Libertarian Party's Barr coming to northern Ohio

Tom Jackson
Mar 23, 2010


The Libertarian Party's candidate for president, former congressman Bob Barr, will speak at 5 p.m. Thursday in West Lecture Hall of the Science Center at Oberlin College in Oberlin. The address is 173 West Lorain.   The Libertarians say that anyone interested in their party's "live and let live" political philosophy is invited to attend.   So, what is a Libertarian?    While it's dangerous to make generalizations about a party of individualists, Libertarians generally believe in staying out of other nations' affairs, withdrawing American troops from other countries, ending the War on Drugs and legalizing drugs such as marijuana and eliminating federal government involvement in public education.   They also believe in avoiding government interference with the free market and protecting privacy rights. They dislike government spying and favor gun ownership. Most oppose the bailout and believe companies and individuals who make bad decisions should be allowed to go broke. They dislike Social Security and would prefer to keep their money.   Such views put them in the minority. On the other hand, they've been a distinctive, identifiable minority on the political scene since at least 1972, when the party fielded its first candidates for president and vice president.   Here's the Web site for the Cato Institute, a libertarian think-tank in Washington. Here's the site for the Libertarian Party, and here's a funny piece in the Onion mocking the party's struggles to attract voters.



One of the best definitions of a libertarian is a fiscal conservative and a social liberal.

In other words - I pretty much don't care what you do; I just don't wanna pay for it.

Until the U.S. began sticking its nose in the rest of the world's affairs this was a great country.

Isolationism is not a bad as a foreign policy. Ask the Swiss how it's worked for them.


It's about time the Register has given coverage to candidates besides the demopublicans. A fair and balanced news provider would give all the parties the same coverage.

Tom saying that libertarians are a small minority based on election results disregards an important fact-that the the election rules and processes are designed to give demopublicans huge advantages.

For instance, libertarians don't receive the free advertisements on the nightly news that the lamestream media gives the demopublicans. Nor do libertarians benefit from a taxpayer funded nominating process (primaries). And libertarians do not benefit from the lamestream media coverage of a taxpayer fund infomercial (the conventions).

In addition, libertarians are tied down by unfair and restrictive ballot access laws (the Ohio Supreme Court just declared the Secretary of State's ballot policy towards the libertarians was unconstitutional). Another problem is the unfair burden put on smaller political parties by election law "reform".

These things are the real election scandals. If the lamestream media was worth anything, this would be the focus of election scandal investigations. Considering all this,it is not stretch to say that American does not have a free and fair election system.

And consider this: if the lamestream media was doing it's self-proclaimed job and informing the American people about their choices at the poll, it wouldn't be necessary for Tom to attempt to explain the fundamental stands of a party that "has been on the political scene since 1972".


I have been looking at Barr for some months now. To me, and my family, he seems like the one with the answers and is not of the GOB club that excists in congress right now. He makes complete sense and has the plan to get this country back on track, SOON. look forward to seeing him in person!


Bob Barr is no doubt the most controversial presidential candidate that the Libertarian Party has experienced since its inception in 1972, simply because Barr is so new to libertarianism. Barr was a Republican Congressman whose political career fizzled when he lost his seat to a more popular Republican in a regerrymandering-forced election and then he joined the Libertarian Party.

He is controversial because as a Republican, he not only voted for the unlibertarian Patriot Act - he played a significant role in crafting it!

Further, not a single delegate from Ohio voted for Barr at the Libertarian Party Convention in Denver (most voted for longtime libertarian Mary Ruwart). But Barr is a practiced wordpusher and quite skilled at telling people what they want to hear (which is why libertarians advocate a one term limitation, so con artists don't make a career out of conning people). Barr told the delegates he could get them media exposure; he could overcome mass media censorhip which has long been problematic for all second parties.

However, Barr's selection by delegates from other states in our union caused an uproar in Ohio and the Northeast Region Chair Todd Maher promptly resigned his position and his membership in the LPO, noting that Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party is more of a libertarian than Barr. This, on the heels of NSA Chief Porter Goss's former aide Robert Butler, who as the LPO executive director drained Ohio's state coffers and caused so many libertarians to resign from the Libertarian Party (Toledo and its large membership went defunct and previous Chair Jason Sobiski, now an independent Coucilman on the Amherst City Council, resigned his Chair and Party membership). How much more can we libertarians take in our attempts to forge ahead as a political party?

Other libertarian critics, such as longtime bottlewasher yours truly, remain with the Party because Barr will no doubt go back to where he came from (the Republican Party) but the Party and its potential to serve as a vehicle for restoring the American Dream will remain.

In short, to the extent that Barr propagates libertarian solutions to Mc-bama and their Demopublican-caused problems he is worth supporting and listening to. So I encourage folks to come down State Rte 58 off Rte 2 to Oberlin on Thursday and check him out (there's also great eateries in Oberlin to explore afteward). But he is new and still learning about libertarianism - things such as in a free market there are no corporations; corporations are creations of the state and as such behave just as bureaucratic and inefficient as their parent. For more about free market economics and libertarianism, see and .


Unfortunately, that libertarian political and economic star Harry Browne is no longer with us and the Libertarian Party is stuck with Barr.

Never the less, his political philosophy is undoubtedly more fiscally conservative than the candidates of Marxist and the Fascist parties.

At least Barr has perhaps "˜seen the light' and is more of a beacon that the backslider Ron Paul. Paul makes people believe that there's hope among the fascists.


For in depth articles about the views of the Austrian School of Economics check out:

I miss listening to the wit and wisdom of Milton Friedman. At this current economic time in our nation's history, I could REALLY use a dose of 'Uncle' Milton.


The Libertarian Party's motto is the "Party of Principle", so what are those principles? Below is the LP's Statement of Principles:

"We, the members of the Libertarian Party, challenge the cult of the omnipotent state and defend the rights of the individual.

We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose.

Governments throughout history have regularly operated on the opposite principle, that the State has the right to dispose of the lives of individuals and the fruits of their labor without their consent.

We, on the contrary, deny the right of any government to do these things, and hold that where governments exist, they must not violate the rights of any individual: namely, 1) the right to life - accordingly we support prohibition of the initiation of physical force against others; 2) the right to liberty of speech and press - accordingly we oppose all attempts by government to abridge the freedom of speech and press, as well as government censorship in any form; and 3) the right to property - accordingly we oppose all government interference with private property, such as confiscation, nationalization, and eminent domain, and support the prohibition of robbery, trespass, fraud, and misrepresentation.

Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market" [the free market is not the government-generated competitive business cycle that is often mistakenly referred to today as 'the free market'].


The Constitution is based on the principle of limited government. Sounds good to me.

Let's put it into practice!

It hasn't been tried in almost 150 years, ever since the election of Lincoln and his abuse of it.


I'm not a politician. Like you, I am sick of seeing government take half the national income and then dole it back to us as though we are children on an allowance. And I'm not fooled by a bail out bill that doesn't change anything, or by other government action that add up to a bigger government budget.

Most politicians believe in just one thing - winning elections. They'll say anything to get in office and stay there. Today they believe saying 'bailout' will get them elected, but the last thing they really want is to give up the power that comes from big government.

For decades the Demo-publican Party has dominated the government. And every year government grows larger and interfers further in our lives.

The Libertarian Party says "Enough!" They have constructed a realistic blueprint for restoring the American Dream.


Actually, such views put them in the majority. However, due to the stranglehold our two party system has on people it is almost impossible for a third party to be heard. Politics in this country are a joke. Democrat or Republican, you still get the same cronyism regardless of who you elect with these two parties. You all can talk about change, but there will be none until a third party is able to finally take away the power that the Democrats and Republicans hold.


The Libertarian Party is much stronger in the Western U.S., where one can find many that share a sense of individual responsibility, as opposed to the collectivist mentality of the East.

I've always found the county voter map of the 2000 Presidential election to be very enlightening. It shows rural and city collar counties going for Bush and the urban areas largely for Gore:


(Did you know that the originator of the red state/blue state color system had the Dems as "˜red'? CBS reversed it when they first adopted it and it's since become the standard. Wonder why the Dems don't like to be associated with the color red???)


Having just moved here from the west (Utah), I certainly know what you are talking about. I just can't believe the entitlement mentality of people here. Maybe that's why I rarely see a smile on peoples face here.


Oklahoma had a vibrant Libertarian Party movement two decades ago. There were campus rallies at the Univ of Oklahoma against the nasty Soloman Amendment that forced students to sign-up for the inactive draft; education seminars in Slaughterville against zoning that culminated in a successful lawsuit against the municipalty's attempt to introduce zoning to a 45-square mile rural area that incorporated in the first place to avoid being annexed and zoned by neighboring municipalites; and active local Libertarian parties in the City and Tulsa that ran candidates and campaigns for local and state offices.

Today, Oklahoma is the most inactive state in the Libertarian Party. If Buckeye Libertarians aren't careful, Ohio will be next!

Bob Barr is an ex-CIA official from the '70s, when Daddy Bush was Director of the CIA. Bob Barr is now the LP's candidate for president! How could a man who used to be part of the problem hoodwink Libertarians into thinking he could be part of the solution? I guess the same way Republicans can fall for the Bushes.

We're all in trouble if we can't see that 3 months from now no matter who is in the Oval Office - McCain, Obama, or Barr (M.O.B.), the New World Order will still be rolling.

As voters we must find a better way than an ex-CIA man who became Congressman and then crafted the all-seeing Patriot Act while publicly proclaiming they're for privacy. I wonder how many Libertarian Party members today are really ex-government employees collecting a government pension?


How anyone could believe Bob Barr is the best candidate escapes me. He and his Libertine Party are phony from beginning to end. They could have picked Mary Ruwart but they picked Barr.

Sarah Palin is a real American. John McCain did right to choose her for his running mate. McCain showed he can do right when he picked her. The women of America can be proud for the next 4 years.


McCain and Palin are consummate liars. They tell so many lies that they no longer can remember what actually happened - they only remember their lies. Rolling Stone magazine had a good article on the many bald-faced lies these two have been telling.

I'm sick of lies. Bob Barr is not a liar. He says his CIA spy days are over. Barr says the Patriot Act was a mistake. Barr says he has woke up and smells the neocons. Vote Libertarian while you still can.


The three main candidates - McCain, Obama and Barr (M.O.B.) - have little difference on warrantless surveillance. When former CIA official Bob Barr was in Congress, he voted for the Patriot Act that authorized warrantless spying and he helped to write it. Worse, Barack Obama voted in support of it back in July. But John McCain didn't think a Congressional vote was required for the NSA to listen to these calls. Is that a difference?

Thank God for Demopublican party and the Libertarian Party who now seeks to act just like them (sarcasm intended).

We can't rely on the M.O.B. for change. The M.O.B. is not a choice.

Cynthia McKinney, the Green Party candidate, is the African-American candidate that the M.O.B. and their friends in high places don't want you, the voter, to hear about. She gave Bush and his New World Order nothing but fits when she was in Congress, always voting against him. McKinney is a choice, the M.O.B. is not.


I am Chuck Baldwin and I, too, am deeply concerned about the politics as usual. My candidacy seeks to retrieve representative government from the wealthy so that your voice - the voice of the working man - is heard.


Election Day is fast approaching, with our country facing real catastrophe. If we don't wake up to the fact that at least 7 people are running for president and we don't have to waste our votes on McCain or Obama, our country may never recover.

The facts are undeniable: the Democrats and Republicans are working together to enrich billionaire owners of corporations as if they were bandits, while blaming their destructive activity on alleged "failures" of free enterprise when it is their anti-market behavior at fault. It's a gigantic scam.

A vote for Obama or McCain means aiding and abetting our slide into the New World Order's global corporatism. Left unchecked, the Republicans and Democrats will crush the economy and the spirit of working Americans. But even more troubling is the fact that all the other people running for president are being shut out by a corporatized media beholden to five billionaire power brokers.

We saw what the media did to Congressman Ron Paul in his campaign againt McCain for the Republican nomination. We saw how a true conservative who fearlessly spoke the truth about President Bush's wars and our economy was ridiculed, ignored and censored. But now everything Ron Paul warned about is happening.

Ron Paul is no longer a candidate after he and his supporters were shut out of the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis. So Ron Paul has endorsed Chuck Baldwin for President.

Chuck Baldwin is the only person among the 7 candidates who understands and will speak the truth.


Although Ron Paul endorsed Chuck Baldwin, he did invite Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader to the historic September 10 conference and has made favorable commments about the Libertarian candidate for president. Barr had a 74% rating on what is now the John Birch Society's Freedom Index. He has admitted his mistakes and I believe that he has repented. Besides, if he gets five percent of the vote in Ohio, we don't have to petition for ballot access in 2010.
If you don't want to support him, that is your right but be objective and at least consider the possibility that he has changed.


David Macko, who commented below, is, according to his website, a member of the Libertarian Party and candidate for Congress. Apparently he is no longer endorsed by the Libertarian Party who had initially endorsed him.

The Libertarian Party should do the same with Bob Barr, and why they haven't is not only curious but should be of major concern for liberty-loving Americans.

Nobody should vote for Bob Barr for one very important reason - if the Libertarians get 5% of the vote as they are hoping to do with Barr's help, then a dangerous precedent will be established and they will go after more CIA-trained pied pipers in the future to lull people into a stupor.

ANYbody sounds good preaching libertarianism, even H.Ross Perot did when he pinched Andre Marrou's speeches in 1992! But watch what they do, not what they say. Perot became the 9th wealthiest man in America by rubbing shoulders with Daddy Bush for 30 years and milking government contracts. Barr worked for Daddy Bush when Bush was Director of the CIA. High-level statists and their friends do not make for libertarians or libertarian candidates.

The Libertarian Party should be punished for not unendorsing Barr. They do not follow their own advice. That is why Ron Paul is endorsing Chuck Baldwin and not former CIA official Bob Barr. Chuck Baldwin was never a spy and speaks the truth.


Hearing Bob Barr explain libertarian solutions to problems created by Democrats and Republicans was refreshing. It was like manna from Heaven. I always felt that the Big Parties were in cahoots together and Barr confirmed that.

We need libertarian solutions. We need Bob Barr to explain them. We need Bob Barr in the White House.