Thirsty McWormwood documents them in devastating fashion on the
main site today (though I think he exaggerates Barr's shift on
immigration and appears to invent one on abortion, where Barr
remains pro-life*). But I am not as bothered by Barr's flip-flops
as I might be, say, Mitt Romney's. For one, Barr has been evolving
in a more libertarian direction for a longer period of time than he
was expected to be a presidential candidate. More importantly, Barr
isn't going to be elected president. Any major-party candidate
might be. Thus what Barr would really do in office isn't a
concern. The relevant question is whether any significant vote for
Barr is seen as an endorsement of his platform, which is both more
libertarian and more conservative than the one John McCain is
running on, and creates any incentive for major-party candidates to
woo small-government voters.
Conservatives not persuaded by this argument have two options:
McCain and Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin. I'm not sure
what better choices libertarians who distrust Barr really have,
besides not voting.
* Once upon a time, Barr did change his position on abortion. He
ran for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate in Georgia as a
pro-choice candidate, though he did make a play for pro-life votes
against his pro-choice primary opponent Paul Coverdell. Coverdell
won the primary and the general election, the latter in a
runoff.
topics:
John McCain, Abortion, Constitution, Immigration
