Sasan,
Heres my response to a paraphrased version of your biased questions: 1. If a citizen chooses to not-vote as opposed to voting for a liberty oriented candidate, is that maintaining their neutrality? My answer: yes. The fact that the election system is partly a rigged game means that more proactive citizens have a further duty to clean up the corruption in the election process. However, the system of voting is a primary means by which the US citizens can assert their sovereignty over hired politicians, and failure to exercise that mechanism is, IMHO, an act of neutrality. 2. Is voting for Bob Barr a way of promoting liberty? Answer: yes. Now that Ron Paul has withdrawn, Bob Barrs campaign is the best chance for the libertarian movement to have a positive impact in the presidential election. Even Ron Paul acknowledged that Barr is saying the right things despite the real blemished in Barrs 1994 to 2002 voting record, and that Barrs campaign will have a positive impact on the national debate. Sasan, does your unsubstantiated argument have more credibility than Ron Pauls opinion? Sasan, have you ever met Bob Barr in person, and discussed with him why he experienced his big turnaround? I have. A friend of mine & I had dinner with Bob & his son. The commute & dinner gave us an opportunity to obtain some good feedback on the man in addition to having spoken with Barrs fellow LNC members, the Georgia LP Chair, & others. If you have not had any one-on-one discussion of substance with Bob, do you believe youre personally qualified to be his prosecutor, judge & jury in the realm of public opinion? Have you considered the sacrifices Bob has personally made in order to be available as our candidate? Sasan, FYI Im no longer a fundamentalist Christian, but I do still subscribe to the concept of redemption I now use that word redemption to mean that a person who apologies & regrets his prior actions should be afforded forgiveness, and the opportunity to pay restitution for his misdeeds. Barr has apologized & sought forgiveness for many of his past misdeeds. The lack of mercy being displayed by many members of the LP against Barr makes me wince at being associated with such unforgiving people. Some LP members refuse to accept Barr as the LP presidential nominee. [Sasan, this many not apply to you personally.] To those LP members who are working to sabotage Barrs campaign: are you personally qualified to veto the decision of the 2008 LP National Delegation? It was the entire national delegation who selected this man as our presidential nominee. Are you a member of the Libertarian Party? If so, do you feel like youre personally qualified to veto the decision of the entire LP National Delegation? My original post on this topic was neither childish nor a personal attack against any one specific individual. It was a frontal attack against a naïve, counter-productive idea, and for that I do not apologize. Your personal attack against me, however, does show youre quick to shoot the messenger Perhaps doing so helps you maintain your own state of denial about the arguments presented. Just curious, did you even look at this article before you decided to shoot the messenger? Just to fire you up notice I was the National Coalition Liaison for the RLC at the time. http://www.mclendon.net/active/commonground.htm I will acknowledge one blemish my online demeanor does tend to be overly blunt. Email isnt a great substitute for verbal communication as we seek to mutually evaluate complex situations. Sincerely, Guy McLendon VC LP of Texas Chair Harris County Houston, Texas www.HarrisLP.org <http://www.harrislp.org/> Posted by: "Guy McLendon" <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] %20with%20Lee%20Mercer> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://profiles.yahoo.com/guymclendon> guymclendon Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:37 pm (PDT) MODERATOR'S NOTE: Wow, Barr's supporters must be getting pretty desperate if they are launching childish attacks like the one below. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
