Comments:Controversy spreads over Libertarian U.S. presidential nominee Bob Barr

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

• Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
• Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
• You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

Click here to add a new comment · Add onto existing comments

Maybe now people will realise Barr isn't a real libertarian. Anonymous101^talk 18:13, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Why does this even matter, all these third party candidates do is take away from their prospective base (Green party from Democrats and Libertarians from Conservatives) Quite frankly I think its very self centered to run for a position just for the hell of it. 70.165.36.114

Libertarians are NOT conservatives (Barr is, but he's not a real libertarian). Anonymous101^talk 21:41, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

You don't know what you're talking about. American Libertarianism is all about preserving the Constitution and individual rights. You're confusing social conservatism with true conservatism. 68.189.148.241 23:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the two posts above, but who the hell are you to say what the 'prospective base' is? Also, many people vote third party because of the following line of thought, "I don't like the way the country has been going the last X years. Who has been in power the last X years? Well, a Democrat or Republican. I guess I won't vote for them." Fephisto (talk) 01:37, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand what the big fuss is about. What's the whole deal with people getting mad at the fact that he won't attend a press conference? I'm not informed in the third party candidates, so somebody fill me in. Isn't he just sticking up and saying "hey, I'm going this on my own"? Why are people revolting as to why he just wants to say he's in it for himself? conman33 20:09, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I would assume it's because there has already been much consternation over whether Barr is really a libertarian, and his perceived insults to Paul further inflame such concerns.

1) Bob Barr actions in the past are not libertarian by any means. He was a Republican that voted for the Patriot Act, the War in Iraq, the War against Drugs, etc.. For many people, they may be mad with Barr to begin with because he's the candidate for the LP when he's not even libertarian. Thus, give people any chance to attack a guy they don't like and they will.

2) Ron Paul was effectively reaching out to endorse third parties and help them out, and Barr has effectively shoved aside an endorsement that follows very well with LP ideology (since Ron Paul is fairly libertarian). It's like someone giving you $100 and you replying by saying "Go to hell." It's incredibly disrespectful.

3) After refusing Paul's endorsement, he turns around and asks him to be his VP, which is just an added dose of rudeness.

4) He did it at the last minute. Way to be a drama queen.Fephisto (talk) 01:37, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

My two cents

Libertarian is rich man anarchy--KDP3 (talk) 02:48, 13 September 2008 (UTC)