Libertarians left out of third-party consensus: Anti-war, pro-privacy, anti-debt, anti-Fed

Ron Paul’s Campaign For Liberty has brought the presidential candidates of the Constitution and Green parties together, along with independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader, on a four-point platform of consensus:

The Republican/Democrat duopoly has, for far too long, ignored the most important issues facing our nation. However, alternate candidates Chuck Baldwin, Cynthia McKinney, and Ralph Nader agree with Ron Paul on four key principles central to the health of our nation. These principles should be key in the considerations of every voter this November and in every election.

Foreign Policy: The Iraq War must end as quickly as possible with removal of all our soldiers from the region. We must initiate the return of our soldiers from around the world, including Korea, Japan, Europe and the entire Middle East. We must cease the war propaganda, threats of a blockade and plans for attacks on Iran, nor should we re-ignite the cold war with Russia over Georgia. We must be willing to talk to all countries and offer friendship and trade and travel to all who are willing. We must take off the table the threat of a nuclear first strike against all nations.

Privacy: We must protect the privacy and civil liberties of all persons under US jurisdiction. We must repeal or radically change the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and the FISA legislation. We must reject the notion and practice of torture, eliminations of habeas corpus, secret tribunals, and secret prisons. We must deny immunity for corporations that spy willingly on the people for the benefit of the government. We must reject the unitary presidency, the illegal use of signing statements and excessive use of executive orders.

The National Debt: We believe that there should be no increase in the national debt. The burden of debt placed on the next generation is unjust and already threatening our economy and the value of our dollar. We must pay our bills as we go along and not unfairly place this burden on a future generation.

The Federal Reserve: We seek a thorough investigation, evaluation and audit of the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationships with the banking, corporate, and other financial institutions. The arbitrary power to create money and credit out of thin air behind closed doors for the benefit of commercial interests must be ended. There should be no taxpayer bailouts of corporations and no corporate subsidies. Corporations should be aggressively prosecuted for their crimes and frauds.

Libertarian Bob Barr did not attend the press conference despite being invited and being in D.C. at the time.

28 thoughts on “Libertarians left out of third-party consensus: Anti-war, pro-privacy, anti-debt, anti-Fed

  1. sunshinebatman

    The LP’s Barr is likely endorsing this platform even as we type. Reason.com , a news website, will have a report soon.

  2. Steve LaBianca

    Can there be any doubt about Barr now? First, he thumbed his nose at Libertarians by not debating (via not ANNOUNCING his candidacy) all over the country, then Barr thumbed his nose at LP delegates in Denver by not debating with the other 14 candidates at the “unofficial” debate (Barr was the ONLY one not to do so), and now he is thumbing his nose to Ron Paul supporters, and any alternative candidates to the monopoly of the major bought and paid for parties!

    Barr IS an insider Republican, and his attendance at this event at the National Press Club this morning would severely hurt his chances at getting back in with the Republican leadership. Thus he didn’t go.

    Is there any doubt now that Barr is using the LP as a stepping stone for running in Georgia for statewide office with the GOP in 2010, then to run for president again (via the GOP and their primary process) in 2012?

    Screw Barr . . . if you are a Ron Paul supporter, it has now become completely transparent and evident that a vote for Barr is in itself, thumbing your nose at liberty, and maybe for RP supporters, Ron Paul himself. Please, vote for someone else other than Barr, McCain, or Obama. Even Nader is better than Barr, at least in his sincerity.

  3. sunshinebatman

    tReason and IPR are both anti-American pro-Obama websites, but tReason does a better job keeping their crazed spittle from compromising their reporting neccisitating several rewrites, etc.

    Anyway, the tReason report is up now on the Barr presser. Two bullet points:

    – Yesterday Barr sent Paul a letter (which I have a copy of, and I’ll scan in a bit) asking Paul to run as Barr’s vice presidential nominee. Wayne Allyn Root agreed to step aside if Paul wanted the job. Paul turned this down.

    – Barr signed onto the statement of principles that Nader, McKinney and Baldwin signed, and stands by it. But he declined the offer to appear this morning.

  4. G.E. Post author

    Yes, IPR is “pro-Obama” says the deluded 9/11 Truther who supports CIA man Bob Barr. You have zero personal integrity or credibility.

  5. G.E. Post author

    As far as being “anti-American” — I don’t think that’s true of IPR, but if you’re referring to the U.S.A., it certainly is true of me personally. Who but a statist could NOT be against this Evil Empire and the odious sheeple that comprise it? I am for the individual and I am for many of the ideas on which America was founded, but I am NOT for your CIA.

  6. sunshinebatman

    Since it was confirmed at the press conference that Barr endorsed the consensus and by Nader that Barr actually helped write the document, will a competent IPR editor change the headline to remove the falsehood?

  7. G.E. Post author

    Barr’s name is NOT listed in the document: “However, alternate candidates Chuck Baldwin, Cynthia McKinney, and Ralph Nader agree with Ron Paul ”

    PERIOD. He was left out. By his own choice.

