Across the web, as far as I can tell, the reception for Bob Barr and his Presidential bid seems rather less than enthusiastic amongst libertarians, to say the least. I understand, and even agree, with much of the reticence. That being said, I hope he gets nominated, and grandly loses with a couple of million votes.

For a couple of months we all had the pleasure of witnessing Bergland's “cat-herding” on a grand scale, and while the feline flock is somewhat reduced, the skill's of the herder can't be underestimated. That being said, Ron Paul is not going to be in any elected office other than his Congressional seat. That's just reality. However, unless the national parties, entities that really should not exist in a free country, recognize that there is a real resonance for many of the principles that Paul advocates rather than a simple cult of personality somehow constructed around a septuagenarian physician, it will all be for nothing.

What does that mean? Well it means that there had better be an electoral showing for people who espouse similar views. Polls are simply not sufficient. At this moment, a unique opportunity exists to reform the old alliance between free market libertarians and the un-Hannitized remnants of old fashioned conservatism. You know, the kind that believes in the economics of Adam Smith rather than Keynes, and the philosophy of Charles Lindberg on foreign policy rather than that of Leon Trotsky. Honestly, Justin Raimondo does a far more eloquent job than I could ever hope to do of pointing out the relation between the blood-fetishism of today's “new” conservatives and the pre-icepick delusions of ol' Trotsky here.

How then does this relate to Mr. Barr? Well, if you think, as I do, that the only real point of the LP is the effort to educate folks on, well, freedom. What is the best way of achieving this? Seems to me that the best way to pull this one off is to focus on those people who at least pay rhetorical tribute to individualism. Those people are the old school conservatives. End of story. They believe in this, these are country people, they don't call nine-eleven, and they don't lock their doors when they are home. That's how you get down in the sticks. Your conclusions are, honestly, likely accurate. Guess what, most of those folks go to Church on Sunday.

That last sentence is usually a problem for libertarians, of the capitalized or lower case version, but frankly, that Bible is reserved for a Sunday late morning arsenal, rather than a week long thump. In other words, just because you live out there does not mean that the Second Coming is imminent, or that all scientists are queer for chimps….honestly, it more likely means that you have a better idea of the market price of Panama red than do even the higher echelons of the Bloods. The Bible party does not even have enough cellulose to be called a paper tiger, it's ephemeral, and thank's to the overblown, Stalinistic silliness over Obama's preacher, open to a full summer's worth of ridicule. Let us pray. Aaaamen. Perhaps the Religious Right can finally be shown to be the odd aggregate of two dozen pedophiles and their, paying, flock. The Bible says that vengeance is the province of the Lord, something rather difficult to discern from the bellicose ramblings of either Pastor Hagee, or Pat Robertson. A fan of religious sanctimony I'm not.

All of that being said, why deal with a guy like Bob Barr with his less than pure roots? Well to me, the entire point of the Libertarian Party is to educate the citizenry and expand the movement, such as it is. Where, pray tell, is the best place to find people pre-disposed to freedom but in the former happy hunting ground of the GOP, rural Ameerica? Bob Barr is a guy those people can feel alright looking at, and even getting behind…all while a blue star hangs in the window. Subtlety is worthwhile in this case. There is a real chance for Liberty to get a toehold this election cycle, and that chance lies with Bob Barr, hate it or not.

The other thing that I would like to see in my lifetime is the destruction of the self imposed tyranny that is the two-party system in this country. As far as I am concerned, anything that damages any part of either of our ruling houses is a good thing. Bob Barr can put a pull, in the skeet sense, on the republican party, and perhaps expose their hypocrisy, and perhaps send the GOP the way of the Whigs. Once the more corrupt, and weaker, party self-destructs, focus on the party of Marx. Both must go, and both are vulnerable, but the Libertarians might be able to cause real harm to the GOP, and educate a few wayward conservatives along the way, and what's wrong with that?