Though he now claims to be a Libertarian, sits on the LNC and wants to be our Presidential nominee, Bob Barr continues to support Republican candidates through his Republican PAC, called “The Bob Barr Leadership Fund”.
He doesn’t just support Republican candidates; he supports Republican candidates even when there is a Libertarian candidate for that same office. Worse, this has happened too many times for it to be simply explained away.
Q: Why should Libertarians support Barr for President, when Barr doesn’t support Libertarian candidates?
A: We should not. Libertarians should never support a presidential candidate who regularly stabs Libertarian candidates in the back by supporting their opponents.
Here are some of the races in which Barr, since he joined the LP, has supported a Republican candidate to the detriment of a Libertarian candidate for the same office.
Update: I have added the exact dates the contributions were made. All of the below contributions were made during the 2007-2008 election cycle, according to FEC records.
Georgia Senate race
Libertarian candidate: Allen Buckley
Bob Barr supported
05/08/07 Saxby Chambliss for Senate $ 500
06/22/07 Saxby Chambliss for Senate $1000
09/28/07 Saxby Chambliss for Senate $1000
01/07/08 Saxby Chambliss for Senate $1000
Total to Republican candidate in George Senate race: $3,500
Total to Libertarian candidate in George Senate race: $ 0
New Hampshire Senate race
Libertarian candidate: Ken Blevens
Bob Barr supported
03/12/07 Team Sununu $1000
06/22/07 Team Sununu $2000
Total to Republican candidate in NH Senate race: $3,000
Total to Libertarian candidate in NH Senate race: $ 0
Virginia Senate race
Libertarian candidate: William Redpath
Bob Barr supported
12/04/07 Gilmore for Senate $1000.00
Total to Republican candidate in Virginia Senate race: $1,000
Total to Libertarian candidate in Virginia Senate race: $ 0
Idaho Senate race
Libertarian candidate: Kent Marmon
Bob Barr supported
05/08/07 Larry Craig for Senate $1000
Total to Republican candidate in Idaho Senate race: $1,000
Total to Libertarian candidate in Idaho Senate race: $ 0
North Carolina Congressional race
Libertarian candidate: Thomas Hill
Bob Barr supported
05/08/07 Robin Hayes $1000
Total to Republican candidate in N C Congressional race: $1,000
Total to Libertarian candidate in N C Congressional race: $ 0
Texas Congressional race
Libertarian candidate: Ken Ashby
Bob Barr supported
05/08/07 Friends of Jeb Hensarling: $1000.00
Total to Republican candidate in Texas Congressional race: $1,000
Total to Libertarian candidate in Texas Congressional race: $ 0
Last Free Voice 
I would hope a principled Libertarian wouldn’t accept PAC money in any form.
Likewise a real Libertarian, principled or not, would never have their very own Republican PAC.
Why not accept PAC money? That makes no sense. A PAC is just a voluntary association.
As for this post — I, of course, agree.
Wow- Elf – how did you find all of this out? Great story, and horrible if it is true (and I don’t think you’d put something out that that wasn’t factual).
Great post!
T.G. – It’s true. It’s been around for a while. The old timers in my local party knew about it, so it must be circulating outside of the internet, too.
Good reporting, btw, ENM.
Hiya, TiGirl! Sadly, it is true. It’s all in public records, through the FEC.
Thanks, GE. 🙂
Well GE, I disagree. I personally do not believe in accepting money from any PAC organization. If I’m running for office and some how I win, I do not want to feel like I owe anyone any favor. I’m not a huge fan of accepting donations from voters either, but, at least I can repay them by being a principled public servant.
If you or anyone else wants to take PAC money when running for office, more power to you. Just don’t expect my vote.
That’s completely idiotic.
So if I start a PAC with ElfNinosMom, tiataniumgirl, Andy the anarchist, Jeff Wartman, etc., the LastFreeVoice PAC, there would be something wrong with that? There’s something wrong with pooling small contributions together in order to have a stronger voice?
Your opinion is your own, but it is completely irrational and dogmatic. There is no logical reason for someone to be against PACs but a member of a political party, which is nothing but a specific kind of PAC. Or moreover, a candidate committee, which is another specific kind of PAC. Are you against candidate committees? Absurd.
If it’s true, it’s true, one thing is certain, the man has some BALLS to announce so late (on Monday 5/12.. I hear?) And to support R’s over L’s and then run as an L himself.
