WASHINGTON — Bob Barr launched his Libertarian Party
presidential bid Monday morning, and wasted no time taking aim at
presumptive Republican nominee John McCain, whom he blasted as a
“Johnny-come-lately” to the Bush tax cuts who doesn’t have any
claim to the label “conservative.”
The former congressman from Georgia reiterated a series of
stances on issues that could complicate his efforts to capture the
Libertarian nomination later this month, but make him potentially
dangerous to McCain in some swing states in the general
election.
Barr remains pro-life, and is less extreme in his small
government and antiwar views than purists within the Libertarian
Party.
For instance, while Barr said he favored “reevaluating”
government spending in the Departments of Education, Commerce, and
Energy, as well as the need for U.S. bases overseas, he did not
make a blanket statement, as past Libertarian candidates have, to
eliminate such departments, and immediately close all overseas
bases. Probably his closest bond with Libertarians is his strong
stance against the PATRIOT Act.
On international affairs in general, his tone was a lot more
measured than what we’ve seen from Ron Paul — there were no
stinging critiques of U.S. as an imperialist nation.
Barr voted for the Iraq War, but now believes it was a mistake
and wants to “set in place a plan” to “dramatically decrease the
military, the economic, and the political footprint we maintain in
Iraq.”
But his language remained cautious. He opposes precipitous
withdrawal, and described it as “foolhardy” to announce a timetable
for pulling out of Iraq. “Only a fool would signal to whoever their
adversaries are when we would be drawing down our troops,” he
said.
In response to another question, he added that “the doctrine of
preemptive war has no basis in traditional and historical notions
of America’s security.”
Such is the dance he is employing to mollify Libertarians while
trying to appeal to a broader constituency than the typical nominee
of the party.
WHEN I ASKED HIM how he would handle Iran’s quest for nuclear
weapons, he opened with a dig at McCain, remarking, “First of all,
I’m not going to go around making up songs about such a serious
matter.” This was an obvious reference to McCain’s “Bomb, bomb
Iran” ditty.
He said that Iran is a much different place from Iraq, and that
military action there would have tremendous consequences, so it
should not be taken lightly. He described the possibility of Iran
obtaining nuclear weapons as “remote” and said he believes that
there are many diplomatic avenues that have not been fully explored
yet.
Aside from the issues, what struck me was how much more of his
fire was reserved for McCain, with little criticism offered for
Barack Obama. When asked what his problems were with McCain, he
quipped, “How long do we have here?”
Barr declared, “Anybody who stands as the foundation of their
domestic agenda, McCain-Feingold, today cannot lay claim, at least
with a straight face, to calling themselves, or being labeled as a
conservative.”
McCain was not truly committed to reducing the size of
government, Barr said. He dismissed McCain’s opposition to earmarks
as a “red herring,” because even if you eliminated all of them it
would be a drop in the bucket in comparison to the overall
budget.
Barr also said McCain was, “not committed to deep and
significant tax reform. As a matter of fact, there are some
legitimate questions that have been raised over whether McCain is
simply a Johnny-come-lately to the modest tax cuts which have been
the only area in which the current administration has done what it
said it would do.”
REPORTERS PRESSED BARR on why he was running, and if he were
concerned with costing Republicans the general election. He said
that if McCain doesn’t win, it’s because his message isn’t
resonating with the American people, and nobody else should be
blamed.
He joked, dryly, “At the end of the day, if I do not succeed on
November 4, then it’s not my intent to blame Senator McCain or
Senator Obama.”
He also delivered another jab at McCain: “Those people who would
be inclined, of which I hope there are many, to vote for Bob Barr
as president, would not likely fall into the category of people who
would be enthused by voting for John McCain, if such exits.”
Barr said he was not taking the Libertarian nomination for
granted, but remains “very confident” that he will prevail because
the LP is a “political party” that wants to win and not a “debating
society.” Many would disagree.
In response to a question by AmSpec contributor and
Investors’ Business Daily correspondent Sean Higgins, Barr
said the campaign did have a plan to target very specific states,
although he would not share that plan publicly. If Barr, who was a
board member of the National Rifle Association, could garner a few
percent of conservative anti-McCain votes in swing states, he could
help damage the Republican nominee.
He was evasive on the question of fundraising, saying the
campaign was just starting today. But there have already been
reports of difficulty during the exploratory phase of his
candidacy. He has brought on Russ Verney, who served as Ross
Perot’s adviser in 1992 and campaign manager in 1996.
The questions regarding Barr’s candidacy are whether the more
temperate tone he is striking will hinder his ability to tap into
the enthusiasm generated by Ron Paul’s presidential run. Also,
whether, if he is able to catch fire and win some media attention,
his more moderate approach to foreign policy could make him a
bigger threat to McCain.
This is all very debatable, but this is something worth keeping
your eyes on.
Philip Klein is a reporter for The American
Spectator.
