Bob Barr @ MindSay

While the mainstream media  does its damndest to misinform the public into thinking that this country has a two party political system and there are no other choices for President other than Father Time and Black Moses, I felt it was my duty as a concerned citizen to try and inform the masses of the other options that are available in this election year. So without further ado I bring you...The Third Party Candidates of 2008!

Cynthia McKinney, GREEN PARTY Candidate


Who:  The first woman to ever represent the state of Georgia in the U.S. House of Representatives, McKinney served six terms in the U.S. Congress and two terms in the Georgia General Assembly.  Cynthia McKinney is also a human rights and peace activist as well as having a long history of fighting for the right sof women in the U.S. and abroad. McKinney has served on the International Relations and Armed Services committees as well as the International Relations subcommittee. She also fought long and hard during her time in Congress and as a commissioner on the 9/11 Committee to make sure that the families of 9/11 victims were provided with answers about what went wrong that day.

Controversies:  Accused the Bush Administration of having advanced knowledge of the 9/11 attacks and getting into a physical altercation with a Capitol Hill security Guard (charges were filed against McKinney but subsequently dropped).

Running Mate:  Rosa Clemente, a journalist, political activist and community organizer. Find out more about her HERE.


Why I Like Her:  You know where you stand with Cynthia McKinney. She doesn’t spin, she doesn’t switch her allegiances based on polling numbers and she doesn’t betray her values in order to get a vote. She may hold some controversial opinions but she is real and honest which is a combination in short supply from the big two Presidential candidates.


Bob Barr, LIBERTARIAN PARTY Candidate


Who:  Former U.S. Congressman from Georgia and is also a former U.S. Attorney. Barr served on the Judiciary Committee, the Committee on Financial Services, Committee on Veterans Affairs, and was Vice-Chair of the Government Reform Committee. Originally a run of the mill hardline conservative who was against abortion, tough on crime, all for gun rights, against the very concept of gay marriage and hated anyone named Clinton with a demented passion. Barr’s stances have changed a tad since he left Congress. He has been an outspoken critic of the Bush Administration’s disregard for civil liberties, has reversed his stance against medical marijuana, is against the Federal Marriage Protection Amendment, wants a total withdrawal from Iraq, and has publicly stated his regrets at having supported the Patriot Act. Most of Barr’s views fall in the realm of State’s rights and as such made him a good fit for the Libertarian party when they were looking for a Presidential candidate.

Controversies:   Barr was pushing for the impeachment of Bill Clinton long before the Lewinsky affair came to light; during the Clinton Impeachment, Barr (who was a driving force of the procedings) had several personal tidbits exposed by Larry Flynt namely that he’d cheated on his second wife.

Running Mate:  Wayne Allen Root is an entrepreneur, author and television producer who once worked as an anchor on CNBC. Find out more about him HERE.


Why I Like Him:  New Bob is a pretty awesome dude. He cuts through the bullshit that permeates our political process and gets to the heart of any subject with an examination of what the problem is and what solutions he would implement to fix it. New Bob’s stance on personal freedoms also is right in line with my own. Bob Barr is also incredibly well informed on almost every hot button issue and deserves to be involved in the debates currently going on because he would probably outshine both of the big two candidates. But that is probably why he isn’t invited.

Ralph Nader, INDEPENDENT Candidate


Who:  Ralph Nader is a consumer and political activist, author and attorney who has been fighting for the rights of the average American for almost five decades. He is responsible, directly or indirectly, for many of the laws and regulations that make everyday life safer for people all over this country. He can take credit for pushing the USA to have to create OSHA and the EPA. He is known more recently for his unsuccessful runs for President in the last three election cycles.

Controversies:  There are no real controversies in Nader’s history aside from fact that he has become personae non gratae to the Democratic Left who blame all of their party’s ills on Nader’s 2000 Presidential bid.

Running Mate:  Matt Gonzalez is a former public defender and political official in San Francisco. Gonzalez currently practices civil rights law.. Find out more about him HERE.


Why I Like Him:  He’s Ralph Nader, what’s not to like? Love him or hate him it is hard to dispute that Nader has more tangible accomplishments that actually benefit the lives of the voting public than either McCain or Obama. Nader is also running for President for an entirely altruistic reason which is also something that cannot be said for the Big Two Party candidates.

I have always been suspicious of Barr. He should have been McCain's running mate. Take a look at Rockwell's blog:

Bob Barr working for the Empire

This video features Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Jesse Ventura, Mike Huckabee and others.

Every election year, the only two people the media ever wants to talk about are the two major party candidates. The Democrats push out yet another rich martini-swilling progressive while the Republicans yell "next" and present the next rich scary-looking old man in line.

During the primaries, each candidate becomes a champion of their party's values. The Democrats are all super-liberal and super-progressive, promising vast sweeping social reforms and government programs galore. The Republicans are all real conservatives, ready to bring this country back to a smaller government and more open market. Then, the primaries end, the candidates are chosen, and both start sounding a lot more like each other. We have John McCain being an environmentalist, and Barack Obama citing "safety of the American people" when he votes to give the government more warrant-less wiretapping powers. Before you know it, Obama will be an Iraq War supporter.

It's clear that the worst time to determine a politician's loyalties is an election year. Pandering to every voter interest possible inevitably leads to contradiction and policy "flip-flopping." What's also clear is that when no one is trying to garner votes, the party lines are substantially blurred. The Republicans and Democrats work essentially as one party in the "off season." As a result, nothing ever changes.

People do recognize this. Many do not get involved in politics, citing "they're all the same" as the reason. So why is it, election after election, these same people pick the person they hate over the person they really hate? Why don't they vote for a third-party candidate?

The reason is because people love to be right, and too often, voters will vote for who they think will win rather than who they like. Voting for a third party candidate is seen as throwing a vote away, or worse yet, giving it to the enemy. Many cite Ralph Nader's 2000 campaign as an example. Nader is blamed for Gore's defeat because those making the claim assume that if Nader wasn't running, all of his votes would have gone to Gore. Many of them probably would have, but there is also one other important fact: Gore won the popular vote in Florida and thus the 2000 election. It was the supreme court that made the determination that Bush won. Nader's votes wouldn't have tipped the scales because they were already tipped in Gore's favor.

But even if that sentiment was true, it was the sentiment itself that made it so. It's not impossible for a third party candidate to win an election. Ross Perot, and independent candidate, actually polled as the winner in the 1992 presidential elections for a short time. Perhaps if he hadn't dropped out of the race, we would have had 8 years of President Perot in the 90's.

Many are fed up with the one political party that masquerades as two come election time, but are still drawn to vote for it when the crucial moment comes. Some may be genuinely fooled (yet again) by campaign rhetoric, but the vast majority I feel continue voting for the same corrupt system because they get caught up in the black-and-white, us-vs-them mentality. To them, they may not like the candidate they're voting for, but they really hate the other candidate. They feel the risk is too great to vote third party. The problem is, once again, that voting for a major party because you don't believe a third party candidate can win is precisely why third party candidates don't win.

I was a victim of the same reasoning. As an Obama supporter, I began to excuse more and more minor shifts in direction he exhibited. When the controversy over FISA started, I adopted a "wait and see" attitude. Obama promised us he was different. He wasn't just another politician, and he was true to his ideals. I trusted his words against FISA (including those against telecom immunity) meant that when given the opportunity to act against it, he would do so.

When Obama had the chance to seize that opportunity, he changed his mind, and instead supported the FISA bill in the end. That's when I realized that he is, in fact, just another Republi-crat. Now that he's not courting the left wing, his politics are diving strictly to the center, where he believes he will get more votes. Now he's starting to talk about safety, and how great of a reason it is to give the government unprecedented spying abilities and let large corporations off the hook for violating the law.

On the conservative side, McCain has long been a disappointment to conservatives. His record as a conservative is paltry at best, and often throws in with Democrats in order to propose very liberal (to the conservatives anyway) legislation.

As I thought about these things, I realized that there is a battle between two political wills in this country, but not between the two that most people think. No, the battle is between the Republi-crat establishment and the minor party rebellion. These parties, whether it be the Libertarian, Green, or Constitution Party are the only ones that are advocating real, sweeping change. You want an interesting debate? I would much rather see Ralph Nader go up against Bob Barr than watch Barack Obama and John McCain pretend to disagree with each other. I know where Nader and Barr stand. They actually have sharply different ideas on how to run this country. There are more issues at stake than just pro-war vs. anti-war.

To anyone reading this who is reading this, who is fed up with Obama and disappointed by McCain, I beg you to seriously consider your political alternatives. Really think about what the purpose of an election is, and above all, remember that in order for a third party candidate to really win this time, it takes your, yes your vote. Ignore the polls, ignore the media. They're bought and paid for by the political institution. They'll ignore Barr, Nader, McKinney, or Baldwin no matter what the polls show. Sure, they throw the rebels a bone once in a while, but the vast majority of their time is on the candidates who are part of the system. I'm proud that I'll be voting this November for Ralph Nader, because I know I'll be voting for real hope and real change from someone that has actually changed things for the better. I hope you can feel the same way when you pull the lever this November, regardless of who your candidate is.

Just horrible. Bob Barr is being interviewed here. I'm not the biggest Barr fan, but I like him a little more after listening to him deal with this guy asking irrelevant questions.