That attitude that many libertarians take is frustrating. Why does a candidate have to share one's exact views to be considered electable? It is illogical and childish. I think the problem is that libertarians hold their views in such high regard that they refuse to accept any other form of libertarianism to be valid. I don't think I have to explain why such a thought is so stupid. People are always going to differ in opinions, and no two people share the exact same set of principles and philosophies. We have the ability to be our own individuals, and libertarians just seem to be so full and sure of themselves that the idea of electing someone who disagrees with them is blasphemy.

I never try to believe I'm going to agree with everything about a politician's take on issues. I know that I don't fully agree with the Libertarian Party's platform. I am pro-life, and I proudly stand against the majority of libertarians on this issue. If I were to run for an office, my stance on that issue would be a major turn-off, and it would cost me many votes. Granted, abortion is a larger of an issue to disagree on, but I feel that my pro-life stance doesn't make me any less of a libertarian than the next guy who is pro-choice. I believe in the core belief that the government should be limited to just protecting the people, especially their individual liberties. That's what makes me a libertarian. Most libertarians don't seem to think of it like that.

I don't support the idea of giving up your beliefs, so you can fit in with a candidate's platform. I think selling your beliefs like that makes you a dirty whore. You should never have to give up your values in order to vote for a candidate. You should always be looking for the candidate that fits with you. If they don't fit, then move on. However, just because they don't fit perfectly doesn't mean that you're selling your beliefs. If the issues that candidates disagree with you on are trivial, then I don't see why they should be tossed aside. Again, everybody is different. Every libertarian has beliefs that disagree with another's. If the issues that you disagree with are severe, then it's time to move on, but only then. Tangible issues should not be the deciding factors on who you vote for.

I think the point of libertarians caring too much about themselves is shown by Russ Verney's reaction to Ron Paul's endorsing Chuck Baldwin. When Dave Weigel from Reason Magazine talked to Russ Verney, this is how Mr. Verney responded to the question of "Do you regret skipping Paul’s press conference and holding your own?":

No, it wasn’t a mistake. We stand by our position. This is all about liberty, and liberty-minded voters need to know that concentrating their support in the Libertarian Party.

While Verney makes it clear that he knows the Campaign for Liberty and everything is centered around regaining our lost liberties, he seems adamant about making that come about through the Libertarian Party. It just furthers my assertion that they are trying to turn the LP into the nation's third major party rather than bringing about liberty and the freedom to choose. This "me me me" attitude defeats any progress being made for the libertarian agenda.

All of this fighting between libertarians and third parties is just pushing me over the edge. I really wish I wasn't a libertarian. Now, I love the ideology. I am glad that I support individual liberty at all cost. I just hate having to deal with all of the drama and narcissism that libertarianism has with it. If libertarians could work together towards common, core goals like Ron Paul is attempting, there is no doubt that big waves would be created in the elections. Instead, we fight amongst ourselves, and we get nowhere because of it. Until that stops, I'm convinced we'll just be considered insane and ignored.

It's just sad that when we need the unity, libertarians are so caught up in themselves that they condemn serious, sincere candidates because they're not perfectly aligned. Libertarians are living in just as much of a fantasy world as the other two major party voters are.

Why is this important, you may be asking? It's important because it shows that Bob Barr and the Libertarian message is popular, and it is capable of actually making a splash in this year's election. While this won't ultimately gain us the victory, it may just make people pay attention to our message of liberty a little more. 2008 has been a tremendous year for the libertarian movement and Ron Paul's Revolution, and just because RP is out of the race, the movement hasn't slowed. That's a great thing to witness.

I will still be impatiently waiting for my Barr items. I have a war to fight inside of my apartment building with all of the liberals, and perhaps with the rest of my city. Perhaps I'll have them by the end of the week or the beginning of next. I need to turn heads, and that is my determination to do.

There's this ultra liberal woman that lives in my apartment building on the first floor. She's all about the community, and is all about Obama '08. She decided that this upcoming Tuesday she is going to host a get together for people to come in support of Obama. Well, she sent everybody invites for it by sliding the invites under everybody's doors, her usual method. When I got home, I saw the flyer, and I decided to respond in a public fashion. I made an example of her flyer by crossing out the information she had on it, and scribbled pro-Barr/Libertarian Party information on it. Then, I stuck the revised flyer on the board in the apartment lobby. Apparently, this caused a stir.

Then, on Wednesday, I decided to up the ante and actually make a flyer promoting Barr. Since my editing of the Obama flyer was taken down, I put up my newly designed flyer in its place, next to the invite posted by the ultra liberal. This morning, I put some grayscale copies of the flyer on the table downstairs next to my Barr '08 flyer. Hopefully, some people will be interested enough in wanting something different besides Obama and McCain and will take the flyers and research Barr. It'd be fun if come Tuesday, half of the building was in support of Bob Barr. I know I put Barr's name in the minds of two unsatisfied women in my apartment building, so who knows what will happen. This might just be the year that there is noticable change.

My beautiful flyer.

I figured that it makes no sense for only myself to have the rights to copy and distribute this beautiful flyer, I decided to make it public. I know that most people don't have Adobe Illustrator, and since most people DO have Adobe Acrobat Reader, I decided to post a color version and a grayscale version in PDF format for people to print and distribute. I found that if you don't want to take the time to download the file and print it or put it on a flash drive to get it printed, Office Max will open the file directly from the web and print it. At least, that's what I was able to do.

This is just the first wave of my activism. Hopefully, I'll be able to do more and more to help the cause of liberty. If I don't speak up now, I may never get the chance to before being silenced for good. I'm not willing to let that happen, and neither should anybody else.

The absurdity of these claims against Barr is astounding. It doesn't take a stretch of the imagination to see why someone would change their political views so quickly in the wake of the Republican party sinking into neoconservatism. It doesn't surprise me one bit that Barr has left the Republican Party and has taken up the principles of libertarianism. I was not unlike Barr just two years ago. I was a neoconservative in my own right, but then it just took a few subjects to quickly change my view on the insane ideology that the Republican Party seems to be embracing. Once I left the Republican Party, my views starting to fall into place, and now I am a minarchist. I'm not the only person to do this that I know of. An online buddy of mine has done the same in leaving the Republican Party for the Libertarian Party. It doesn't take the stretch of the imagination to figure that Mr. Barr could very well have done the same.

What brings me to write this is Christine Smith's (and countless others') attack on Bob Barr's previous voting record while a Republican. I believe we should all hold people accountable for their pasts, but we cannot continue to make assumptions about them simply because of it. Again, I would still be looked at as a moral crusading conservative, but that's just as about as far from the truth as one could get. I would dare people to try to claim that I am not a libertarian. Besides my pro-life stance, there is not a single issue that I wouldn't side with the majority of libertarians on. I do subscribe to the minarchist school of thought, and claiming that I am not a libertarian is a baseless claim. While Barr is a bit more conservative than I am, he still cannot be discounted as a libertarian simply because of his previous voting record.

Christine Smith, a libertarian presidential candidate for 2008, has decided to leave the Libertarian Party because of the Libertarian Party's "abandoning" of libertarian principles. I say that we don't need people like her in the party that is going to suddenly abandon it because the party chooses a more mainstream candidate that is more capable of getting votes. Yes, we lose some of the hard-line libertarian principles, but Barr still upholds the basic libertarian principles that would help create a smaller government. Most Americans doesn't want a radical change, but they do want a change.

Smith goes on to claim, "No true libertarian would support (or defend) the selection of Bob Barr." I find that insulting. As I said above, I would dare someone to claim that I am not a libertarian, yet here I am supporting Bob Barr. This comment, obviously, does not sit well with me. The claim that I can't possibly be a true libertarian because I support a candidate that she dislikes is a moronic thing to suggest. Smith seems intelligent, so I cannot imagine that this usage of ad hominem is typical of her, and it certainly isn't appreciated.

Perhaps my favorite paragraph that she writes is the following:

The libertarian principles which made this this the party for me have been abandoned. The party has become an end in itself, but I believe the cause of liberty trumps any party. Barr's campaign will certainly attract more interventionists, more anti-immigration and more anti-freedom conservatives like himself to the LP, so the delegates may get their growth (and perhaps increased vote counts in November) they so eagerly seek, but the cost is that true libertarians now have no political home since the LP chose as its standard bearer a man who is the antithesis of libertarianism. No matter how the LP delegates and Libertarians who supported this may rationalize it to themselves, they sold out their libertarian principles.

I did not sell out my libertarian principles. I allowed them to be stretched a little to provide the LP with a candidate that can support libertarian ideologies, but also bring in disgruntled conservative voters. Barr is the candidate that can help to fuel the revolution that Ron Paul has created and bring liberty back to Americans. While the liberty that most libertarians desire won't be given to us immediately, it's a certain step in the right direction.

Ultimately, I think this whole issue comes down to the fact that Christine Smith doesn't like Bob Barr. She is too hung up on his previous voting record to see what changes he has made to his ideals and what good can come of his candidacy. She conveniently ignores the concept that people change and opts to use ad hominem towards Barr's supporters. Instead of attacking the reasons as to why someone like me may support Barr, she just decides to insult us instead by claiming that we're not true libertarians and that we have sold out our libertarian principles. Even if the LP is wrong in choosing Barr as their candidate, they did one thing right by not choosing her as the candidate.

There's not a whole lot else to be said on this matter. As far as I'm concerned, Bob Barr is the best man for the job. He is trying to garner the same support that Ron Paul has while going for the GOP's nomination. My first choice would have been Ron Paul for president, and I was disappointed when he stated, a few months ago, that he would only seek the Republican nomination and no third party nomination. That being the case, Bob Barr and Wayne Root are the two best choices for the job, as far as I'm concerned.

Please show your support for the ticket that will bring America back to where it belongs, operating as it did when our nation was first founded on the principles of liberty and limited government. Patriots did not shed their blood for a new tyranny to be born, so to honor the sacrifices they and the patriots that followed gave, we must elect a candidate who would make them proud. Make Barr/Root your 2008 presidential choice, and bring America back from whence it came.

Bob Barr 2008