Saturday, January 22, 2011

Sticking a Fork in the National Libertarian Party

As some of you people may remember, I was scornful of the LP's choice of Bob Barr as their presidential candidate in 2008.

Now comes the delicious word that Bob (still rockin' a porn stash for the ages) is in Haiti, REPRESENTING BABY DOC DUVALIER!!

Yes that's right, the Libertarian presidential candidate is helping out a notoriously corrupt and brutal ex-dictator.

I do not think that the party will soon recover from the complete and total sellout of libertarian principles that Barr's nomination represented. This is just icing on an ugly, ugly cake.

LP members: Check out this load of crap from your candidate:

Barr "will be representing" Duvalier "in bringing his message of hope to the world," the former Republican congressman's website says.

"I also am reminded of others who have risen from the ashes," Barr told reporters Friday. "The city of Atlanta is the Phoenix city. The people of Haiti, likewise, will rise from the problems created by last year's earthquake and emerge stronger and better than before. That I know is Mr. Duvalier's deep wish and something that he knows in his heart."

1. Baby Doc was a 15 year slow motion earthquake for the people of Haiti.

2. Baby Doc can't know anything in his heart because he does not HAVE a heart

3. If one finds themselves within 10 feet of Baby Doc, the only appropriate course of action would be to try and inflict as much physical damage on him as possible as opposed to the heinous butt kissing of Bob Barr.


Brian Irving said...

I didn't like Barr's nomination neither, but Bob Barr is NOT the Libertarian Party.

And I take exception to point #3. Inflicting physical damage is not a libertarian principle.

Handle said...

But, everyone, even unsavory types, deserves a good defense, right? Should we shame or stigmatize all good lawyers or agents from providing that defense? Even the Tuscon monster has gotten a great lawyer volunteer for his case - no one criticizes her for it. Or were all the people who said the ACLU was evil because its lawyers were representing terrorists pro bono right?

Pelsmin said...

Handle --

Get a grip. Everyone going through the US judicial process is entitled to a robust defense. That doesn't mean every dictator hoping to seize control of a country is entitled to strong advocates.

And yes, everyone who questioned lawyers for representing Gitmo terrorists WAS right. Pro-bono work is great, even if the people you're representing are accused of awful things. But anyone who says "I'd like use my spare time doing pro bono work -- but only for people with convictions for serial child rape" has a problem.

Angus said...

Brian: you are right, Barr is not the party but the LP is the party that chose Barr. Also, #3 was meant to be humorous, not literal.

Thanks for reading and commenting!

Chris Lawrence said...

Unfortunately this is par for the course for many alleged libertarians. Ron Paul, for example, often displays a Chomskyite tendency to decide he can't apply any moral distinctions beyond America's borders. Because apparently if Ron ever suggested Kim Jong-Il might be a bad guy, that would certainly be the tipping point to launching a military attack against North Korea.

IMHO Barr is definitely edging into Seymour Hersh and Pierre Salinger territory here.

As for Baby Doc, he long ago forfeited any protection against the initiation of the use of force.

TGGP said...

Best outcome might be if Baby Doc is jailed and his claimed money goes to a respectable NGO rather than the Haitian government.

Anonymous said...

"go on take the money and run" is the best econ blog tag ever.