the former, I have first hand evidence to the contrary.

    How could I have gotten lost? We have mapquest, Geo Quiz, and Thomas Guides! Besides, we [Citizens For A Better Veterans Home, including one law degree and one PhD] reviewed Gail’s illogical, erradic, unprofessional behavior and did not even start on the journey.

    If Gail is ‘just fine’, why did SHE bring up learning disabilities and over commitment?


    I’ll be returning to painting my house and campaigning against Prop 8.

    Dearest Mid Coast Micheal, you don’t believe unethical theocrats [some of the most dishonest folks on the planet] should be allowed to spew lie after lie on TV and in print and get away with it?

    And people wonder why TPW has gone the drain in favor of LFV and IPR

    Dearest Fellow West Coaster: TPW has gone down the drain because it was never bout the wide spectrum of alternative parties, candidates and or organizations. It is and was Libertarian, paleo consevatism, neo conservatism, and now blatant, transluscent Bob Barr 2008 watch.

    It [and to a lesser extent IPR] has been faulty and even dishonest from the get go. Again, direct personal experience with Austin Cassidy [who is blocking my IPR responses, a la California Vet, Donald Raymond Lake, and Lake Lakey], Steven Gordon, and others.

  63. Jonathan Says:

    Ron Paul is right
    great article:

  64. Tom Bryant Says:


    For starters, the article you linked was not written by Ron Paul, but a Dominic Cuchara.

    Secondly, Ron Paul endorsed Baldwin - not Nader. Voting for Nader is a vote against who Ron Paul believes is the best candidate.

    Third, the author of that article knows very little about the Federal Reserve and the nature of government. Government controlling the money supply is not something Libertarians would be in favor of, as Libertarians understand that destructive nature of government.

    The Federal Reserve is not a private bank. If it were, Libertarians would have no problem with it.

    If you’re a against the free market in banking, and if you proudly vote for a socialist like Ralph Nader - you have very little in common with the Libertarian Party. We stand for individual liberty - not more government power.

    I’m not sure why you thought for so long that Barr would deliver a socialist utopia - but I’m glad you finally figured out that Barr and the LP stand for smaller government. Now you can look for your a political home that suits you much better (The Greens may be a good fit if you dislike all private businesses with the same enthusiasm as you dislike private financial firms).

  65. DonaldRaymondLake Says:

    Two photo graphs of Bob Barr, and lots of negative opinions on alternative candidates, parties, organizations in gerneral. Ah, 2008, the year that could have been.

    “Third parties unlikely to spoil presidential race

    Buzz Up Send

    Paul Davidson, 53, a retired police officer from Charlotte, said he tried to read up on all the candidates — including Barr. But in the end, he plans to vote for McCain.

    “I think it’s great you have all these people running. That’s what America is all about,” Davidson said. “But you have to think long and hard about how you’re going to vote. I like Barr, but McCain needs every vote he can get to beat Obama.” ”

  66. Jonathan Says:

    Thank you Tom for setting me straight, lol

  67. Barr None Says:

    Richard Winger said: “I haven’t seen any libertarian or other anti-tax group praising Barack Obama for refusing to accept either primary season, or general election, funding.”

    I believe Libertarians realize that accepting govt. funding would have limited the amount of money that Obama could have spent on his campaign.

    Joell - I hope you are correct that Barr will discard the LP after the election. Unfortunately I think that he may prefer to finagle his way into a seat on the current LNC.

  68. Rocketman Says:

    If Barr is the infltrator that I think that he is everyone will see it after the election is over. He’ll publically criticize loudly the LP after the election, telling the public that he was misled and surrounded by nutcases that he only found out about too late and very messily leave the party trying to do as much damage as possible to it. Many in the LP like Cristine Smith tried to warn us about him but too few listened. Everyone who supported him should be ashamed and apologize to Christine Smith.

  69. Tom Bryant Says:

    Would that be the same Christine Smith who has been an LP member for less time than Bob Barr, and whose original website included a call for universal healthcare?

    I’m privy to the inner workings of our state party, and the amount of volunteer / inquiry traffic we have received has been immense. I worked on the Badnarik campaign, and there was not anywhere near this amount of interest in my state party. I’m curious if any of the naysayers actually hold leadership positions, and can comment on the amount of volunteers / inquiries the Barr campaign is generating.

    I know that the LP is seriously dropping the ball by not having enough for these folks to do, but that is not on the candidate, that’s due to the weakened state of our local affiliates. I imagine a state / region with stronger local groups would benefit a heck of a lot more.

  70. ken Says:

    All this is coming out as I predicted.

    Unfortunately, the right-wing LNC deliberately set out to destroy the affiliates. About half of the state affiliates are non-functional.

    Smith is no LP stalwart. her website included calls for universal healthcae re and attacks on ‘libertarian anarchism,’ which is the conservative-LRC codeword for any position they don’t like based on a voluntary approach.

    Now Barr has done a radio interview where he calls for women to be executed for abortions, including raped children, apparently. Goodbye, LP women.

    Libertarians are voting Obama in this election. Many are saying better a weak ally than a traitor who stabs you in the back. Even the Economist is writing about it, though there is total silence on the LP controlled groups and blogs.

  71. Rob Says:

    If you want the LP to thrive, hold your nose and vote Barr anyway.

    I’m a green, so I don’t really care if you choose to allow your party to self-destruct, but the fact is barr isn’t going to win and if you don’t vote to help your party maintain its status on ballots at least, you are “throwing your vote away”.

    assuming you actually want to build your party.

    Nader is a true wasted vote this year; he leaves no party in his wake to continue his fight.

    You can at least leave a party behind that has learned from this debacle, I hope!

  72. Clark Says:

    MONETARY IGNORAMUS TOM BRYANT THEORIZES OUT HIS ASS: “..Third, the author of that article knows very little about the Federal Reserve and the nature of government. Government controlling the money supply is not something Libertarians would be in favor of, as Libertarians understand that destructive nature of government. The Federal Reserve is not a private bank. If it were, Libertarians would have no problem with it. If you’re a against the free market in banking, have very little in common with the Libertarian Party. We stand for individual liberty - not more government power…” (END)

    ...maybe learn a little about the origin, nature, etc. of a fucking ‘dollar’ before you work your hamburger chute too much here!..

    “...The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was a major coup for the international bankers. They had battled for more than a century to establish a private central bank in the United States with the exclusive right to “monetize” the government’s debt; that is, to print their own money and exchange it for government securities or I.O.U.s. The Federal Reserve Act authorized a private central bank to create money out of nothing, lend it to the government at interest, and control the national money supply, expanding or contracting it at will. Representative Charles Lindbergh Sr. called the Act “the worst legislative crime of the ages.” He warned prophetically:

    “[The Federal Reserve Board] can cause the pendulum of a rising and falling market to swing gently back and forth by slight changes in the discount rate, or cause violent fluctuations by greater rate variation, and in either case it will possess inside information as to financial conditions and advance knowledge of the coming change, either up or down.

    “This is the strangest, most dangerous advantage ever placed in the hands of a special privilege class by any Government that ever existed. . . . The financial system has been turned over to . . . a purely profiteering group. The system is private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people’s money.

    In 1934, in the throes of the Great Depression, Representative Louis McFadden would go further, stating on the Congressional record:

    “Some people think that the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lenders. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man’s throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into states to buy votes to control our legislatures; there are those who maintain International propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us into granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime.

    “These twelve private credit monopolies were deceitfully and disloyally foisted upon this Country by the bankers who came here from Europe and repaid us our hospitality by undermining our American institutions.”

    I DIRECT YOU ‘FREE MARKET MONEY ISSUANCE/CREATION’ REPUBLICRAT FOOLS TO ART. 1 SEC. 8 Clause 5 of your apparently unread/not understood Constitutions!

    ...and have a good day!..

