May 22, 2008 7:23 AM
Libertarian presidential contender Bob Barr on immigration, gas prices, Iraq and more
Former Republican Congressman Bob Barr, now a candidate for the Libertarian Party's presidential nomination, took questions online Thursday morning.
You can read the transcript here.
The Libertarian National Convention opened this morning at the Sheraton Hotel in downtown Denver and Barr's candidacy has prompted a flurry of speculation about whether he might upset the major parties' balance of power - if he gets the Libertarian nod.
George Will has this assessment of Barr's likely impact on the general election campaign:
Come November, Barr conceivably could be to John McCain what Ralph Nader was to Al Gore in 2000--ruinous. Nader was a weak third-party candidate but was the most consequential in American history. He won only 2,882,955 popular votes nationwide (2.7 percent), but 97,488 of them were in Florida, where, because of Nader, George W. Bush won by 537 votes.The son of a soldier, Barr graduated from high school in Tehran. In 1994, he was elected to Congress as the Republicans, led by another pugnacious Georgian, Newt Gingrich, ended 40 years of Democratic control of the House. Four years later, Barr, a former prosecutor inflamed by charges of perjury and obstruction of justice, was central to the impeachment of Bill Clinton. Since losing his seat in 2002, he has been active in the National Rifle Association and the American Civil Liberties Union, an unusual tandem.
Noah Millman at theamericanscene.com, lists eight reasons why Barr could have a significant impact on the election.
2. Some of Barr's issues - civil liberties, opposition to the war - that will draw disaffected Republicans may cut into what would otherwise have been Obama's vote totals as well as McCain's (some of these voters would have otherwise defected to the Democrat over these same issues; others would otherwise have stuck with the GOP because of opposition to other elements in the Democrats' platform). But one particular issue could pose real problems for McCain: gun rights. McCain does not have a good history with the gun rights crowd, while Barr is a true believer. Gun rights voters are a key part of the GOP coalition. If these voters are convinced that McCain will be lousy, and Obama won't be much worse (which Obama might reassure them about by choosing a pro-gun-rights VP such as, oh, I dunno, Jim Webb), McCain could lose a small but important component of his base voters. That could make a difference in a close contest in Ohio, or Missouri, or Virginia, or Nevada.3. To a lesser extent, Barr may be able to capitalize on immigration-restrictionist loathing for McCain. I actually doubt Barr is going to make a headline issue of immigration, because if he does that will devour his campaign and his priorities are elsewhere. But it's not inconceivable that immigration-restrictionist activists wind up supporting him anyhow, as he's more congenial than McCain or Obama are. If they get any traction, this once again cuts into a base McCain needs.
Ross Douhat at theatlanticonline.com disagrees:
My bold prediction: Barr will do roughly as well as Pat Buchanan did in 2000, benefiting from the more favorable landscape for a right-of-center protest candidate but suffering from a lack of the charisma, celebrity and committed followers that Pitchfork Pat brought to the '00 race. He won't be included in the debates, the media will largely ignore him, and he'll end up being a factor only if the election comes down to some butterfly ballots in South Florida. There is an anti-war, anti-immigration libertarian who could have had at least a Nader-style impact on the general election - but his name is Ron Paul, and he isn't running.
Bruce Bartlett, writing in the Wall Street Journal, wonders if the Libertarian Party matters.
Ron Paul's unexpected success raising money and gaining votes in the Republican primaries - running on an explicitly libertarian platform - has made the Libertarian Party's presidential nomination something worth vying for this year.Although Rep. Paul could probably have had the nomination for the asking, he's running instead for re-election in his Texas district. Former Republican Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia and former Democratic Sen. Mike Gravel of Alaska are among those actively seeking the nomination at the LP convention, which begins today in Denver.
The fact that such well-known, former establishment figures would seek a fringe party's presidential nomination demonstrates to many libertarians that their party has come of age. It's also created fear in Republican ranks that a viable LP candidate could throw a close election to the Democrats.
Libertarians respond that their message of an immediate end to the Iraq war, legalization of drugs, and opposition to the Bush administration's undermining of civil liberties appeals as much to Democrats as their advocacy of free-market economics appeals to Republicans.
May 22, 2008
8:39 AM
Travis writes:
Ron Paul is a true Republican.
May 22, 2008
9:55 AM
Brittanicus writes:
After McCain joined a group of pro-illegal immigrant politicians, including Ted Kennedy. How can anybody trust him? Come to that! How can we trust Obama, Clinton or McCain, when it comes to this fire-breathing issue. Back in 1986 Ted Kennedy promised the American people, there absolutely would not be any more AMNESTY? That was obviously a down-right lie, because he and his special interest lobby, tried to push America into another AMNESTY last march. However, it did not work as 80 percent of our population said NO!
We cannot give credence to anybody, who sits in their ivory thrones in Washington. Just this week Madam Feinstein, Pelosi, Craig thought thy could slip through unnoticed another AMNESTY, but 'THE PEOPLE' caught wind of it and stopped it in its tracks. Although this push for AMNESTY to appease the parasite corporate world was thwarted, Senator Reid still did not remove one amendment to Iraq War appropriations package, where this AMNESTY was hidden? Read the disturbing details at NUMBERSUSA. It's your jobs that are in peril!
May 22, 2008
9:58 AM
Brittanicus writes:
After McCain joined a group of pro-illegal immigrant politicians, including Ted Kennedy. How can anybody trust him? Come to that! How can we trust Obama, Clinton or McCain, when it comes to this fire-breathing issue. Back in 1986 Ted Kennedy promised the American people, there absolutely would not be any more AMNESTY? That was obviously a down-right lie, because he and his special interest lobby, tried to push America into another AMNESTY last march. However, it did not work as 80 percent of our population said NO!
We cannot give credence to anybody, who sits in their ivory thrones in Washington. Just this week Madam Feinstein, Pelosi, Craig thought thy could slip through unnoticed another AMNESTY, but 'THE PEOPLE' caught wind of it and stopped it in its tracks. Although this push for AMNESTY to appease the parasite corporate world was thwarted, Senator Reid still did not remove one amendment to Iraq War appropriations package, where this AMNESTY was hidden? Read the disturbing details at NUMBERSUSA. It's your jobs that are in peril!
May 22, 2008
11:33 AM
Brad writes:
I hope the Libertarian Party nominates somebody who opposes the anti-immigrant racists.
May 22, 2008
12:05 PM
Shaggy writes:
Brad,
I think you are confused as many open borders people are.
We are not opposed to immigration...we are opposed to illegal immigration.
Do you understand the difference?
We are tired of them destroying our Country and breaking our Laws.
May 22, 2008
12:21 PM
Anonymous writes:
Start excuting illegals in the states, they will leave on their own, quickly too I might add
May 22, 2008
1:04 PM
jay writes:
shaggy, how do you think the illegal immigrants are "destroying our Country"?
May 22, 2008
1:57 PM
Shaggy writes:
jay, there are so many facts about them destroying this Country I better just send you a link and hope you actually open it and click on a few of the many many many facts of what they are doing.
Do you know that more Americans die from the hands of illegals than Americans fighting Wars over seas?
Did you know that on average 12 Americans die every day at the hands of illegals?
Check it out.
http://www.usillegalaliens.com/
May 22, 2008
2:31 PM
jay writes:
shaggy, but how is 5% of the population "destroying the country"?
i took at your website in the hopes you posted a cost benefit analysis, but didn't see one. do you have a link to one?
this is just one guy talking, but it kind of sounds like you maybe blowing the influence of illegal immigrants on the nation's problems out of proportion a little.
May 22, 2008
3:35 PM
Ben- Border Native writes:
Pinochio, You make me laugh. JW was the first one to bring cost benefit of illegals up, get slapped down and then have to shut up. So you cling to cost/benefit like a straw in the ocean. Let's see your radical open-borders math.
Why don't YOU link a C/B of illegals? Lord knows myself and others have done it ad-nauseam for your "willful ignorance". You could take the easier way out and cry "racism' like Brad.
May 22, 2008
3:55 PM
jay writes:
don't pout benny.
"Why don't YOU link a C/B of illegals?"
because i'm not the one needing to supporting a vast conspiracy theory about 5% of the population "destroying our country".
May 22, 2008
4:09 PM
Ben- Border Native writes:
Of course Pinochio, you can't, but others have done so repeatedly. Par for the course for you.
Well jay, in many countries illegals have done a pretty darn good job destroying their own home country, what makes you think all of a sudden they care of the stewardship of our country?
Put it too you this way, illegal aliens have done a darn fine job destroying my border town and it's American culture.
May 22, 2008
4:09 PM
gr8fuldude writes:
Mark, you might want to re-word the headline...It presently reads like this:
"Libertarian presidential contender Bob Barr on drugs,..."
Not sure Barr would approve of that message...
May 22, 2008
4:15 PM
Shaggy writes:
Unlike you jay we provide links to back us up.
You should try it at least one time...just once please...you could start with that pesky link on McCains economic adviser you fail time after time to provide.
Heres another one so you can stick your jayhole in and deny it.
"WASHINGTON – Someone has finally fixed an approximate taxpayer cost of between 12 million and 15 million illegal aliens residing in the U.S.
A new study by the Heritage Foundation's Robert Rector found a household headed by an individual without a high school education, including about two-thirds of illegal aliens, costs U.S. taxpayers more than $32,000 in federal, state and local benefits. That same family contributes an average of $9,000 a year in taxes, resulting in a net tax burden of $22,449 each year.
Over the course of the household's lifetime that tax burden translates to $1.1 million."
May 22, 2008
4:17 PM
Shaggy writes:
BTW, Those figures can safely be DOUBLED as the more realistc figure puts the illegal population at 25-30 million.
May 22, 2008
4:23 PM
Shaggy writes:
The fact that you even consider the costs of people breaking our laws speaks volumes.
here is the link to back my previous post up...please take note and follow suit in the future.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55135
May 22, 2008
4:38 PM
Shaggy writes:
"If the lower figure of 12 million illegal aliens is used for estimation purposes, the total tax burden translates to $2.2 trillion."---same link
May 22, 2008
4:48 PM
Shaggy writes:
""Over the next ten years the total cost of low-skill households to the taxpayer (immediate benefits minus taxes paid) is likely to be at least $3.9 trillion," Rector writes. "This number would go up significantly if changes in immigration policy lead to substantial increases in the number of low-skill immigrants entering the country and receiving services.""---another inconvenient fact for you jay from the same link
May 22, 2008
4:50 PM
Shaggy writes:
Kinda makes the money we are spending in Iraq look like peanuts doesn't it?
May 22, 2008
4:51 PM
jay writes:
just so i'm clear.
your cost benefit analysis is an article on the wnd?
May 22, 2008
4:59 PM
Shaggy writes:
No jay, it was a study done by the Heritage Foundation.
Looks like you over looked that inconvenient fact?
Read for once man...this is getting old!!!
May 22, 2008
5:18 PM
jay writes:
yes, i've seen the heritage foundation report...it doesn't contain a complete c/b analysis either.
was that it?
can we dismiss your chicken little rantings about illegal immigrants "destroying the country"?
May 22, 2008
5:55 PM
Ben writes:
Nice info, Aaagain Shaggy,
Willful ignorance indeed.
May 22, 2008
11:44 PM
KW writes:
jay: "shaggy, how do you think the illegal immigrants are "destroying our Country"?"
That has to be the most uninformed and illiterate comment you have ever posted.
Education and medical expenses alone account for HUGE (still love that word) unnecessary costs to all of us tax payers. These two items alone account for major budgetary overloads.
Being in denial doesn't strengthen your position jay, but good attempt at being clueless.
You are the master.
May 23, 2008
9:52 AM
jay writes:
i understand that the illegal immigrants put additional strain on our social service, education and medical systems...but their influence is far from the largest problem those infrastructures have.
i still haven't seen any evidence that supports the chicken little statement that illegal immigrants are "destroying our country".
May 23, 2008
5:57 PM
Anonymous writes:
how is 5% of the population "destroying the country"?----jay
have you ever been to southern cal?
have you ever been to southern florida?
have you ever been to parts just west of denver?
have you ever been to a third world country?
if the answer is no than i suggest you visit any of the three i mentioned!
didn't think so jay, you are in denial if you don't think they are damaging our country. they are only making companies make big profits. i thought that is a no no in the liberal mind.
it's basically modern day slavery. i would think you would be against that but then again liberals blow the way of the wind.
May 23, 2008
7:24 PM
If you build it, they won't come writes:
"This is just one guy talking, but it kind of sounds like you maybe blowing the influence of illegal immigrants on the nation's problems out of proportion a little." -jay
Now, just replace the words "illegal immigrants" and "the nations problems" with "man made emmisions" and "global warming" and watch the liberals get up off their collective knees in service to Al Gore and rabidly defend an unproven science.
May 26, 2008
12:19 PM
KYJurisDoctor writes:
I agree with George Will. This could be a REPEAT of 2000, and Bob Barr will most likely "bar" John McCain from the White House!
May 27, 2008
4:31 PM
Stone Cold writes:
Barr will be inconsequential - as this election will not be close.
I see Obama winning at least 30 states, maybe even 35.
People will not vote for a Third Bush term, as it's been a Proven Failure.