I need to expound a bit more on last night's post. As I said last night, Bob Barr may be making a run at the Libertarian nomination for prez this year. There are two reasons why at this time I will not be supporting his candidacy for president, despite the fact that I agree with him on many issues. He is a proponent of reducing the size of gov't, and getting rid of programs and entitlements that have negative impact on our economy and society. He is a staunch supporter of privacy rights, home schooling, and other 'individual' issues, promoting that America is great because of its people, and not b/c of its government. He is against the Real ID Act, and promotes states' rights. Good stuff. Back to the 2 reasons. 1, his (and Libertarians as a party) position on foreign policy, and 2, the current ineffectiveness of third-party candidates for the presidency.
Where I have issue with Bob Barr and the majority of Libertarians is in their view of foreign policy and truly recognizing what I believe to be a major threat: radical Islam. Now I know you are thinking that I have been brainwashed by my republican handlers and am just spouting the company line. (BTW: I consider myself a conservative, not a Republican. Big difference) Others will say that we haven't been attacked in six years, so it is not so big a threat anymore. I believe there is a reason we haven't been attacked, and that is because we have been attacking them on their turf and protecting our own.
The conundrum on this issue is in determining which ideal takes precedence: protecting our freedoms at all costs versus protecting our country, and this is a legitimate argument. Do we derive our decisions from our staunch support for privacy, keeping government at all levels out of our lives and potentially enabling outside invaders to take down our republic? Or do we protect ourselves at all costs, sacrificing personal liberties to keep our houses and jobs and hope that we can trust our government not to pull a Big Brother on us and run our lives? Honestly, I don't know the answer, maybe a mix of both. And I believe many true conservatives will have to make that decision if they honestly evaluate Bob Barr as a candidate come November, because he brings such a different view to the table.
Barr's candidacy also brings up another issue, and that is the ineffectiveness of a third party becoming a major player in our political scene. In my naive and often idiotic opinion, I don't see this ever happening in this manner. All a third party does right now is essentially elect one of the major party candidates every four years. I don't see the Libertarian party becoming effective by nominating Barr for president. Much like most political efforts, this needs to be from the ground up. Harvey Birdman noted in his comments last night that its 'voters like you' who keep a third party from becoming viable. In some form, yes that is true, but I believe that a third party must grow its roots through local, state, and congressional elections before it will ever become a real challenger for the White House. And I am in favor of guys like Barr and Joe Liebermann breaking away from their former parties to support the people and issues that they believe in. But at this point, I don't believe that voting for a third party candidate for President will have any positive impact on the issues that are most important to me.
5 comments:
Bob Barr was on the radio yesterday and his answer for folks worried about a vote for him being a vote for Obama was, " Its never the wrong time to do the right thing." We are supposed to be mad about the mess that our Republicans in congress have made yet alot of us seem ready to back McCain a member of that same congress that has helped double the size of government. I am ready to give Barr my vote to help to send a message. The only problem is we are a few million voters short of having enough votes to accomplish that.
I agree with Ryan...and I think more of America is ready to vote for a "Barr-type" than ever before. If Obama wins this election and doesn't bring his "change" it could make things even more interesting in 2012. I do agree that a vote for McCain is just giving us a 3rd Bush term though...
Barr should get Ron Paul on his ticket! ha
You both make very good points, especially about a third "Bush" term, even though those two hate each other. The repubs of today are not fiscally responsible, and maybe a huge (relatively speaking) turnout for Barr would make them take notice. I just see this movement as needing to take place through the states and congress to ever gain a real foothold, but maybe this could start that movement.
Barr-Paul ticket? Don't know if that would help or hurt.
Barr/Paul would be a dream ticket (for me).
I doubt Barr will take many votes away from McCain. The people that vote Libertarian strongly dislike, even hate, both parties. You can bet that votes for the Libertarian candidate, if anything, will take votes away from Obama (let's be honest, he's going to get the nom) AND McCain, not solely one more than the other. I was really involved in the Ron Paul campaign, and the people that were dedicated about getting him in the White House, have that same enthusiasm for Obama and McCain not getting in the White House. These are people that are only going to vote third party, or not vote at all. I don't know about you, but I'm sick and tired of voting for the lesser of two evils, it's time people started voting their conscience/beliefs and voting for the candidate that can make some serious changes in America. Have we been deceived by politics so much that we've lessened ourselves to vote for the person who can beat the greater of the two evils? We'll never see change in this country as long as people vote that way...
Josh, it's time for a new post! Work can wait.
Post a Comment