Bob Barr Looks Back

An exit interview with the 2008 Libertarian candidate for president

WASHINGTON—"Life was a bitch," says Bob Barr.

We are sitting in the coffee nook at the Mayflower Hotel, the aged Washington, D.C. institution where, some 76 years ago, Franklin Delano Roosevelt wrote his first inaugural address. We are not yet talking about the campaign for president that Barr finished in fourth place with 512,000-odd votes. Barr is talking about his habit of downing a high-single-digit number of espressos every day, and how hard this was before Starbucks came along.

"Most countries I'd lived in had cultures of much heavier coffee," Barr explains. "In South America you've got café con leche. In the Middle East you need a knife and fork to drink the coffee. It was hard to get strong coffee here—I was delighted when Starbucks made it big."

Barr is in Washington to speak with fellow alumni of Georgetown Law School at a meeting of the Federalist Society, and to build up the client list for Liberty Strategies, his consulting firm. "I absented myself from producing income for about eight months," Barr says. "I'm a working stiff." Hence the coffee, and hence a packed schedule that's meant to introduce Barr to the people who can get him back in the black.

Over the course of a six-month campaign, Barr spent more time than he might have liked dealing with intra-Libertarian squabbling, lower-than-expected fundraising numbers, and what his running mate Wayne Allyn Root called "the ghost of Ron Paul"—persistent media attention on the indecisive Republican candidate who, contrary to some expectations, did not endorse the Libertarian ticket. Over coffee, Barr hashed out how he got the nomination, what went right and wrong, and what he's doing now.

reason: What did you get out of your stint in the Libertarian National Committee?

Bob Barr: From my standpoint, it gave me an opportunity I've not had before to learn the personalities in the Libertarian Party, and to learn the structure of the party. It gave me the opportunity to assure at least some Libertarians that I wasn't a Trojan horse. I wasn't a Republican trying to use the Libertarian Party to further the Republican agenda, or some such nonsense. I think I accomplished that working with the LNC.

reason: There are still LP members who aren't satisfied—less than there were in May, but various voices on the web who make this argument.

Barr: In any political movement you're never going to be able to satisfy everybody. Reagan didn't. I really don't think that anybody with a straight face could make that argument now. I really don't. Which does not mean that everybody in the Libertarian Party loves Bob Barr. I doubt that that's the case. I do think that over the course of the campaign, the people that we worked with, the issues that we presented, I think gave lie to any lingering doubts that I was not a Libertarian.

reason: In December of last year, you proposed, and the LNC passed, a resolution asking Ron Paul to drop his GOP bid and run as the Libertarian candidate. Was that more for attention, or was it a real attempt to get him to run?

Barr: I meant it exactly how it was worded. I saw at that point, and I don't think anyone saw otherwise, that Ron was not going to get the Republican nomination. He had, in fact, built up a significant amount of public attention, a persona as a libertarian with a small l, and my thought was, "Let's make a serious effort here, an honest effort to get him formally back into party and take advantage of what he's done." At the time, had he taken advantage of it, it would have been a significant boost for him and the Libertarian Party.

reason: You had joined the LNC saying you would not run for president. When did you privately decide to make the race?

Barr: I introduced Ron Paul at CPAC. His speech came a few hours after Mitt Romney left the Republican race, which made it much clearer that McCain was going to win the nomination. For whatever reason that's when I started being approached very consistently by a lot of Libertarians about throwing my hat in the ring.

reason: Why did it take two months for you start an exploratory committee and another month to announce? I've heard two explanations. One was the financial consideration of losing your clients, which you've already talked about. The other explanation I heard was that you could not risk running and losing the nomination.

Barr: I was never assured to win the nomination. Some people might have thought that. I didn't. I knew it would be a battle right down to the wire, which it was. I didn't get into it because I was sure I would win. I ran because I thought it was important to do it. Most of the time between February and May, I was working through the personal side of the run—talking to my wife, my son Derek.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • miche||

    I think a lot of them realized that she was not the great savoir for the conservative movement that she...



    Confusing french lessons and catechism Weigel?

    I wonder if Bob Barr would have left his congressional seat to run as veep on the LP ticket for Ron Paul.

  • ||

    "reason: What mistakes were made this year that the LP has to avoid making again?

    Barr: We have to not look backwards. If we are serious about being a real political party we have to set political goals, educate people, have a consistent message, organize at all levels, and look for opportunities. You don't wait for opportunities to be handed to you. Where's the Libertarian Party in these debates about the incoming administration? It needs to be there. But what I do know?"


    (bold added)

    I'm guessing that "But what I do know?" is a misprint, with one of two likely possibilities.

    1) "But what I do [not] know?"

    This seems unlikely considering the question mark, which leads to what I think is the most likely possibility--transposition.

    2) "But what [do I] know?"

    ...which is the perfect end to the interview.

