Hello. Smither. You're. Quite. Good. At. Turning. Me. On.

You met Bob Smither this morning via Shawn Macomber's profile. Over at the Washington Times, Reason contributor Robert Stacy McCain reveals that former Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) has endorsed Smither.

"In light of the less-than-conservative agenda that the Republicans in Congress have pursued, I'm delighted to support a Libertarian candidate, Bob Smither, who I think will most definitely stick to his small-government philosophy," Mr. Barr said yesterday in a telephone interview from his Atlanta law office. "I don't see him going to Washington and voting for bigger government the way so many Republicans have done."

Ron Gunzberger, the editor of Politics1, is hearing that the GOP has already given up on the Texas-22 race as the local Republicans descend into a Illinois 2004-style meltdown.

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.

  • ||

    Given the enormous overlap between libertarians and web nerds, there's really no excuse for Smither's website.

  • ||

    Given the enormous overlap between libertarians and web nerds, there's really no excuse for Smither's website.

  • ||

    Then how do you explain the Reason server, huh?

  • ||

    SR: Call it some nerd's nostalgia for a VIC-20.

  • ||

    Just think, folks: If you were reading inactivist.org you could read stuff by H&R commenters without AND post your own comments!

    The irony is that if this comment gets through then the content is false. If it doesn't get through then it's true and nobody will know.

    So, suppose there was a liar from Crete...

  • ||

    The irony is that if this comment gets through then the content is false. If it doesn't get through then it's true and nobody will know

    Thoreau, uh, so does that mean that your comment is true?

  • ||

    I think its about time that Libertarians started picking off Republican districts (and those southern Dems, too). Given the recent nod to practicality in the LP platform, there's no reason why Libertarians can't poach a few of these seats. Well, there are a few reasons, but let's all pray, clap our hands, cover our hearts, fart, or do whatever it is we do when we want something to happen.

  • ||

    Kudos for the headline.

  • ||

    Yes, the headline is an excellent Simpsons reference. :)

  • Robert||

    Laugh of the day, thanks to a link supplied by someone in the next thread:

    Democratic Party Chairman Boyd Richie also criticized the Pearland gathering.

    "Despite protests from a number of Republicans in Congressional District 22, Republican Party leaders are once again running roughshod over voters fundamental right to select the candidate of their choice," he said in a statement.

    Heh. By having a closed meeting to decide who to endorse as a write-in?! That has one laughable meaning, and another possible and even more laughable meaning: That the voters have obviously already selected the Democrat, so attempting to make the general election a contest runs roughshod over them!

GET REASON MAGAZINE

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

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement