Watch the Third Party Presidential Debate with Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin and Ralph Nader, which took place at the City Club of Cleveland on October 30th, 2008.

On Tuesday, October 21st, 2008, Bob Barr granted an interview to Eric Jackman and Justin Martell at Franklin Pierce University.

Now that it’s guaranteed that John McCain can’t win the elections, Libertarian candidate Bob Barr has emerged as America’s last hope to prevent Barack Obama from becoming the next President of the United States of America.

If you love freedom and care about the future of our great nation, don’t waste your vote on a lost cause like John McCain! Help Bob Barr defeat Barack Obama and send a powerful message to the establishment that socialism stops here.

Bob Barr’s momentum is growing faster than ever before and he has positioned himself as a powerful voice of reason that will keep Obama in check. Once Americans realize that John McCain has already lost, millions will switch their support to Bob Barr.

Unfortunately, fighting socialism doesn’t come cheap. Which is why Bob Barr needs our help. These days even $5 makes a difference… the race is that close and Obama is flush with cash from his Wall Street banker buddies and welfare check groupies.

If you prefer free markets over socialism, small government over one-party corruption, and personal freedom over radical oppression, donate your money to Bob Barr right now instead of paying it in taxes to Obama in the future.

Donate to Bob Barr at his official campaign website.

Bob Barr was interviewed today by MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.

Rachel Maddow: Here to try to talk me down is former Congressman Bob Barr, the Libertarian candidate for president this year. Hi Congressman Barr, thanks for joining us.

Bob Barr: Rachel, it’s great to be with you and an honor to be among the first guests on your new show. Thanks for having me.

Rachel Maddow: Very kind of you to say. What do you think when you hear McCain telling voters that he is the real agent of change, he is the real maverick to shake up Washington.

Bob Barr: It’s absolutely hilarious. As you indicated, there might be some reasons to elect this guy as president, but being a maverick is not one of them. This guy has “status quo Washington insider” written all over him, and this latest example of saying, “well gee we don’t really want to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but we’ve got to”, golly gee, and “where was Washington, it’s Congress’s fault”, this guy was in Congress, he’s been there almost 30 years!

Rachel Maddow: Well, the McCain campaign is banking to a certain extent on the idea that “lobbyist” is not a boring political word. They are campaigning as mavericks, they’re saying, “we’re gonna stand up to the lobbyist”. If the idea of a lobbyist is a potent negative image in politics, then what about the fact that the McCain campaign manager was a Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac lobbyist? At that point doesn’t it come around to sort of bite them politically that the campaign is really being run by a lot of former lobbyists?

Bob Barr: Well, a little come around to bite them, if the people realize what’s going on. It’s important that you’re talking about it, that I’m talking about it, the others are talking about it, and it’s not just one or two lobbyists, I mean it’s dozens. I think at one point he had like five dozen lobbyists working for him. You know, this is one thing, you know, there are good lobbyists and there are bad lobbyists, but if you’re going to put yourself forward as somebody that is purer than the driven snow and never would have anything to do with a lobbyist, then you have to stand up to the scrutiny that you have lobbyists on your own payroll, and I don’t think he should be able to get away with that.

Rachel Maddow: We saw before John McCain picked Sarah Palin that they were really going with this “inexperienced” attack against Barack Obama. They were hitting that over and over and over again. After choosing Sarah Palin they’ve now shifted to this “running against lobbyists” idea. Do you think they should have stuck with the “inexperience” attack? How are you running against Barack Obaba?

Bob Barr: Well, that certainly is a legitimate complaint I beleive against Barack Obama, but it’s just as legitimate against Miss Palin. I mean, for heaven’s sake, the only foreign experience that has been put forward is, I think by Senator McCain’s wife who said, “well gee since Alaska’s on the same latitude as Russia and it’s really near” - I don’t think she noted that they used to be attached by a small land bridge - this means that she really understands Russia. No, the fact of the matter is that’s what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, and it’s a legitimate complaint against both campaigns, particularly since Senator McCain of course as the oldest person ever to seek, or if he were sworn in, to be sworn in as president. These are legitimate concerns. Would his his running mate who would then would become vice president and a heartbeat away from the presidency, does that person really have the experience, and certainly in the foreign affairs arena the answer is a resounding “no”.

Rachel Maddow: Bob Barr, Libertarian candidate for president, I have to say I was not especially “talked down” about John McCain’s successful pitch as the “change” candidate, but thank you very much for chiming in and for joining us.

Bob Barr: My pleasure, Rachel.

While Senators Barack Obama and John McCain exchanged stump speeches in New York, Libertarian Party presidential nominee Bob Barr added his take to the issues that impact all American citizens.

“Pretending there is only a Republican or Democratic proposal to solve the challenges our nation faces ignores the voices of millions upon millions of Americans who are sick and tired of partisan posturing,” says Bob Barr.

Bob Barr answered the questions Democrats and Republicans choose to avoid, live from Christopher Newport University.

A recording will be available soon.

On October 13, 2008, Bob Barr held an amazing lecture at Lynchburg College in Lynchburg, Virginia. Below is a video recording and transcript of his speech, which gives great insight into Bob Barr’s philosophy and position on many different issues facing our country today.

Bob Barr Welcomes The Audience

I appreciate very much the opportunity to be with you all here today.

Andy McPherson, Andy is in back in the room there. Andy is with our campaign and if there is anything that we can do, either after the program today or at any point between now and the election or after, because I don’t intend to stop fighting for liberty and freedom after November 4th. Please don’t hesitate to call him or call on our campaign. The campaign website is BobBarr2008.com. Some of you all may have already gone there; we have an awful lot of information on there and you can find out a little more about yours truly.