  • GILMORE||

    Articles about ron paul or bob "looks like a cheap bar mitzvah magaician" barr are so fucking over. Over! Who cares? is it not possible with all the shit going on in the world there's something more relevant in politics other than gossip about or the ruminations of a few political honable-mentioners?

  • ||

    That BobBarr is a fine fella I here.

  • Eric Dondero||

    Well, that was fair and balanced, unlike Doherty's piece last week.

    512,000 votes is not that bad. Not great. But it is 140,000 more votes than last time. Libertarians of all stripes should be encouraged by that number.

    Bottom line: Bob Barr ran the 2nd most successful Libertarian Presidential Campaign of all time. He and Wayne Root (and their staffs and family), should be heartily congratulated for that.

    Thank you Bob. Thanks Wayne.

  • Pac||

    Oh yeah I'm so encouraged

    I knew i should have just written Ron PAul's name in that would have been a better way to waste my vote.

  • ||

    Barr lost because he didn't worship at the Altar of Paul! (at least that's what a few people have told me)

  • ||

    Most of this interview could be summed up in a different blog post: So, Bob, Why Did You Suck?

  • ||

    Fucking douche bag asshat son of a bitch. If I never hear the name Bob Barr again, it will be too soon.

  • Xeones||

    DONDEROOOO!!!
    *shakes fist*

  • The Angry Optimist||

    So productive, Warren. And insightful! The man gives an even-handed, fair interview where he admits mistakes...and still...

    "OHNOES BOB BARR taksesss our precious party!"

    Get off the cross.

  • Ravac||

    So, does Weigel interview Bobarr every week?

    Note: I haven't read any of these interview pieces because I really don't care about Bobarr. But it seems like this headline pops up every coupla days.

  • ||

    Dave is contractually obligated to interview Bob Barr 16 times.

  • creech||

    "We have to not look backwards."
    No, those who don't learn from history are condemned to repeat it. Just spin wheels and try to plow forward? No, the LP has to examine everything that has worked (?) and not worked for 35 years, and decide if its strategies and tactics are moving toward its goal or not.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    There are two ways of "looking backwards":

    1. Creech's way, which involves the objective evaluation of goals and the methods to reach those goals and

    2. The LP way, which involves purges, hairshirts, circular firing squads, mindreading and character assassination.

  • ||

    Quick, someone get me a Dramamine, all that spin made me nauseous!

    OK, better now.

    If Dondero likes it then it was a bunch of crap.

    The non-answers bear that out. He admits (without saying it in typical politician fashion) that A) He relied too much on the Paul lists, B) Despite Dondero's ravings to the contrary, Palin was not a factor on Barr, C) Root's fundraising was all hype, D) he wants to make the LP GOP-lite, E) he exalts Cory, proving he doesn't understand the LP, F) Wiggle totally avoids directly addressing Snubgate (which caused A. to fail).

    And yes, Barr, you are a Trojan Horse whether you protest too much to the contrary or not. Some of us saw it in 2006 and gave you the benefit of the doubt. No more.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    raise your tiny fists of rage, Seebeck. go take back your precioussss....

  • ||

    Well said, Seebeck.

    For those of you who think this is about taking something back, or sour grapes, or whatever else, wise up. This is about libertarianism. Some people are libertarians, and some aren't. Bob Barr isn't. There was an opportunity for the Liberty movement to really catch fire this election cycle, so comparing the Barr campaign to campaigns of the past do not hold water. There has never been so much libertarian buzz leading into the general election as there was this past year, and, yes, we can thank Paul for that. Barr dropped the ball.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    Bob Barr isn't.

    Please elucidate the issues that makes one "100% libertarian".

    Then, for kicks, grade Barr against it.

    Finally, tell me what grade constitutes passing.

    Or, you can engage in mindreading.

  • ||

    Whining about him not being taken as "100% libertarian" by the group he's trying to champion misses the point. Every group has cutoffs, and libertarians are no exception. George Bush is no libertarian, nor are John McCain, Sarah Palin, or Eric DONDEROOOOOOOOOOO. Some people think Barr falls outside of what they consider libertarian. Such a person can't lead libertarians?

    Unfair? Well, it's politics.

  • ||

    One question mark too many, above: Such a person can't lead libertarians.

  • Thane Eichenauer||

    I'm with The Angry Optimist.

    I have yet to see a complaint lodged against Bob Barr that wasn't based on a belief that Mr. Barr wasn't libertarian in his heart where it counts.

    I think most complaints about Barr and his campaign are from libertarians who are projecting their own lack of accomplishment onto a convenient scapegoat.

    Nothing kept any non-LP Presidential nominee from running for office but how many did? Ruwart? Jingozian? Kubby?

    At least Phillies ran for President and I'll bet he connected with more people than the average "Barr isn't a Libertarian" claimant.

    Thane Eichenauer
    2008 Libertarian Party candidate for Arizona's 1st congressional district

  • قبلة الوداع||

    thank u

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement