Bob Barr announces possible presidential bid

[frankie_the_yankee]

Thanks, that was just what I was asking for. Now convince me to vote for McCain instead of Barr. After all, I do agree that there is a better chance of convincing the 1 or 2 million who support Barr than the 48 million who support McCain (even if the minority is correct).

As for the judges argument you used before, I have the perfect answer. Read the American Rifleman interview with McCain. He says he will appoint judges that will enforce the laws that the elected legislators pass.

McCain is a little off on this. Judges don't "enforce" the law, they interpret and apply it. The Executive branch enforces the laws.

Sorry, but I want judges who do their job. Our current system includes judicial review of the laws for Constitutionality (not that I agree it was intended, just the way it is). McCain passes laws I believe to be unconstitutional and will appoint judges who will enforce them.

But you need to check your own terminology. As president, McCain wouldn't be "passing" any laws. The Legislative branch, the Congress, does that. As president, he signs or vetos laws that Congress passes, and then enforces them (using federal cops, the FBI, the DOJ, etc.) in the event that they become law.

So you see, anyone can make a mistake in speaking.

What I have also heard McCain say is that he would appoint Originalists like Thomas or Scalia (or Roberts) to the SCOTUS and lower spots on the federal bench. This is somewhat more clear and definitive than what seems to me to be a careless statement referring to judges who "enforce" the laws that Congress passes.

I think he meant to say judges who "interpret and apply" the laws that are passed, and not make up new laws or new rights out of whole cloth.

And McCain still supports NICS checks at gun shows for all transactions. I still have problems with that, and with the Constitutionality of background checks at all.

I'm opposed to NICS checks on private sales, mainly because I cannot see any difference between private sales at gun shows and private sales at other places. (Like I gave my kid an LCP last week. No NICS needed in my book.) But I have no problem with requiring licensed dealers to perform NICS checks as is currently the case. It fits in with my basic principle of "little or no burden on LAC's / larger burden or barrier to BG's".

Getting back to McCain and Barr, while Barr has a lot of good points, I'm glad you agree that it is more practical to change the minds of a million or so Barr supporters (to hold their noses and vote for McCain)than it is to get 60 million or so McCain supporters to switch to Barr.

[seamusTX]

Getting back to McCain and Barr, while Barr has a lot of good points, I'm glad you agree that it is more practical to change the minds of a million or so Barr supporters (to hold their noses and vote for McCain)than it is to get 60 million or so McCain supporters to switch to Barr.

How about if Sen. McCain actually was a real conservative and voters didn't have to hold their noses? Is that remotely possible?

The thinking that we have to accept whatever hairball the Republican electoral process thows up is not the path to progress.

- Jim

[frankie_the_yankee]

How about if Sen. McCain actually was a real conservative and voters didn't have to hold their noses? Is that remotely possible?

No. We have to deal with reality as it is, not as we wish it to be.

The thinking that we have to accept whatever hairball the Republican electoral process thows up is not the path to progress.

- Jim

Sometimes "progress" is not a great thing. It depends on the direction one is progressing towards.

Obama will show us progress, make no mistake about it. But it will be progress towards the death rattle of the constitution and the subsummation of the USA into a socialist world government that most of can only envision in our worst nightmares.

What did you think of his recent statement that other countries should be given input into how much we eat?

Besides, I've settled on a new magnetic sign to post on the tailgate of my pickup. It reads like this:

HAMAS ENDORSED OBAMA.

ANY QUESTIONS?

Photo to follow in a few days.

[seamusTX]

How about if Sen. McCain actually was a real conservative and voters didn't have to hold their noses? Is that remotely possible?

No. We have to deal with reality as it is, not as we wish it to be.

Splendid.

What did you think of his recent statement that other countries should be given input into how much we eat?

I have no intention of voting for him. Therefore, I don't care what he says. I have attention deficit disorder and can't pay attention to unnecessary things.

- Jim

[KBCraig]

Sorry, but I want judges who do their job. Our current system includes judicial review of the laws for Constitutionality (not that I agree it was intended, just the way it is). McCain {currently, in his job as a legislator} passes laws I believe to be unconstitutional and will {would, if elected} appoint judges who will enforce them.

But you need to check your own terminology. As president, McCain wouldn't be "passing" any laws. The Legislative branch, the Congress, does that. As president, he signs or vetos laws that Congress passes, and then enforces them (using federal cops, the FBI, the DOJ, etc.) in the event that they become law.

I'm not Steve, but please note the comments I made above. It's obvious to any objective reader that Steve didn't intend what you inferred. He was referring to McCain "passing" laws as a legislator, vice "enforcing" them as President.

[frankie_the_yankee]

I'm not Steve, but please note the comments I made above. It's obvious to any objective reader that Steve didn't intend what you inferred. He was referring to McCain "passing" laws as a legislator, vice "enforcing" them as President.

It was McCain himself who referred to judges who would "enforce" the law as written. Steve was just paraphrasing him. And as I stated, I think McCain just mis-spoke there, actually intending to say "interpret and apply" rather than "enforce".

Not sure of the context of the "passing" remark, but I think that was Steve's formulation rather than McCain's. But I'm sure he will clarify this when he gets the chance.

[srothstein]

Yes, McCain said he would appoint judges who enforce the law as written by the elected legislators. That was McCain's wording.

Kevin pretty much had what I thought I had said correct, and I apologize for not being more clear. McCain has written and pushed through legislation as a senator that is in my opinion (and President Bush's opinion also) unconstitutional.

From these two statements, I come to the conclusion that he wants to appoint judges that will not rule a law unconstitutional because it was passed by the elected legislators. I am against this.

Now, this may be a misstatement on his part. I have no evidence either way on it. From the text of the interview I referenced, I am now convinced that I cannot support McCain. Based on my conclusions of what was printed there, I do not care for either McCain, Obama, or Clinton in the office. All three are equally bad choices. To be honest, I was hoping to see some reason to change my mind and I did not.

So far, the whole Republican effort to convince me has been based on the judges McCain would appoint. As I pointed out before, I do not normally succumb to doomsday type arguments of this type, and now I find McCain will not appoint any better judges than the others, and possibly worse in many ways.

BTW, I do no know of any right that has been created by judges out of whole cloth. So far, I have seen some rights recognized that were not mentioned but were still rights, and I have seen some rights recognized under different applications of stated rights than I had thought of, but no new rights have been created that I am aware of.

[Liberty]

I wonder if anyone here could still support McCain if he actually acts on the what the rumor mill is spilling out. The rumor mill claims that McCain is concidering Americas number one gun banner (Bloomberg) as a VP.



While Obama might not have better positions, he has never actually accomplished anything. If he gets elected his incompetance might prevent him from doing damage. Remember he has never caused one bill to be enacted that emasculates the 1st or 2nd ammendment. McCain has actually pushed legislation that has managed to put the screws to American people and strip the bill of of rights.

Bob Barr looks like the best choice to anyone who believe in personal freedoms over serfdom.

[frankie_the_yankee]

elected legislators. I am against this. Kevin pretty much had what I thought I had said correct, and I apologize for not being more clear. McCain has written and pushed through legislation as a senator that is in my opinion (and President Bush's opinion also) unconstitutional.

From these two statements, I come to the conclusion that he wants to appoint judges that will not rule a law unconstitutional because it was passed by the legislature.

If he used a litmus test like asking potential appointees, "Would you vote to overrule McCain-Feingold?", then that would be a problem. (Note: I wouldn't expect him to put it so bluntly. And no judge worth 2 cents would ever answer such a question anyway (though many potential Democrat appointees probably would).

But there are ways of figurinng out where someone is coming from without being so direct.

Now if he actually appoints Originalists, that will not be a problem. An Originalist would throw McCain-Feingold straight into the dumper.

Now, this may be a misstatement on his part. I have no evidence either way on it.

I think it is more of a sloppy statement.

From the text of the interview I referenced, I am now convinced that I cannot support McCain. Based on my conclusions of what was printed there, I do not care for either McCain, Obama, or Clinton in the office. All three are equally bad choices. To be honest, I was hoping to see some reason to change my mind and I did not.

......................

So far, the whole Republican effort to convince me has been based on the judges McCain would appoint. As I pointed out before, I do not normally succumb to doomsday type arguments of this type, and now I find McCain will not appoint any better judges than the others, and possibly worse in many ways.

Democrat judges voting against the 2A 100% of the time is all the reason I need. You can't do worse than 100%. No matter who McCain appoints, they will not vote against the 2A more than 100% of the time.

And any vote that McCain doesn't get is one less vote that Obama needs to beat him.

You're not gonna change the minds of 60 million people to go and vote for Barr.

If you want to convince me that Barr has a chance of being anything but a spoiler, show me where he is polling somewhere in the 40+% range, and raising around 10 - 20 million bucks per month. Show me the TV ads. Show me the media coverage. Or show me the multi-billion dollar bank account (like Bloomberg has) that would make all of the other things above possible.

Right now, very few people in America even know he is running. There's no way on Earth someone can win if people don't even know they are running.

BTW, I do no know of any right that has been created by judges out of whole cloth. So far, I have seen some rights recognized that were not mentioned but were still rights, and I have seen some rights recognized under different applications of stated rights than I had thought of, but no new rights have been created that I am aware of.

Roe v Wade for starters. Same sex marriage seems to be in the pipeline. But whether these "rights" were created from whole cloth or just from a small piece of cloth that was already there in a different form is not really relevant. They both represent major changes to our society that were (or are being) taken out of the democratic arena (i.e. the legislative process) and imposed on the whole nation by judicial fiat.

[frankie_the_yankee]

I wonder if anyone here could still support McCain if he actually acts on the what the rumor mill is spilling out. The rumor mill claims that McCain is concidering Americas number one gun banner (Bloomberg) as a VP.

Never happen. McCain needs someone to motivate the conservative base, not someone more leftist than he is.

While Obama might not have better positions, he has never actually accomplished anything. If he gets elected his incompetance might prevent him from doing damage. Remember he has never caused one bill to be enacted that emasculates the 1st or 2nd ammendment. McCain has actually pushed legislation that has managed to put the screws to American people and strip the bill of of rights.

That's a nice rationalization, but it won't work out that way. Give Obama a strong Democrat majority in Congress and you'll see what he will be able to push through. And it will be worse than your worse nightmare.

Bob Barr looks like the best choice to anyone who believe in personal freedoms over serfdom.

I agree. So let's see him poll in thet 40+% range, raise 10 - 20 million dollars per month, and get the word out to America that he is running and that would be great.

But if he is polling in the low single digits, the only thing a vote for Barr will accomplish is to take a vote away from McCain and help Obama and the Democrats win.

[lrb111]

I wonder if anyone here could still support McCain if he actually acts on the what the rumor mill is spilling out. The rumor mill claims that McCain is concidering Americas number one gun banner (Bloomberg) as a VP.

IMO, McCain's best saving grace would be to get a VP that is more conservatively balanced than McCain.
Otherwise, his candidacy is sickeningly similar to the slightly worse choices.

[tarkus]

If he chooses a real conservative as VP I might vote for his VP.

Otherwise I'm probably voting for the original subject of this discussion.

[frankie_the_yankee]

I like Bobby Jindal, but I don't think he has enough experience.

With McCain's age, any VP would need to be someone who could take over on short notice with little or no OJT needed.

Charlie Christ would bring FL with him, but from some things I've read he isn't as conservative as some people make him out to be.

[lawrnk]

I like Bobby Jindal, but I don't think he has enough experience.

With McCain's age, any VP would need to be someone who could take over on short notice with little or no OJT needed.

Charlie Christ would bring FL with him, but from some things I've read he isn't as conservative as some people make him out to be.

I am certainly not knocking frankie. I really like Jindal. I think I need to avoid this topic. On one side, a vote for "slow wheat" this election is akin to winning the special olympics when you live in Texas. Eh, I've said enough. God help us from another "Perot" bringing us a socialist. i've got a red star for some folks. This is really burning me up................