As for the PAC debate, doesn’t Ron Paul take money but make no promises to special interests? I think to win, you could take the cash however, it takes a true person of integrity to not let that $$$ influence you. I see Jason’s point, but I also think that taking the money is not the problem as much as making promises that favor the contributor. Many PAC’s are no doubt corrupt to the core, however, there are many decent ones out there that give funding to to good folks that alreadysupport their cause.
Hi again, TiGirl! You have an excellent point about him announcing only 10 days before the convention. I find it insulting that he thinks we should even consider a candidate who intentionally gave us so little time to consider his qualifications (or lack thereof, as the case may be) for what is arguably the most powerful position in the entire world.
Of course, if I had as much dirty laundry as Bob Barr – and knew that bloggers would dig it up and bury me with it – I’d announce at the last possible minute too, in order to minimize pre-convention damage.
The end result of not “accepting donations from voters” is that only the richest among us would be able to run for office.
There are some very principled PACs. There is nothing wrong with PAC money per se.
I don’t think “special interests” bother giving Ron Paul any money, but if they did, he’d certainly accept it. There is absolutely no logic in not accepting money from three people just because they pool together and call it a PAC. And there’s even less logic in not accepting money from BAD PACs — you should take it, lest they give it to someone else with whom they can buy influence!
I’ll tell you what … those Saxby Chambliss contributions bug the shit out of me. Not on specifically libertarian or Libertarian grounds, but just on general principle.
Chambliss was a chickenhawk — he skipped Vietnam on student and then 4-F (“I have a bad knee”), and then ran for US Senate in 2002 as a Bushevik hawk candidate, caricutaring his opponent Max Cleland, a decorated Vietnam veteran and double amputee, as Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein in campaign commercials.
I wouldn’t give Cleland a pass on any bad stuff he supported because he was a decorated veteran (Bronze Star and Silver Star and service at Khe Sanh) — for example, he inexcusably voted for the war on Iraq — but Chambliss’s conduct in that campaign was just sickening and that Barr would support a goddamn troll like Chambliss is even more sickening.
Thomas,
Did I mention that you’re my favorite person ever?
I would suggest that people going to Denver print out copies of this material and distribute it to delegates. I’ll bet not a lot of people read the FEC reports or maybe even this website, but will be outraged if they find out about this.
These contributions to Republicans running against LP candidates all occurred *since* Bob Barr joined the LP and has been (until recently) sitting on the Libertarian National Committee, yes?
Barr and Wayne Allyn Root really seem to be giving each other a run for the money as far as which one would make a worse LP presidential nominee. I just hope we have the collective good sense to give Mary Ruwart or another committed, principled Libertarian the nod.
Ruwart isn’t electable, I want someone who’s able to break 15%.
That leaves Gravel and Barr. For obvious reasons, let’s go Gravel.
[Poster was a Ruwart supporter before Gravel jumped in the race.]
I think that this…
Is most interesting.
This is very good research. It would be better if the author had mentioned the year of each donation. Sometimes I know what year it was. Most shocking is this year’s US Senate race, in which national chair Bill Redpath is running for US Senate, and Barr has apparently given nothing to Bill Redpath, but $1,000 to Bill’s Republican opponent. I would overlook old examples, but a 2008 example is very disappointing.
On the other hand, I just noticed that the Idaho US Senate race example is clearly misleading. It says Bob Barr donated $1,000 to Larry Craig, but Larry Craig is not running for re-election. It’s been a year since he said he wouldn’t run for re-election. So now I suspect the Barr donation to Craig was as much as two years ago.
Great research and a big thanks to ElfNinosMom for it!!
MHW
I just believe in “putting your money where your mouth is”. Thats the one thing I respect about George Phillies. The government takes too much of our hard earned money for me to go door to door with people struggling to put food on the table and gas in their tanks to beg for a donation.
I’d much rather go it a lone.
Richard, the contribution to Larry Craig was made on May 8, 2007.
I added dates, so everyone can see when the contributions were made. Sorry for that prior oversight on my part. ALL of the above contributions have been made during the 2007-2008 election cycle, according to FEC records.
Our Founders insisted that Washington take a salary, which he initially refused, because by refusing he’d essentially be setting a precedent where only the richest among us could seek office.
You are essentially saying the same thing.
Indeed, I am the chairman of a non-partisan PAC which has endorsed principled, pro-liberty candidates from the GOP, the LP, and the CP.
One good site I’ve found for basic information and statistics is http://www.whitehouseforsale.org
The thing is, Barr’s PAC is in his own name even, and isn’t just a pro-liberty non-partisan group. It supports Republican candidates exclusively, and has even supported Republican candidates who don’t seem to be at all pro-liberty in races against pro-liberty candidates from the LP.
This information ought to be distributed far and wide!
This might just sink Barr! One can only hope!
Jerry Baner Says:
May 10, 2008 at 5:01 am
Ruwart isn’t electable, I want someone who’s able to break 15%.
I don’t quite understand this post. Is Mr. Baner saying that Gravel IS electable? Is Gravel’s supposed “ability” to break 15% going top get him elected?
Please explain.
Gravel could barely break 0.15% in Democratic primaries. He would do worse than the worst LP candidate ever.
Jeff Wartman Says:
May 10, 2008 at 5:52 pm
i>I think that this…
Libertarian candidate: William Redpath
Bob Barr supported
Gilmore for Senate $1000.00
Total to Republican candidate in Virginia Senate race: $1,000
Total to Libertarian candidate in Virginia Senate race: $ 0
Is most interesting.
Yes it is, as Gilmore’s campaign for Governor of Virginia, in 1997 had one thing and one thing only in his campaign platform which Libertarians could support . . . ending the “car property tax”. His plan got enacted, but the steps to reduct it to zero got stalled when the commonwealth had “fiscal” problems and the tax was never fully eliminated (at least to my knowledge as I haven’t lived in Virginia since 2004). Though Gilmore is touted for “cutting spending”, the Commonwealth’s budget grew every year under Gilmore by my recollection.
Yes, there is so much to recommend to Libertarians for supporting Gilmore! LOL!
As both Barr and Gilmore were “government attorneys” Gilmore a Commonwealth’s attorney (from Henrico county, where I lived) and Barr a U.S. attorney, I am not surprised that Barr supports Gilmore. Both seem to have the prosecutor’s attitude that their mission in life is to “go after bad people”, as a hero of all that is good and right.
Though I could never have voted for Gilmore’s successor Mark Warner (a Democrat and successful businessman) many positions Warner holds are superior to Gilmore (fairly decent on gun control, as a Democrat no less!)
Jeff Wartman Says:
May 10, 2008 at 5:52 pm
I think that this…
Libertarian candidate: William Redpath
Bob Barr supported
Gilmore for Senate $1000.00
Total to Republican candidate in Virginia Senate race: $1,000
Total to Libertarian candidate in Virginia Senate race: $ 0
Is most interesting.
Yes it is, as Gilmore’s campaign for Governor of Virginia, in 1997 had one thing and one thing only in his campaign platform which Libertarians could support . . . ending the “car property tax”. His plan got enacted, but the steps to reduct it to zero got stalled when the commonwealth had “fiscal” problems and the tax was never fully eliminated (at least to my knowledge as I haven’t lived in Virginia since 2004). Though Gilmore is touted for “cutting spending”, the Commonwealth’s budget grew every year under Gilmore by my recollection.
Yes, there is so much to recommend to Libertarians for supporting Gilmore! LOL!
As both Barr and Gilmore were “government attorneys” Gilmore a Commonwealth’s attorney (from Henrico county, where I lived) and Barr a U.S. attorney, I am not surprised that Barr supports Gilmore. Both seem to have the prosecutor’s attitude that their mission in life is to “go after bad people”, as a hero of all that is good and right.
Though I could never have voted for Gilmore’s successor Mark Warner (a Democrat and successful businessman) many positions Warner holds are superior to Gilmore (fairly decent on gun control, as a Democrat no less!)
Richard Winger writes:
On the other hand, I just noticed that the Idaho US Senate race example is clearly misleading. It says Bob Barr donated $1,000 to Larry Craig, but Larry Craig is not running for re-election. It’s been a year since he said he wouldn’t run for re-election. So now I suspect the Barr donation to Craig was as much as two years ago.
To me, the important issue here is that Barr’s PAC made these contributions _while Barr was serving on the Libertarian National Convention_. Even if these candidates did not ) _at the moment of the contribution_ have a Libertarian Party candidate, wasn’t Barr’s chief responsibility as a leader within the LP to be _finding and supporting such candidates_? Instead, he chose to work for Republican Party candidates on a widespread basis. Why should we expect anything different of _presidential candidate Barr_ than we have seen from _Libertarian National Committee Representative Barr_?
My biggest problem with Bob Barr having made these donations to Republicans while being an LP member and more importantly, an LNC board member, is that most of these Republicans in question are not even libertarian leaning. It would be one thing if he donated money to Ron Paul and to people like him, but this is clearly not the case.
Bob Barr has got some ‘splanin’ to do.
I’m a conservative who has voted Libertarian many times because of the trash that runs in the two parties. I don’t believe it to be a tragedy that Barr supported republicans. After all he was one. It might be good for libertarians to broaden their influence in the electorate–it is OK to win. I haven’t been keeping up with libertarianism lately. Do they still believe in open borders? Do they still believe in the decriminalizing of all drugs? Do they still believe in never going to war unless we are directly attacked? (so naive in a vicious world) It might be good to broaden your perspectives–winning is OK. Purity of dogma is OK as an intellectual and moral pursuit. Then we have the real world as it is. Winning is OK.
What the fuck are the ‘obvious reasons’ to choose Gravel over NOTA? Gravel’s just as bad as Barr — or at least was up until this little gem. Fuck ’em both.
Barr’s line in the sand…
I started off reserving judgment, and willing to be enthusiastic about a Barr candidacy if at all possible. But as the negatives — especially the conflict of interest inherent in his continuing financial support of Republican candidates, including t…..
In NH, John Sununu is quite libertarian, he fought against the Patriot Act, voted against the Military Commissions Act and other Bush laws and fiscally quite conservative. In NC, I understand the Libertarian that run as a Republican – that Barr supported – lost and is going to run as a Libertarian now.
Thomas: what is wrong with supporting candidates/politicians in another party that aspires tot he same libertarian principle through their vote and stance?
After all, it is not only Libertarians that have read and understand Kant….and although the most principled party, the LP does not have a “monopoly on liberty”.
One should work together across party lines for the same ideals.
If you are looking for a candidate you agree with 100%, somone that has never changed his/her view, with a 100% “clean” record (and without mistake) etc., good luck, as you will guaranteed never find such a person. If you find someone you can agree with say 80%, you have found a very good candidate.
…Mr. Barr said he still opposes abortion and the legalization or decriminalization of drugs, just as he did as a federal prosecutor during the Reagan administration and as a Republican in the U.S. House.
Some Libertarians hold the opposite view…
*********
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080513/NATION/778957938/1002&template=printart
Article published May 13, 2008
Barr to woo Libertarian base for funds
Anyone who can read this article and still consider supporting Gravel is an enemy of liberty and should forever be castigated as such:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/katz-j/katz-j28.html
Uh, G.E., I think you meant Bob Barr, right? Nevertheless, a similar argument could be made regarding Mike Gravel.
Sununu voted FOR the Military Commissions Act
9/28/06 Vote 259: S 3930: S. 3930 As Amended; Military Commissions Act of 2006 Yes
He also voted For S 1927 for warrantless monitoring of virtually any form of communication originating in the United States
He also voted for Vote 181: On the Motion: Fund the war This $120 billion dollar package was passed in the Senate by an 80-14 vote on May 24.
He also voted for war by voting against Vote 126: H R 1591: This $122 billion war spending bill calls for combat troops to begin withdrawing from Iraq this summer.
On 6/27/06 he voted for Vote 189: S J RES 12 to ban ‘desecration of the American flag.’
and on 3/2/06 on vote 29: H R 3199 he voted to eauthorize a slightly modified version of the 2001 USA Patriot Act.
And if the format looks familiar, it’s because I cut and pasted from
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/ and their ‘important votes’.
[…] Libertarian Mole? From Last Free Voice. Bob Barr: An Enemy of Libertarians: Though he now claims to be a Libertarian, sits on the LNC and wants to be our Presidential […]
[…] On December 4, 2007, the “leadership PAC” of current Libertarian Party presidential nominee Bob Barr gave $1,000 to Republican Jim Gilmore. This, according to research by Last Free Voice. […]
Вот уж не ожидал что у вас такая трава качественная! Где берете такую? Я например нисколько не сомневаюсь что у Тимура так бы не получилось, так что респект!