David Nolan: ‘The Barr campaign is over;’ support Munger, Straus instead

Libertarian Party co-founder David Nolan, who has been a reluctant but consistent Barr supporter since he won the nomination in May, says the LP’s presidential campaign is over, as of yesterday. He encourages libertarians to support the candidacies of local candidates such as North Carolina’s Michael Munger and New Hampshire’s Morey Straus.

As of yesterday afternoon, Bob Barr’s Presidential campaign is effectively over. There were signs of serious trouble even before yesterday, but his “no-show” at Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty news conference — followed by an insulting suggestion that Ron should join Barr on the LP ticket in the VP slot — demonstrated just how out-of-touch the Barr campaign is, and how poor Barr’s vote total is likely to be.

In earlier articles here on nolanchart.com I tried to give Barr every benefit of the doubt. I observed that in theory he should be one of the Libertarian Party’s stronger Presidential candidates. I opined that while his pronouncements on the campaign trail were hardly hard-core libertarian, they were mostly to-the-point and well stated. I did not support him for the nomination, but I was more or less comfortable supporting him once he became the LP nominee.

Nolan does say he still intends to vote for Barr, though — just don’t send him money:

By all means, vote for Bob Barr in November. I plan to, and I urge every Libertarian to do likewise. Whatever vote Barr receives will be seen by most people as “the Libertarian vote” and we want that to be as high as possible. And if you want to campaign for Barr locally, then do so. Print up flyers, put up homemade campaign signs, etc. But do not, under any circumstances, send any money to the Barr ’08 campaign. Most of the money will be wasted, and the rest will be spent muddying the waters about what genuine libertarianism is all about.

Read the rest.

Snubgate continues.

39 thoughts on “David Nolan: ‘The Barr campaign is over;’ support Munger, Straus instead

  1. Ross Levin

    Agreed.

    But this is what I’ve been saying from the beginning (along with loads of other third partisans) – focus on the local candidates. That’s where victories lie.

    I’m currently volunteering for John Murphy, whose ad is on the right hand side of this comment, and his website is http://www.johnmurphyforcongress.org He’s endorsed by the Green, Reform, and Libertarian parties. He also has Ralph Nader and Mike Gravel’s endorsement, among others.

    I’ve donated to independent Dr. Steven Porter, whose website is http://www.porter4congress.com (I think that’s it. If it isn’t I’ll post another comment).

    And I’m doing a bit of work for Libertarian Neil Kiernan Stephenson, who is running in Michigan. Stephenson also has Gravel’s endorsement, along with the Boston Tea Party’s endorsement. His website is http://www.nks2008.com

    Who are the local candidates all of you are working for?

  2. VTV

    I work very closely with Neil Kiernan Stephenson. We occupy the same body, and it makes it very convienient when I need to have a meeting with him…. 🙂

  3. darolew

    “By all means, vote for Bob Barr in November.”

    No.

    “Who are the local candidates all of you are working for?”

    College eats up most of my time anyway, but, as far as I know, Washington state has no local Libertarian candidates. The top-two primary means only Democrats and Republicans get on the ballot (with the exception of the POTUS candidates). Maybe a few Libertarians got by the top-two primary in non-partisan races, but I haven’t heard of any.

  4. Mike Gillis

    Actually, I believe that one Libertarian candidate for State Rep. made it to the general election, because she faced her opponent in a one-on-one race.

    Ruth Bennett. I disagree with her politics, but she’s a classy lady with strong ideals. Good ally to have on election reform issues.

  5. G.E. Post author

    Support Bob Bird!

    Scotty Boman, Morey Straus, Jason Gatties, Neil Stephenson, Tom Knapp, all good candidates too.

  6. AnthonyD

    “Most of the money will be wasted, and the rest will be spent muddying the waters about what genuine libertarianism is all about.”

    Yes, as opposed to the $35 million sent to the old kook Ron Paul. That was money well-spent…on what I have no idea.

  7. Dylan Waco

    “Yes, as opposed to the $35 million sent to the old kook Ron Paul. That was money well-spent…on what I have no idea.”

    Considering the fact that Barr paid hand over fist for foreign policy advice from Doug Bandow when he could have just read his blog, I’m not sure this is the argument you want to be making.

    Of course this whole thing is a scam. Viguerie came out hardcore for Palin and by pure chance the Barr campaign pulls this crap immediately after? Not likely.

  8. AnthonyD

    No Dylan, it is an argument I want to make.

    Luke 12:48 (KJV, of course):

    “For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.”

    The old kook Ron Paul was given an opportunity unparalleled in LP history to put the libertarian philosophy in front of the American voters, a legitimate shot to get into the presidential debates, and he did nothing with the opportunity. He dropped the ball and went back to the Republican Party, a party we are supposed to be fighting AGAINST.

    If anyone was (is) running a scam, its the good doctor, who seems to be the person benefiting the most from the R3VoLution.

  9. Mike Theodore

    The closest thing I have around here is the LP candidate running against Dick Durbin, who’ll landslide it. I might see what they’re up to…
    Otherwise, I’m supporting (in words only) the lesser of two evils in my state congress race simply because of his leading the uphill battle against the Cook County sales tax.

  10. johnlowell

    Anthony D.

