Read this, and you decide-his words on habeas corpus. by Michael Stahl
(libertarian)
Friday, June 13, 2008
I'm a Barr supporter, I make no bones about it. I've seen him take veritable broadsides, both here and elsewhere from libertarians who are....mildly dissatisfied with his bid. This is from those closest to Mr. Barr ideologically, meaning that its going to be a very, very long summer and fall if Barr shows well in the polls and gets in a smear crossfire from the professionals. Them being the RNC, and the equally nasty, DNC(now that Obama appears pro-war with Iran, especially)?
Frankly, I don't understand it.
I pulled this from the www.Bobbarr2008.com website, and thought some of you amature smear-bundians might like to have a go at it, before the Pro's get their crack:
"June 13, 2008 6:11 pm EST
Atlanta, GA -- Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court made two critically important rulings. The first concluded that detainees in Guantanamo Bay could seek habeas corpus relief in federal court. The second stated that an American held by U.S. forces in Iraq was entitled to the protection of habeas corpus.
With these two decisions the Court "has reaffirmed one of the foundations of American liberties, the historic writ of habeas corpus-which requires the authorities to show cause for an arrest," explains Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president. The justices did not order anyone released, instead leaving that decision up to the trial judge after a full and fair hearing.
Barr, who since leaving Congress in January 2003 has become one of the nation's leading advocates for protecting privacy and civil liberties, explained that the decision "is as much a victory for the American people as it is for any particular litigant." The right to habeas corpus is enshrined in the Constitution: "by allowing a defendant to seek relief in court, habeas corpus is one of the most important legal limits on government," explains Barr.
However, he observes, these decisions, though welcome, "are only the start in a long process of reasserting our liberties." Congress must not, for instance, cave in and allow warrant-less surveillance of American citizens under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). To this end, Barr joined with the ACLU, Liberty Coalition, American Library Association, Citizen Outreach, and other organizations to oppose a proposal by Sen. Christopher Bond (R-MO) to limit judicial review and gut other proposed safeguards against government abuse.
The threat is bipartisan, warns Barr. "The Bush administration has spent seven years attempting to give the executive branch unprecedented powers without any accountability, while the Democrats have refused to use their authority to hold the president and his appointees accountable," Barr explains. And after pretending to be a Republican maverick, "Sen. McCain's staff says he would spy on Americans without warrants just as President Bush has done."
"We must give the U.S. government the tools necessary to defeat terrorism, but in doing so we must not sacrifice the freedoms that make America great," says Barr. Today's Supreme Court rulings are a good beginning. Now, he emphasizes, "It is up to the rest of us to finish the job of restoring America's constitutional liberties."
Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, where he served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. Prior to his congressional career, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and also served as an official with the CIA.
Since leaving Congress, Barr has been practicing law and has teamed up with groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Conservative Union to actively advocate every American citizens' right to privacy and other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom. "
I'm not seeing a problem, I'm sure several will be found, however.
Would it perhaps be too much to ask for those of you who don't like Barr to spend time attacking his much, much, worse opponents, and let the RNC and the DNC do your dirty work?
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 11
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Michael Stahl only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Michael Stahl is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
I was on a facebook message board earlier this evening, where I had earlier started a discussion thread. I had asked the folks who had their hearts set on writing in Ron Paul this November if they did not think it might be more effective to cast a vote that would be counted -- and vote for Bob Barr instead...
An exceptionally disturbed gentleman, of whom any temperament analysis would reveal off-the-chart hostility readings, launched into me with the following accusations: Let's see, I was a completely ignorant shill and some sort of Canadian subversive trying to foist socialism upon the USA (except he didn't blame me for that last part since that is what Canadians do, apparently), oh, and a useful idiot and a shill (again). He then went on to "shame [me] for my moral turpitude, and my shameless misrepresentation of rightful libertarian positions."
Another girl jumped in and agreed with his assessment, and then verbally assaulted a very nice man who had come to my defense. It was all exceedingly aggressive, but done in the name of the true gospel -- REAL libertarianism.
I'm not sure what percentage of the Libertarian Party revels that much in their own self-righteousness, but I have seen similar assaults around the net. Sheesh....
Unless we can run the reincarnation of Ayn Rand this November, I'd say we have met the enemy, and he is us.
I'm astounded how many people are opposed to Barr, especially Libertarians. I've seen people leave the LP over this. Which brings me to the observations of the LPIA state chair years ago: are we a political party or a debate club?
For all of the huff and bluster about independence, something I've noticed about these Ron Paul Republicans is that they essentially fall in lock-step with the good doc. I've had RPRs rant about how terrible Barr is (compared to whom, I ask), then turn around and say that they'll vote for Barr if Ron Paul tells them to.
So many people have no idea what it means to be constructive. I've been startled to meet so many Libertarians willing to leave the party than to vote for someone who's still ten times the libertarian Obama or McCain is. *sigh*
I'm just trying to do some research on Barr, being a Ron Paul supporter and a lifelong (18+ years) libertarian, because each individual is different.
From what I've read, I can see why some libertarians are opposed to him. He used to be part of the CIA, an adamant drug warrior, originally for the Patriot Act, etc., then supposedly changed his views on these things. Well, I have to admit I too feel uncomfortable with such a person running for president under the LP banner. He may indeed have changed, but it will take a lot of proof to earn my trust and the trust of many libertarians. Kind of like in the Bible when Paul changed his ways and became a good man, but before when he was known as Saul he persecuted Christians. He had to really earn their trust.
Anyway, getting back to the LP nominees issue, IMO the last truly honorable LP presidential nominee we had was Harry Browne. God rest his soul. This year I don't know who to vote for, now that Ron Paul is out. I may have to stay home.
Want to comment on
this article? Leave your comment
here. Your email address is required to track your
comment. However, we will neither publish your email
address nor distribute it to other organizations or
persons. The only reason we might use it would be if
we needed to contact you regarding your comment. All
comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