You will note that standing here before you today I’ll probably, according to the conventional wisdom - at least all these things that seemed to be important for candidate for president and the eyes of the media under two major parties - are not the characteristics that I have. I don’t have all the lapel flag on, that seems to be one of the defining characteristics of whether or not somebody is qualified to be president nowadays; one of those issues that the other two parties argue about. “Well, why aren’t you wearing a lapel flag that I am. Why are you wearing one”, and so forth.

I also frankly don’t care how many houses anybody has. That seems to be an important issue for the candidates, you know, whether you have one house or two houses or how many cars you have, or what kind of car you drive. I drive a Dodge Magnum with a HEMI engine, I love HEMI engines.

But that has nothing whatsoever to do with why or not a person is qualified to serve as president. You’ll also note that for those of you who have been following, as I suspect everybody here has knowing Lynchburg’s reputation and concern for the community and our country. I suspect that everybody here has been following the campaign for the presidency quite avidly.

The Presidential Debates and the Vacuum of Leadership

You’ll notice that there have been, thus far, three debates for president, two for president and one for vice president, which essentially is the same thing, or at least should be the same thing.

In other words, if we’re to be voting for somebody to be vice president, that person we obviously demand that person satisfied every criteria, appropriate legitimate criteria, to serve as president. So, it’s really not appropriate to say, “Well it was a debate for vice president, so it doesn’t really matter”, it indeed does matter.

Read the rest of this entry »

Wayne Allyn Root, Libertarian Party VP nominee, discusses the economy, the financial crisis and the government’s response with Neil Cavuto.

Bob Barr issued the following press release today, calling on the Commission on Presidential Debates to include him in the third Presidential debate scheduled for October 15, 2008.

The chance that Bob Barr’s request will be considered is very low because the Commission is run as a two-party system monopoly. It is headed by Frank Fahrenkopf, a former head of the Republican National Committee, and Paul Kirk, a former head of the Democratic National Committee.

Alternative Voice Needed in Final Debate

The presidential and vice-presidential “debates” are awful. The bloviating is excessive; the substance is minimal; and the moderating is bush league.

Virtually no one has been satisfied with the debates so far–except perhaps Barack Obama’s campaign staff. The less substantive and contentious the debate is, and the less interesting the discussion–the better it is for the political front-runner, but not for the American people.

Obviously, part of the problem is procedural. We have moderators who seem more interested in squelching than in promoting real disagreement. We have formats that rule out the genuine give-and-take of an organic debate.

Imagine, for instance, how Sarah Palin would have performed if she had been called for ignoring questions and challenged for her repetitive canned generalities. Or, imagine if the presidential candidates each had 15 minutes to make their respective cases, followed by five-minute rebuttals and a question and answer period in which both could respond to each other. We might actually learn something about the candidates, other than their skill at dodging controversy. Rather than seeing these prospective presidents be forced to operate outside their own comfort zones, all the voters see are candidates doing their best to stay within their debate preparations–hardly “presidential!”

However, the biggest failing of the three contests so far is substantive. For all of the noise and fury of the campaign, Senators Barack Obama and John McCain agree more than they disagree. Both support the $2 trillion succession of federal bailouts of anyone remotely connected to Wall Street or the housing industry. Both support an expensive, imperial foreign policy, in which the U.S. subsidizes its wealthy friends and attempts to remake failed societies.

Additionally, both support massive regulation in the name of fighting climate change. Both backed warrantless surveillance of Americans’ phone calls and email. Both believe in endless energy subsidies and regulation. Both spent most of their careers opposing increased drilling for oil and natural gas at home. Both want to increase the size and expense of the military–at home and abroad.

Even their differences are distressingly small. Both would stay in Iraq for a time; they just argue whether the occupation should continue two or four years, or some other longer period of time. Sen. McCain used to join Sen. Obama in opposing tax cuts. Now, as a candidate for president, Sen. McCain says he is for them. To his credit, Sen. McCain wants to cut pork, but that is only about $18 billion in 2008, compared to the $2 trillion worth of bailouts that he supported.

There is one more debate scheduled, and it desperately needs another voice: An alternative candidate to challenge the false, but shared, assumptions of Senators Obama and McCain. The political establishment has bungled America’s foreign policy and wrecked America’s economy, but refuses to accept responsibility for its mistakes. The conventional wisdom has failed, but the two establishment candidates will talk about nothing else.

Add Bob Barr to the upcoming debate and open up its format, and I promise that the American people will enjoy a real debate that is focused on the issues. We will talk about substance, not fluff. And the American people will learn that they do have a genuine choice on November 4th–a candidate committed to making real change in Washington.

-Bob Barr

Bob Barr explains on CNN’s Situation Room why the Bailout Bill has already made things worse by sending the wrong signal to Wall Street and investors, why government planning of the economy doesn’t work, and what he would do as President to address the financial crisis.

Bob Barr was not allowed to participate in last night’s Presidential debate so he decided to answer the following questions on Youtube, explaining why and how he is different from John McCain and Barack Obama:

• What sort of message does this 700 billion dollar bailout send to those of us who made good decisions? What incentive does it give to us to make good decisions in the future? What’s the message and incentive for the people who were less cautious?
• To be quite frank, I am more afraid of the gunfire I hear from my bedroom window than I am of terrorists half-way around the world. Please justify the “war on terror” to me.
• The Surgeon General has stated that there is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke and the only way to protect people is to prohibit smoking in indoor public places. Would you support policies that push states to pass smoke free laws?
• As President, what will you do with the “No Child Left Behind Act” of 2001? Will you seek to change it? If so, how? If not, why not?