Have you ever thought that what the LP needs is a figurehead? Wasn't there a philosopher, Thoreau, who you could personify as the spirit of American liberty, ready to duke it out with Uncle Sam?
That might be an attention-grabber. Friendly neighbour Thoreau taking on Uncle Sam, the Family bully!
Most people prefer to think in pictures, so you need good visuals.

Rather than watering down the libertarian message with famous, but very weak libertarians, LP ought to concentrate on teaching people what libertarianism is and, more importantly, what liberty is.

Barr is not a libertarian, and it was a huge mistake to nominate him. He's more like McCain than McCain is like Bush.

This nomination would've only been eclipsed in the degree of stupidity by the nomination of Howard Stern a few years ago, had he succeeded in getting the nod.

LP needs a well-grounded libertarian who fully accepts the importance of non-initiation of force, who will place education above vote getting (we already know the LP Presidential candidate will not be elected).

I might add, I think Lysander Spooner would be better than Thorough, Nick, even though I like both of them.

I mean Thoreau, of course. Dopey me, letting my fingers do the walking.

As an Australian, I know very little about Thoreau, except that I don't like his French-sounding name. But I have heard American shows make passing reference to him, though they never quote that Lysander Spooner person. At the moment, Australia seems free of philosophers (we have tough quarantine laws), but we have lots of celebrities. We have more shallowness than any other country!

Nick, I think you are saying that Australian shallowness runs deep!

You should read some Spooner, even if you do have to smuggle him through Customs. It would be worth the effort.

Col. Hogan, help us find such a paragon and I'm sure we'd nominate him. Did you take a look at the rest of the field in this year's crop of would-be nominees? Barr was by far the pick of the litter.

I lived on a lake for ten years in the NorthEast and could conceivably qualify as such a candidate. The problem is that a common sensibility within the ranks is that celebrity qualifies as an electoral defying feat, rather than the hardscrabble case for liberty.

Of course this is why the Sonny Landham in Kentucky is turning into such a disaster. Let's face it, the Thoreau type is not the stuff of television. Can you imagine ? Thoreau live at a eleven !

Stay tuned however. I'm considering a uniquely styled country boy feint against old Chucky Schumer . . .

Laird,

Given that the LP candidate, whomever he might be, will not be elected President, there's no need to select a candidate on that basis.

Thus, my pick for this term was, and remains Mary Ruwart. She fully understands and agrees with the non-initiation of force idea and would be a terrific speaker and teacher of this and other libertarian ideas. I've attended one of her speeches and am quite satisfied that she can sway voters. They might not vote for her, but they'll hear a consistent view of a way individuals can live together without the very destructive specter of legalized force hanging over our heads.

You're right, Mary Ruwart would have been an acceptable albeit inferior choice (although she seemed to shoot herself in the foot with that child porn issue), but every other candidate would have been totally unacceptable even by (low) Libertarian standards. Barr was the best choice not because his libertarian credentials are perfect (no one's are) but because he is high profile. On the day of his selection it made the national news, on all the big networks. That has never happened before. He has already been interviewed on some major TV shows, and might possibly manage to get himself included in the debates. Also, he's an experienced, accomplished politician who knows how to run a winning campaign. There is no one else in the entire party who can say that.

If the Libertarian Party is ever to become a credible party it will have to cast its net widely enough to attract a reasonably broad spectrum of voters. The "purists" are the reason we've never accomplished anything. So what if Barr has bought into the moronic AGW issue? We can overcome that, and he's not going to be elected anyway. What we can't overcome is being ignored by the mainstream media and unknown to the vast majority of the electorate. Barr can help us overcome that.