    Paul’s past wussiness doesn’t make for an excuse for Barr’s arrogance and his outrageous lack of tact. Barr is a shmendrik, an eel seeking to serve his own narrow interests. Deservedly, he is in meltdown at the moment and there will be no recovery. With his performance and the public statements of his campaign yesterday, Bob Barr ended what was already a campaign marred inconsistencies with the past and the appearance of moral insufficiencies. Bob Barr is yesterday. Its over.

  11. Spence

    “But this is what I’ve been saying from the beginning (along with loads of other third partisans) – focus on the local candidates. That’s where victories lie.”

    fuCk that. dont u understand that makes SeNsE? Wat are u? A jew? ROFLMAO!!! I CAN HAZ U PWNAGE!!1

    /sarcasm

  12. AnthonyD

    john,

    Barr stood on principle, and correctly pointed out that an alliance with christian fascists, marxist environementalists, and tired, old ralph nader is no alliance a party devoted to liberty should want to be a part of. Meltdown? Hardly. Pissing off the purists is a sure way to record vote totals for the LP. And I’ll bet you on that one.

    The only eel seeking to serve his own narrow interests is one Ron Paul.

  13. AnthonyD

    John,

    And I will also point out that, beyond our very tiny libertarian universe, this whole Snubgate drama is a totally ignored piece of news. No one in the general electorate has the faintest idea about it, and they will certainly forget it by Sunday. And I mean last Sunday there.

    BTW, Bob “Meltdown” Barr was on CNN tonight, Lou Dobbs. Had purist favorite Mary Ruwart won the nomination, she would have been on Howard Stern, where they would have joked about a party that nominated a kiddie porn sympathizer.

  14. G.E. Post author

    Barr has come out in support of LEGAL DISTRIBUTION OF CHILD PORN and is also defending a child molester. Idiot.

  15. Fred Church Ortiz

    Yes, this “eel” and personality cult that Barr offered the vice presidential slot to.

  16. G.E. Post author

    This does go to show, however, that Ron Paul is a notoriously bad judge of character. That he could ever accept Barr or say anything nice about him goes to his eternal detriment.

  17. chuckmoulton

    Barr has come out in support of LEGAL DISTRIBUTION OF CHILD PORN and is also defending a child molester. Idiot.

    It’s somewhat hypocritical to smear Barr on this issue and defend Ruwart, both on this very issue.

    I’ll defend them both. Distribution of child porn is a victimless crime that should be legalized. Production of child porn is a crime with a victim and should be prohibited.

    But then you have to determine the definition of a child: when is informed consent possible? Age of consent seems like a moral and philosophical gray area to me, but I don’t think maturity / lack of maturity is a magical metamorphosis that takes place on someone’s 18th birthday.

    Bob Barr is a lawyer. We have an adversarial legal system which entitled everyone to a fair day in court — even those we may find repugnant. Defense attorneys help ensure fair trials for their clients. Bob Barr should not be guilty by association for simply having a client.

  18. johnlowell

    Anthony D.,

    Nice dodge, but you’re not successfully going to be able to cast Bob Barr’s deficiencies as Ron Paul’s. Did Paul defecate on Barr’s lawn yesterday and the invite him to ride shotgun on the clean-up vehicle? Wasn’t it was the other way around. No, no sleight-of-hand, Anthony. The problem today is Bob Barr, not Ron Paul.

  19. G.E. Post author

    Chuck – Not necessarily smearing Barr. Just countering the smear against Mary. What’s hypocritical is for this a-hole to smear Mary while defending Barr.

    You’re right on one point, though: Everyone deserves a defense, and if Barr’s client is innocent, then Barr’s defense of him is heroic. I should have put “alleged” in there.

  20. G.E. Post author

    I wasn’t attempting to smear Barr by association, Chuck. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of “Anthony D’s” bogus smear of Mary.

  21. chuckmoulton

    Sorry, G.E., I didn’t realize the context (that you were replying to an earlier comment). Your comment makes more sense now. Yes, it was hypocritical of the Barr campaign.

  22. johnlowell

    Fred Church Ortiz,

    Sorry Fred, wiggle and squirm all you like but the yukel in this case was Barr, not Paul. And the chutzpah with the Vice Presidency offer, if not the very height of arrogance, then a poorly disguised put-down. Barr is a schmegeggie and all the attempts to distract, to rationalize or deny Barr’s kluztiness just won’t be enough. He’s toast.

  23. G.E. Post author

    Chuck – No need to apologize. My failure to include “alleged” in the comment was worthy of criticism. Barr’s client could indeed by innocent, and that’s a horrible crime to be charged with if you are innocent.

  24. Coming Back to the LP

    About support Michael Munger and the others:

    We need to have a site devoted to LP candidates who are actually running active campaigns, where they are actually running full outreach efforts with: TV, radio, door to door, direct mail etc. This would give many big donors the opportunity to send money to a few campaigns, focus our efforts and gain some visible successes.

    I sent an email letter to the Munger campaign. I asked them what they were doing, if they were advertising, are they raising significant amounts of money, and the maximum donation amount for an out of state donor.

    I recieved no reply.

    So how can I believe that this is a serious campaign. I’m going to give $5000 to a local school media center instead.

  25. Coming Back to the LP

    To the Munger Campaign:

    I finally got your reply, thanks. You are all understandably busy. A check will be sent out later this week.

  26. Coming Back to the LP

    I will also be sending a large donation to the National LP and to Barr for President.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *