Bob Barr is all for gay marriage…if that’s what Californians want…. Quoth Barr:
:dubious:
Look, Obama knows which side his bread is getting buttered on. He is not going to go all 50 state on us. But on the other hand it’s important not to go entirely with the 50 percent plus one either. The point of Howard Dean’s 50 state strategy is to not entirely focus on the swing-state approach that we’d done before. Because eventually you end up going with smaller and smaller groups of swing states. At some point you have to work on making red states swing states and making swing states blue states. And honestly, after a certain point, you can only work with what you have.
Was John Kerry ever going to win Florida? Probably not. The people either like you or they don’t. As long as your opponent doesn’t make any huge mistakes and wind up with a live boy or a dead girl, then you’re not going to win Mississippi if you’re John Kerry. Barack Obama on the other hand changes the electoral map. Why? I don’t really know. Why does he do so well in the Great Plans and the Western part of the Midwest? I have no idea, but not playing to those strengths would be stupid.
Anyway. You won’t see Obama hanging out in Idaho in the last week of October. I the guiding advice on Obama is to actually gasp expect more out of him than you would of normal politicians. It’s like this blogger Oliver Willis said.
I’m not sure if it’s bullshit or not, but if it’s consistent with the rest of his beliefs it’s a very reasonable position. I wish more federal congressmen would say “I believe ___ but I don’t think this is an issue for the federal government to decide”.
Every word out of Bob Barr’s mouth is bullshit. 
But if he can steal away some Republican votes, more power to him!
That’s bullshit on several different levels.
First, as a states rights issue, the federal government doesn’t support states rights by passing federal laws which would overrule state laws. States rights are protected by the minimization of federal control.
Second, this isn’t about states rights anyway. Libertarians are supposed to be against any government control over individual liberties. They’re not supposed to just delegate it down do the state level. What difference does it make if I’m being oppressed by federal or state authorities?
Winner. The LP has become infested with states-righters and Constitutionalists and all sorts of vermin who want to shift tyranny from one point to another.
Anyway, it looks like Hillary’s final forking is going to come along TS Elliot style. Or maybe it’s like the quiet, still air just before one hears the roar of the tornado.
How so? Wouldn’t the country as a whole have more legal diversity as a result? There could be a state or county where walking naked in the street is only punishable by a fine and one where all drugs are legal.
Isn’t that the libertarian ideal? For local people to have as many or as few laws as they want?
Absolutely. But when libertarianism says local people, it means ALL the local people. A single person governed without his consent is a tyranny.
Note: I’m only answering your question. If you want to debate the merits of noncoercion or the ethics of ungoverned renegades, please open some other thread. Thanks.
From NY Times on Clinton this morning: Ouch, the end is near.
I think she finally smells it.
What the Barack is cooking?
Obama’s had a good weekend delegate-wise, picking up three superdelegates yesterday, including a couple of just-selected add-ons, plus swiping an extra delegate in the Nevada state caucuses.
And of course, this was on top of Obama’s landing a passel of former Edwards delegates in SC, IA, and NH, upping his counts in those states.
DemConWatch’s delegate count is at 1,908 for Obama, and 1,716 for Hillary.
Suppose the remaining primaries go like this, delegatewise: Hillary wins KY 34-17 and PR 38-17; Obama wins OR 29-23, MT 9-7, and SD 8-7. Overall, that would be Hillary 109, Obama 80. And that’s probably about as good as it would get for Hillary.
Another 37 superdelegates or Edwards delegates would be all he needs to get to 2,025.
He’s closing in on the prize.
Not only that, but he’d be likely to either gain all of those 37 super/Edwards delegates before the Rules and Bylaws Committee meets on 5/31 to discuss MI and FL, or be so close as to make little difference.
There’d be a sense that Obama was already about to close the deal, and I doubt they’d do anything to move the goalposts in a way that substantially delayed the point at which Obama could claim victory.
Agreed. It’s looking very, very good for Obama right now. ::crossing fingers::
I agree, I do wish the party was not so split though.
75,000 Rally In Portland For Obama! That’s 1/8 of the city!
Damn, that’s 3 times what I saw at the Hartford Civic Center. I’d love to be there.
Un-freakin-believable.
They led with this story on the morning news shows…oddly, nothing about tomorrow’s primaries.
BTW - The interview with all the Obama’s was so nice to see. He’s such a family guy, in hopeless love with his wife, [to the Tennessee GOP *" Back off my wife! *"]. Gushing over his children saying he has to get them a dog now - even joking with his wife about who will actually be bring said dog out in the middle of winter [heh - most likely the secret service] it was all in good fun.
And to the election process he’s very humble, saying it’s not over and until it is he refuses to count Clinton out - but assures us the party will be unified to beat the pubs in the fall.
It was a refreshing interview to watch.
So, what kind of dog do you think he’ll get? Golden? He seems like a golden guy.
Some sort of retriever I’d bet. It was so funny watching those two [Barack and his wife] talk about the dog - I can see them now walking in on the White House lawn.
More would have made it, but they died of cholera and dysentery on the way there.