Is there a Barr to a McCain victory?
April 15, 2008 · Print This Article
From Jason Pye’s blog, we learn that Neal Boortz has conditionally endorsed Bob Barr’s quest for the Libertarian Party presidential nomination. Pye quotes Boortz:
Here they go again .. all those emails from people who are upset with (1) Bob Barr running for president on the Libertarian Party ballot; and (2) my support for the Libertarian Party. (I’m a lifetime member.) These people are concerned that Barr’s candidacy are going to give us another Ross Perot situation … where votes for Perot essentially put Bill Clinton into office.
Frankly … I’m really not going to be upset if the Republicans get their hats handed to them in this election. During the Bush years the only bright moments for the Republican Party were tax cuts and fighting Islamic fascism. Beyond that, what have they done? Well, they doubled the size and the cost of the federal government for one. How’s that for a record of accomplishment. In 2007 Republicans were the pork champions in Washington; more pork spending than Democrats. Oh yeah — let me get my checkbook out and make a huge contribution to the Republican Party right now.
The way things look right now, if Bob Barr is the Libertarian nominee .. and if he will pledge to continue to take the battle to, and not run from the Islamic fascists … they he will have my vote. If the Democrats win … so be it. We’ve become a nanny nation anyway. Might as well make it official. Remember .. this is the “I want my mommy” election. We’re turning America into a giant assisted care living center. What sense does it make to continue to support a party that is helping this along?
Bottom line .. the Republicans haven’t earned another shot at this.
Jason applauds Boortz for jumping ship after previously backing Mike Huckabee, calling it a welcome change. Unfortunately for Neil Boortz, his support for such a notorious nanny-stater as Tax Hike Mike just about burned up all of the available Boortz political credibility. Neil left both the libertarian and conservative reservations for that one, dwelling for a while on populist ground.
Personally, I have given up listening to Boortz’ radio program on my favorite local talk station. Whenever I’m free to listen, I switch over to the competition to hear Mike Gallagher’s show instead. He’s a much better listen, and not a political gadfly like Boortz.
Democrats are licking their chops in anticipation of a strong Barr candidacy. They figure that he will draw a lot of conservative votes away from John McCain, a guy conservatives never much loved anyway. But there are some flies in this ointment.
Barr has bashed President Bush for listening to U.S. citizens’ phone conversations, even when there’s a terrorist on the other end. He even went so far as to team up with the ACLU on informational and data privacy issues. Although he voted for the Iraq war, now he’s against it. Security conservatives will not be impressed. Even Boortz will have to withdraw his support for Barr if the former congressman doesn’t show enough backbone against the Islamofacists who want to do us in. Barr is sounding more like Ron Paul on the war issue every day. Paul, meanwhile, appears to be moving toward an endorsement of Barr. This may hurt Barr more than help him, especially if Paul’s more enthusiastic supporters try to back Barr in the same pushy manner that they pushed for Paul.
The former Georgia congressman flipped again by voting for the Patriot Act, but is now saying that he regrets casting that vote. But perhaps his biggest flip, one which tops even NASCAR driver Carl Edwards’ aerial victory tumbles, is the one he did over medical marijuana. The man whose name will be forever associated with the Barr Amendment to deny funding for any use of cannabis is now calling for the reversal of his own legislative measure.
Social conservatives will find Barr’s opposition to a federal constitutional amendment against same-sex marriage a deal-breaker, just as many of them refused to back Fred Thompson for the same reason. Well, “reason” is perhaps not the best word to use here, as the odds against such an amendment passing are slim to none. Fred’s federalist solution was to have the states pass their own amendements, but socons would have none of that.
Before Barr can try to have any impact on the 2008 presidential race, he must first secure the Libertarian Party nominaton. That’s not a sure thing, as many LP members appear to be lukewarm to the prospects of a Barr candidacy. At the party’s North Carolina state convention last week:
The delegates applauded at the end of Barr’s speech, but afterwards it was clear that many of those attending the two-day state convention still viewed the Republican-turned-Libertarian with a good deal of skepticism. When a presidential preference straw poll was taken the next day, Barr got only one vote, compared to 17 for longtime LP activist Mary Ruwart, three for Massachusetts physicist George Phillies and two for Las Vegas oddsmaker Wayne Allen Root. (Ruwart is something of a “favorite daughter” among Libertarians in North Carolina, where she lived for four years before moving to Texas last year.) Like Barr, ex-Democrat Mike Gravel got just one vote in the straw poll.
So it remains to be seen if Barr can win the Libertarian Party’s nomination, and even if he can manage it, just how much “conservative” support he would be able to draw away from the GOP. Would it be enough to hurt McCain and hand the White House over to a liberal Democrat? Some small-government conservatives may flock to his cause, but securicons, socons and across-the-board conservatives won’t join them in any appreciable numbers. Not even Neil Boortz can put lipstick on this squealer.
- JP
Cross-posted at MainstreamConservative.com
Huckabee was not a populist or a liberal. He was not perfect, but he was an incredibly talented and very conservative executive who got things done. He communicated in a way that was gentle on subjects that had not received anything other that harsh treatment in the past and Huckabee’s fresh approach would have been useful.
Few people seem to realize after Mitt Romney’s smearing that Huckabee’s Arkansas had some of the lowest taxes and highest success rates overall. Arkansas democrats (who are more conservative than most republicans these days) hated Huckabee for constantly cutting spending rather than raise taxes to a rate that would damage business and hurt families.
He built roads, fixed the schools, and got the state on track.
I will be interested in Bob Barr, we will see what his campaign does.
Huckabee was anything but conservative. He was a tax and spend liberal governor that never met a tax increase or criminal he didn’t like!
Huckabee’s no conservative:
Taxes
By the end of his ten-year tenure, Governor Huckabee was responsible for a 37% higher sales tax in Arkansas, 16% higher motor fuel taxes, and 103% higher cigarette taxes according to Americans for Tax Reform (01/07/07), garnering a lifetime grade of D from the free-market Cato Institute. While he is on record supporting making the Bush tax cuts permanent, he joined Democrats in criticizing the Republican Party for tilting its tax policies “toward the people at the top end of the economic scale” (Washington Examiner 09/13/06), even though objective evidence demonstrates that the Bush tax cuts have actually shifted the tax burden to higher income taxpayers.
Finally, Governor Huckabee opposed further tax cuts at a 2005 gathering of Iowa conservatives (AP 09/17/05).
Spending
Under Governor Huckabee’s watch, state spending increased a whopping 65.3% from 1996 to 2004, three times the rate of inflation (Americans for Tax Reform 01/07/07). The number of state government workers rose 20% during his tenure (Arkansas Leader 04/15/06), and the state’s general obligation debt shot up by almost $1 billion, according to Americans for Tax Reform. The massive increase in government spending is due in part to the number of new programs and expansion of already existing programs initiated by Governor Huckabee, including ARKids First, a multimillion-dollar government program to provide health coverage for thousands of Arkansas’ children (Arkansas News Bureau 04/13/06).
These large increases in government borrowing and spending significantly impede economic growth.
And there’s more…
Club for Growth
Democrats may be “licking there chops” at a Barr candidacy, but what they’re not taking into account is that Barr could actually come from behind and win!
All Barr would have to do is win a handful of states where neither Obama nor McCain is liked (Georgia? Wyoming? Oklahoma?) thus denying either Republocrat candidate 270 electoral votes. The election then gets thrown to the newly elected House, where each state gets ONE VOTE, determined by the Congress members from that state. Despite the Democrats control of the House, when it comes down to state-by-state control, the country is about evenly split (and even some states are evenly split). These state caucuses would then get to pick from the top three electoral vote getters. No Republican will support Obama and many will shy away from supporting McCain; no Democrat will support McCain, and some will shy away from supporting Obama.
The deadlock can be broken with a compromise candidate - one the Dems like for his opposition to the war, one Republicans can get behind on taxes, guns and abortion (there is no doubt Barr will appoint Supreme Court Justices who will overturn Roe v. Wade).
McCain is slipping, and this bleeding can not be stopped, he gets a day older every day. NOW is the time when all true conservatives MUST get behind Bob Barr, or face the demolition of all that conservatism stands for.