It's good to hear your point of view. Still, I have to levy some criticism.
First, your statement that Bob Barr "embarrassed everyone who at anytime claimed to be a Libertarian or a member or subscriber to the philosophy of any third party" is clearly not true. I am a Libertarian and I'm not embarrassed by the tiff between Barr and Paul. Do I think the Barr campaign made a blunder? Yes. Every campaign makes blunders. That doesn't mean I'm embarrassed to support the person I think will make the best President. Of those on the ballot, anyway. More generally, you identify so many people in your statement, that it's very unlikely ALL of them have even heard about the tiff. It wasn't reported in the MSM. Those who have heard don't necessarily care, or don't care enough or in the right way to be embarrassed. Such a broad and sweeping statement suggests that you see things in black and white. In this view, if a tiff develops between Paul and Barr, one must be good and the other evil, one right and the other wrong. Black and white. By contrast, I appreciate both Paul and Barr as good men, who have done much to advance the cause of Liberty. I don't have to take sides. I don't care about their personal conflicts. I don't care if they have sworn a death oath against each other. I suppose with the death oath, I'd ensure their rallies are kept a good distance apart. Chris Edes > 6a. An Analysis of Ron Paul's Decision > Posted by: "Chris Edes" [EMAIL PROTECTED] chrisedes1 > Date: Tue Sep 23, 2008 8:02 PM ((PDT)) > > http://libertyordeath.us/paul-endorse.htm > > An Analysis of Ron Paul's Decision > > > >> What are we to make of Ron Paul's endorsement of Chuck Baldwin? It is >> > worthwhile to exercise a critical faculty. < > > Only if you wish to understand what the Libertarian Party did wrong and how > the Libertarian Party created this mess. > > >> Paul speaks of unity, and "the hope of winning new converts to the cause of >> > liberty." He later goes on to say that "new devotees to the freedom > philosophy are more likely to come from the left" than from "evangelicals who > supported McCain and his pro-war positions." Yet, Paul endorses a candidate > much less > likely to appeal to the left, than to those same evangelicals. < > > >> I agree that the left is more likely to come around to our point of view, >> > than pro-war Christian conservatives. I can tell you that here in NY, the > political left has a very bad reaction to the CP. The CP is also hostile to > the > political left. Baldwin isn't going to bring the leftists into the fold. < > > >>> For this reason, Paul's endorsement of the CP candidate is at odds with >>> > his adjacent reasoning. Such apparent contradictions invite closer > examination. > I'm wary of decisions based on personal pique. If Paul's strategy was to > stay neutral, why did it change? From an advancing-Liberty standpoint, does > it > make sense to change the strategy? Or did it change because Paul felt > slighted? << > > I can understand your not wanting to face the real facts of the matter. > Ron Paul stated more than 100 times he would not endorse any candidate this > year. > Boob Barr publicly made an issue of this. He embarrassed every person > involved in Ron Paul's campaign, he embarrassed everyone who at anytime > claimed to be > a Libertarian or a member or subscriber to the philosophy of any third party. > > Ron Paul and his staff received many calls to repudiate the actions of Boob > Barr. > By his actions Boob Barr pressured Ron Paul to turn away from the actions of > THE BOOB. > > For those who were not around or choose not to remember I find little > difference in most of the ways that the actions of Ron Paul 20 years ago and > the > current actions of the BOOB differ, except Ron Paul never made a national > public > spectacle of himself like the BOOB does. > I would say at this time that maybe finally Ron Paul has grown up to some > extent. > The BOOB is not as important as he thinks he is. He is not a Libertarian, a > libertarian or even libertarian leaning. > His attempt at embarrassing Ron Paul was pure force initiated against another > person. > Thank what ever gods there may be it did not work. > > >>> The final paragraph of Paul's essay strongly indicates a personal motive: >>> > "I've thought about the unsolicited advice from the Libertarian Party > candidate, and he has convinced me to reject my neutral stance in the > November > election. I'm supporting Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate." << > > I loved this answer. I have no use for Chuck Baldwin and never will. However > he has demonstrated that he is much more of a man than is the BOOB. > At least he did not try to use force to get his way. > > >>> The Constitution Party will never unite all those who love freedom. This >>> > is because it advocates a theocracy that only resembles Liberty. A good > discussion of the differences between the Libertarian and Constitution > parties can > be found at > > http://www.lp.org/blogs/andrew-davis/libertarian-party-vs-constitution-party < > < > > To try to use someone who has much less intelligence that yourself is not > wise. It makes you look smaller than he is. Give yourself some credit. > > >>> I ask if our allegiance is to ideas or men. Why should a personal >>> > conflict between leaders guide my course? These aren't the days of feudal > aristocracy. The LP philosophy is closer to my moral code than the CP > philosophy. I'm > not going to endorse the "lesser of two goods" simply because of some > personal > drama. > > The LP has reached out to Paul many times this past year. Paul refused our > nomination. He accepted Baldwin's invitation to address the Constitution > Party > Convention, while discarding the same LP invitation. > So perhaps it's not a decision based on pique. Perhaps Ron Paul has become a > constitutionalist. If so, he's gone where I can't follow. > > Paul has chosen another way and I wish him well. Yet I will follow my > conscience, not the leader. << > > If you endorse the current stand of the Libertarian Party or the permanent > stand of the BOOB you are on the wrong track, I suggest that you lock > yourself > in a closet and pray to whatever god you worship for guidance. > > > > for Liberty, (ARE YOU SURE) Chris Edes > > > Thank You, > John Wayne Smith, Chair > Boston Tea Party of Florida > http://www.bostontea.us > 2008 Vice Presidential Candidate for the Florida Boston Tea Party > 2010 Libertarian Candidate for Governor of Florida > CEO, 1000 Planets, Inc. > Building a Private Road to the Stars! > Http://www.1000Planets.com > 203 W. Magnolia St. > Leesburg Florida 34748 > > > > > > > ************** > Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial > challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips > and > calculators. > (http://www.walletpop.com/?NCID=emlcntuswall00000001) > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > ------------------------------------ > > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