  73. David Staples Says:

    If anyone thinks that a radical, as some of the other proposed LP candidates were, is going to have any chance at all of being elected, think again. The purpose of running a candidate such as Barr is to try and appeal to those that consider themselves independents, but are usually swayed one way or the other to the Republicans and Democrats. A radical appeals to very few, and is what has earned the LP it’s reputation as a party of nutcases. No, Barr may not be your idea of a perfect candidate… but I, for one, am glad that he’s not your perfect candidate. If polls show correctly, Bob should have the highest popular vote tally, as well as percentage, that any LP candidate has ever had. I truly believe that if it weren’t for such a socialist as Obama running this year, that Bob would have even higher numbers. The problem there lies in the fact that so many people feel they have to vote for McCain just to try and make sure Obama doesn’t get elected.

  74. David Staples Says:

    correction to the above… Bob should have the highest popular vote tally, as well as percentage, that any LP Presidential candidate has ever had.

  75. Tom Bryant Says:

    Clark…simply cutting and pasting incorrect statements does not make it so. You would far better off actually reading the law, or simply reading a summary that explains how it operates. The Federal Reserve is not a private bank for starters. If that were the case, there would be no Libertarians against it - we are all for the free market.

    Instead, the government appoints the majority of the Board of Governors. While there is a private minority (good) it is still unfortunately a wing of the Federal government. Congress has established many rules to try to take the politics out of it (good) but the FED is still ultimately under the jurisdiction of Congress (bad). For example, the profit made by member banks is set by law, the excess is returned to the Treasury - and there is sure a lot of excess believe it or not!

    No one was really happy with the law. Those who wanted government control of the money supply aren’t happy with the private sanity check aspects of the law. Those who want a truly private financial sector are not happy with the government having ultimate say in the matter. It’s a hybrid system - guaranteed to be complicated enough so that folks can confuse people for generations.

    The time before the FED, including the free banking era, saw a lot of fluctuations, booms, and busts. That appears to an inevitable fact of an economy. The FED does private some very valuable services, but Libertarians would prefer to see those services being offered by private banks competing with each other - rather than set by a government mandate.

    But other than copying pasting from sites of questionable validity, what do you think would be better: government controlling our money supply or the private sector controlling our money supply? It seems you want the government to do it, which puts you at odds with most Libertarians who see the government as the worst manager of anything.

  76. Clark Says:

    ...tom, REALITY, PLEASE!

    ...Article 1, Section 8, Clause 5. (The Congress shall have Power) To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures

    ...methinks you don’t understand the nature of ‘money’..why do you think they placed money alongside ‘weights and measures?’

    ...would you delegate to individuals the right to make penal statutes? levy taxes? alter weights and measures as they see fit?

    ...btw, thank-you for your thoughtful response and i apologize to you for my original ‘shock value’ outburst…

    ...maybe we both can agree that ‘the money thing’ ought to be first and foremost of all political issues…not buried in republicrat economics gibberish and ignorance as it is today..

    ...there truly is no sense wasting much time arguing about/discussing ANY other issue(s)..

    ...thi$ is at the heart of them all..

    ...have a good day..

  77. ETJB Says:

    I had been telling me Libertarian friends about Bob Barr and, before that, Ron Paul.

    It is one thing to agree or disagree with what they claim to support, and certainly such people should be willing to work together when they have common issues—electoral reform—but calling either one a libertarian is awfully deceptive.

    Paul is really a Paleo-Conservative who finds it benifical to appeal to Libertarians and Constitution Party-type members, no small feet to be sure, with lots of right-wing and or libertrian rethoric and conspiracy theories.

    Bar, I suspect, was probably just wanted to the money and praise that he knew he would get by becoming the LP nominee. He may not have been a GOP plant, just a guy who saw the third party like a suburbian youth might see a ‘wild’ nighti in the city.

    One of the things that has really damaged the party, is the differences between the LP, CP, GOP and Paleo-Conservatives are been somewhat blurred, which driven away a lot of people.

Leave a Reply