I was just at Bob Barr’s website and he has apparently raised over $97,264.35 since June 26th. If you give him $$, you can see your name flash over his website. The mustache man has changed his mind about gay marriage — he once opposed it, but now supports it (Libertarians strongly believe in state rights). Ditto with medical marijuana — he once opposed, and now he supports. He sat on the board of the NRA and is a member of the ACLU.
He is also pro-life, which seems odd to me, esp. since the ACLU is mostly pro-choice. Does it make sense to value individual rights fervently and oppose the rights of women? Aren’t most Libertarians pro-choice? I did a little research and this website says that Bob Barr’s second wife had an abortion, which he first said he didn’t oppose, and then he said he did oppose it in divorce court. And Barr’s website has this to say: “At the core of libertarianism is a trust in and respect for the personal choices of every individual. All Americans should be free to decide what is best for themselves and their families.”
There’s a lot of buzz about the “two faces of Bob Barr”. Gee, I wonder why.
He has a very neat mustache. Which makes me think he’s hiding something, or he’s a pervert.
But if I had to choose between Barr & Nader, guess what? Well, it’s a good thing we have more choices.
Nader. I got into a heated and drunken argument with a friend over the 4th of July who says she will not vote for Nader, but still believes he is a good person at heart. My problem with that is that if he was such a good guy, or a smart guy, he would see the big picture more clearly and realize that he is HATED all over the world. But there’s a reason why he doesn’t pick up on this. His EGO. Anyone who knows anyone with a big huge ego realizes that narcissism and self-righteousness are the most blinding of all human faults. Nader doesn’t care about the people of the United States; he cares about his name being on the ballot.
The fact of the matter is that there is a reason why we have success with a two-party system. The more parties you have, the weaker government becomes. In a country that has 4 or 5 parties, none of them agree, so no majority can accomplish anything. Or, each party will try to team up with one another saying “i’ll sign your bill for gun rights, if you sign mine to increase taxes”, and then after much negotiating, I’d imagine, maybe they can pass a bill or two, but still they have to give in to their ideals to accomplish anything.
That’s why the strongest governments own two party system. It’s the best system anyone has come up with thus far. That’s not to say it isn’t flawed. I’d be curious to know of other countries that have more than 2 dominant parties and that are doing “well” or even “better”, if anyone out there is reading. ?
While I’ve been sitting here typing this, Bob Barr’s contributions have gone up to $97,314.35.
Filed under: Uncategorized