  8. G.E. Post author

    That is from the C4L.

    Are you on the Barr payroll? I don’t know how anyone could be so slavish to a CIA, baby-murdering thug, otherwise.

  9. JSJones

    I wish the anti-Barr LPers would wake up and think long-term strategy & party viability instead of this short-term bickering that continues to keep the LP fragmented. Cast your vote for the LIBERTARIAN PARTY, not Bob Barr! The LP needs respectable, double-digit results to become something we haven’t for 35 years: a viable party. Come on people…united we stand, fragmented we flounder! AGAIN, FORGET BARR/ROOT, VOTE FOR THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY!

  10. sunshinebatman

    No no JJ, you don’t understand. Barr “hijacked” the party because he won the nomination over some unimpressive passive-aggressive nobody who campaigned largely on the allure of her genitals a la Clinton/Palin. We must continue our drama queen pissing contests at all costs!!

    (Seriously, you must have realized years ago that if the LP ever threatened to become viable half the party would quit…)

  11. JSJones

    MG: Yes, and it is incredibly unfortunate. The anti-Barr/Jump Ship Caucus doesn’t seem to understand the potential double-digit numbers we could score this election as a united party will benefit them in the next election cycle…less ballot hassle next go round, more media attention, etc. Fight the internal battles BETWEEN election years, not during. Barr isn’t going to win this election, no f’n chance. Let’s put the bickering and posturing behind us and support the LP/DD ticket! (Libertarian Party/Double Digits)

  12. G.E. Post author

    JS – Double digits? You mean in raw number of votes? Cuz you can’t possibly mean like 10%.

  13. Tim in Ohio

    Right. So for the next election lets ask Al Gore to run as a Libertarian. Of course we’ll be voting for the LP, not Al Gore. Think of the votes!

    If Bob Barr were to get 10% of the vote, we’d only end up with someone just as bad (if not worse) next election cycle.

    No thanks. I’d rather be right with 1% than wrong with 51%.

  14. JSJones

    Nice strawman, Tim. Let’s just continue to flounder. Great strategy. It’s all about you being right with the 1%, meanwhile, the Republicrats continue to chip away at our liberties, year after year, while the 1 party system remains intact. Oh, well, at least you can feel good about yourself.

  15. Tim in Ohio

    So lets defeat the Republicrats by becoming Republicrats? Bob Barr is not going to have ANY effect on this election (other than perhapse “uniting the liberty movement” behind Baldwin.), so why sale the party’s soul for “media coverage and votes” that are not going to help anyway?

    Becoming GOP Lite will not make things any better.

  16. JSJones

    No, let’s defeat the Republicrats by becoming a viable political party instead of a self-righteous debate club of floundering fleas. “On the fence” libertarians will continue to vote Republicrat until the LP can show some signs of being a contender. We can’t be a contender by holding our heads high and settling for a laughable 1% of the vote. Again, let’s fight the internal battles between elections and unite during the elections. Is that “being like the Republicrats”? Only in strategy, not principle. Being smugly principled hasn’t gotten the LP anywhere in 35 years. No, Barr will not have any effect on this election, but the “1 percent, but principled” vote will continue to ensure that LP candidates in future elections will have not effect either.

  17. inDglass

    It is great to see Nader and McKinney signing on to the point about the Federal Reserve. I see this as hope for more unity of the third party movement. I also see it as the icing on top of the Bob Barr disappointment cake. He just can’t seem to get anything right.

  18. Spence

    “Yes, IPR is “pro-Obama” says the deluded 9/11 Truther who supports CIA man Bob Barr. You have zero personal integrity or credibility.”

    I believe he was referring to you. The actual quote:

    “…tReason does a better job keeping their crazed spittle from compromising their reporting [necessitating] several rewrites, etc.”

    That is something I can get behind. Course anyone that challenges what garbage this passes for news is quickly shown the only alternative, the sad sad TPW, and G.E. triumphantly saying “there’s still plenty of people who love to read our diatribe.”

  19. VTV

    Honestly, it is absurd for our party to fight to be viable via a presidential race. How could a party that has not fielded a single Congressmen or Senator hope to win the presidential election? Our presidential races don’t give us viability, they make us look pathetic. We should be concentrating our efforts (And that huge amount of money spent on ballot access) on researching Congressional districts and getting at least ONE congressmen on C-SPAN with the (L) in front of his name.

  20. davenate

    There is only one way for third parties to gain recognition and votes. Any election held for Federal office has to be changed so you can vote once, but for every candidate you feel is acceptable. The most votes wins.

    Having it any other way such as ranking your votes, will not work because too many people feel they are throwing their vote away.

    This would be a very simple piece of legislation and would have advantages for the current two party system as well. For example, Pro war McCain got chosen as the Republican party candidate because Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee split their votes.

    Being able to give 1 vote to every candidate you feel is acceptable is the only way to bring about true choice in this Democracy. Without this process, people will overwhelmingly vote for the lesser of two evils for fear of throwing their vote away.

Leave a Reply

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