Barrwatch: Season of the Witch

I've never seen Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr nailed down on his late-1990s crusade against Wicca on military bases. Not until blogger Ed Brayton found Barr at Netroots Nation and asked him. The answer's of a piece with Barr's other answers on his congressional mis-steps.

He's repudiated and apologized for many of his previous positions and I asked him if he would repudiate his absurd anti-Wiccan crusade of 1999, when he wanted all Wiccans banned from the military. He said yes, with a bit of hemming and hawing.

He said that he had reports from several military leaders that Wiccans doing rituals on military bases were causing problems and that's why he did what he did, but that since that time it's become clear that there are no problems with allowing Wiccans to serve and to practice their religion on military bases like any other religion.

I'll be interviewing Barr today for a long reason feature. If there's anything you haven't heard him asked before, and you want to know it, put it in the comments. (I'm going to stay away from horse race and "spoiler" stuff.)

Comments

[Nigel Watt]

I'd like to hear from him on monetary policy. That was a big attractor to Ron Paul, and Barr's been pretty mum about it.

[thoreau]

Given how many stances Barr has had to repudiate, it seems like there are a few possibilities with this guy:

1) He never really believed any of that stuff, and just did it to play to the base. OTOH, while lots of Republicans clearly do need to play that game (and yes, Democrats, have to play a game of pandering to their own base as well), he sure went pretty zealous on it. That suggests he either really did believe it or else he was a sufficiently low character that he didn't mind turning it up to 11 (as opposed to just paying some lip service).

2) He's as opportunistic now as he was then.

(Options 1 and 2 are compatible, although 2 seems a bit less likely because there's far less to be gained now, so why be an opportunist?)

3) Once he got away from the machine and the power and all that he looked around and was like "What the hell was I doing? Damn, that shit messes you up!"

[SugarFree]

At least a politician was interested in my all my chickens have double yolks and the cow's milk has gone sour. You won't be laughing at his anti-witch stance when your twins are born with a caul.

[robc]

thoreau,

I think a bit of #1 and #3. He knew he trading off some to "play the game" but probably didnt realize how much until after he left. And how little he got in return for doing it.

And the Wicca thing sounds like a little bit of

4) Listened to "experts" with an agenda.

[P Brooks]

If there's anything you haven't heard him asked before, and you want to know it, put it in the comments.

"So, Bob- why would any reasonable person believe anything other than that you are a despicable, lying, scumbag who will say anything to anyone if you believe it will advance your personal thirst for power over other people?"

Something along those lines would be nice.

[Legate Damar]

I would just like to hear what caused his change of heart. When and why did he realize that he spent most of his time in power doing things that he shouldn't have been doing?

[SugarFree]

[obligatory]

92 days 'til Halloween, Halloween
92 days 'til Halloween, Silver Shamrock

[/obligatory]

(Unless, of course, you were going for a Donovan ref...)

[Warty]

LD - I read some interview where he said it was a House Republicans meeting before the 1998 election, where Newt asked the members in danger of losing the election for a list of pork that they needed to get re-elected. Not that that accounts for any of bad stuff he did after 1998, but apparently it made him start to think that he shouldn't be on Team R any more.

[Fluffy]

Some of the other Barr items - the drug war stuff, and the gay marriage stuff - are much more clear-cut in terms of their contradiction to libertarian principles than this is.

As was noted in a couple of other "religious freedom" threads we've had lately, the Armed Forces are a special case because you're talking about the practice of religion on or using US government facilities.

A lot of people claimed Ron Paul was not a "real libertarian" because he favored legislation affirming the right of citizens to engage in religious expression while in public schools. But now people are claiming that Bob Barr is not a "real libertarian" because he opposed the right of US service members to engage in Wiccan religious expression while on US armed forces bases.

So which is it? Should "real libertarians" favor the right of all citizens to engage in whatever religious speech they want while on public property, or shouldn't they? Help me out here.

[Mojotron]

I would just like to hear what caused his change of heart. When and why did he realize that he spent most of his time in power doing things that he shouldn't have been doing?

seconding this. I don't mean it as an attack on him, I'm genuinely curious as to what prompted his change(s) and what's to keep him from "backsliding" if elected.

[ChicagoTom]

Regarding his support for the Patriot Act:

"In public appearances you have indicated that the main reason you supported PATRIOT was due to assurances by the Administration that they would not misuse it and only go after terrorists with this new power. What made you think it was proper to just take this or any administration's word on how they wont misuse enormous amounts of power they ask for? Is the only reason you now oppose PATRIOT due to your being lied to by the Executive Branch, or have you had a fundamental shift in ideology/beliefs that would lead you to believe that regardless of any assurances or good intentions, no government should have that kind of unchecked power over their citizens?"

Or something to that effect.

[Mojotron]

who cares what a "real libertarian" would think? Discuss the idea on its own merits and stop worrying if it's libertarian/punk/indie enough.

[robc]

Mojotron's post isnt libertarian/punk/indie enough, I suggest it be deleted.

[Untermensch]

My question for him would be the following:

If elected, how do you intend to reduce the scope of government given that (a) you will come from a party with no congressional allies, (b) the Republican will assume no matter what that you stole votes that were rightfully theirs, and (c) congress is hell-bent on spending money it doesn't have and tries to deep six anyone (like Tom Coburn) who occasionally says no. While the veto pen has some power, you won't be able to draw on party leadership to try to reign in anyone determined to override a veto.

Maybe all this has been asked, but I've not seen it.

[Jerry]

Ask him a techie question, somewhat along the line if he sees any usefulness in the current patent system for example.

[`]

I'm going to stay away from horse race and "spoiler" stuff.

Asking him what he thought of the new Batman movie would be somewhat illuminating.

[svf]

Given the prohibitive and unrealistic criteria for third party inclusion in the presidential debates (polling at 10-15% or more in multiple national polls), do you have any other contingency plans? Lawsuits? Civil Disobedience? Hosting your own debate?

[Jack]

Be Radley for a second and press him on no knocks/local police militarizing via the feds. Actually, I'd like to hear his ideas about criminal justice reform. Would he support the measure Obama passed in Illinois requiring interrogations be recorded? Frame it as a theory question if you can, because he's just going to punt with federalism

[Christopher Monnier]

What's Barr's stance on climate change?

1.) Does he acknowledge that climate change is caused at least in-part by humans?

2.) Does he think that something should be done to reduce [the increase of] the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere?

3.) If something should be done, does he prefer a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system?

If he dodges the question or says that he doesn't think climate change is real, I would like to see him confronted with Ron Bailey's position that 'yes it's real, and if we do something it should be a carbon tax.'

[Warren]

David, please ask the following:

How can you reconcile your (newly adopted) federalist approach to to gay marriage with the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment?

[Justin]

1. What would his first year in office look like priority-wise, given the powers of the presidency?
(i.e. whose neck get's the blade first?)

2. Would he work to massively reduce the power the executive branch has accrued in the past 100 years, or seek to exercise it more judiciously?

3. Where the hell is Wayne Allen Root?

[Episiarch]

Hmm, I have no questions for Barr that haven't already been discussed, though I do favor drug war/police militarization questions.

But I have a question for Dave: was the title a Romero reference?

[svf]

Why don't you have any statement about the War On Drugs on your website?

[brandon]

I can relate to his conversion. I'm significantly younger, so I guess that makes it more typical, but in college I was a conservative Republican. Got involved in the CR's, even drove to Ohio to volunteer for Bush in 04, under the spell of the "lesser of two evils." Only in the past two or three years have I outgrown such stupidly naive beliefs.

Ask him his thoughts on electoral reform. The way we conduct elections in this country insulates the statists from serious electoral challenge. As an LP candidate I imagine he has gained first-hand experience.

[Jeff P]

I was going to mention the controversy of Goths in the Military, then it dawned on me that military training is indistiguishable from cosplay.

[jtuf]

Ask Barr if he would sign HR5842 and HR5843 so that states could set their own marijuana policies.

[J]

Do you fully stand by your role in the impeachment of President Clinton?

[Warren]

svf | July 31, 2008, 11:37am | #
Why don't you have any statement about the War On Drugs on your website?

Ditto.

DO NOT ask about Root. That name should never even be mentioned again.

[MassHole]

How about ask him why he didn't tell the Army to figure out it's own problems with the handful of Wiccan's in the Military and worry about something worth his time and paycheck.

[Joey]

I would ask Bob if he has considered making an appeal to the public (including people who aren't going to vote for him) to say they are supporting him in telephone polls just as a way to crack into the debates.

On a related note, he has railed against the debate format and the arbitrary 15% polling requirement. Should there be a minimum bar that you have to pass in order to share the stage?

--Joey

[P Brooks]

And ask him if the TSA serves any useful purpose; that might be revealng.

[jtuf]

Warren,

I still think gay marriage is a 1st ammendment question under the peaceful assembly clause. This is much better than saying "my genes made me do it".

[kevrob]

Epi:

David could have been making a Donovan reference. The song came first.

Kevin

[joe]

3) Once he got away from the machine and the power and all that he looked around and was like "What the hell was I doing? Damn, that shit messes you up!"

Republicaine's a hell of a drug.

I'm currently reading a book titled "With God on Our Side," about the evangelical takeover of the Air Force Academy and the imposed culture of Christianity. I wonder if that has anything to do with those "military leaders" deciding that Wiccan rituals were causing so many problems.

[R. Totale]

Ask him to read Gene Healy's "The Cult of the Presidency" and have him do a book report on it.

[Episiarch]

Republicaine's a hell of a drug.

And Demopium's not?

[Happy Jack]

Ask him if he eats arugula. Voters need to know if he's a paleo or a cosmo.

[joe]

And Demopium's not?

This is a thread about Bob Barr, who was a Republican. What does the Democratic Party have to do with anythinig?

Do you think it would be possible for you to avoid turning maybe one thread today into your standard yammering about partisanship?

[SugarFree]

I have it on good authority that Bob Barr eats entire heads of iceberg lettuce like giant apples, without dressing of any kind.

[Steve]

Ask him if democracy is force and taxation is theft.

[Jay]

My last memory of Barr in congress was him threatening to cut off federal funding for the DC metro because they were in no hurry to change the name of the "National Airport" station to "Ronald Reagan National Airport."

What motivated him to make such a big deal about that?

[Episiarch]

Do you think it would be possible for you to avoid turning maybe one thread today into your standard yammering about partisanship?

Nope. I'm not the one who implied that love of power was partisan by naming the "drug" after one party.

Do you think it would be possible for you to avoid turning maybe one thread today into your standard yammering about my yammering about partisanship?

[Colin]

Please, Dave, ask him if he really believes Kazakhs eat cheese made from breast milk.

[Colin]

Barr was once a Democrat, too -- so the "Demopium" crack was as fair as your stupid partisan crack.

You give hypocrites a bad name.

[Orange Line Special]

I have a strange feeling that Weigel's employers don't want him to press Barr on things like this. And, even if Weigel derailed from the Orange Line and pressed Barr on that, he wouldn't be able to tell all the ways that Barr was lying to him.

So, Weigel shouldn't bother asking that, wait until I get a chance to do it on video destined for Youtube.

[Tingy Wah]

Ask him if he'll toke with you.

[Episiarch]

LoneWacko, if the Illuminati control everything, who controls them? Something to think about, isn't it?

[Colin]

Yes, who illuminates the illuminati?

[P Brooks]

if the Illuminati control everything, who controls them?

Lizards.

Reptilian overlords from another planet.

Don't you know anything?

[P Brooks]

And speaking of our reptilian overlords- be sure to wear your "sunglasses" when you interview Barr, Dave.

[Episiarch]

Reptilian overlords from another planet.

But who controls them, smart guy?

[Reptilian Overlords, Inc.]

The buck stops here.

Now, get back to work, earthling.

[Episiarch]

Now, get back to work, earthling.

I'm from Caprica, dude.

[Josh]

Ask him about the accusations Hustler magazine made that he forced his wife to have an abortion.

[Adamness]

Why were you in favor of Fannie and Freddie bailouts?

[marley]

aks him how he is going to get into the debates as that is the only chance of putting a libertarian message in front of a wider audience (however flawed Barr is personally).

Things will not change over nite. Ron Paul did a good job of getting attention and interest. Its up to Barr (on the national level) to keep this going and make people understand the shit that the two other choices are.

[jimmy]

"So, Bob- why would any reasonable person believe anything other than that you are a despicable, lying, scumbag who will say anything to anyone if you believe it will advance your personal thirst for power over other people?"

i love it. whatever one might think of barr, how does fooling people into giving him the LP nomination help him get "power over other people?" what could his motivation possibly be to lie about being libertarian? someone who was a well-known member of congress for years suddenly switches to an insignifncant minor party...to get more power??? going from the US congress to a third-rate debating society of wackos is a step up???

"heh heh heh...i can't wait to receive that 0.5% of the vote this november, THEN i'll be powerful enough to unleash my sinister plans!"

[thoreau]

I have a hunch that Lonewackolinks are really just RickRolls. But I'm not about to FindOut.

[Gabe Harris]

Mr Barr,
Given your crappy track record of being a huge drug warrior, fan of big government republicanism and CIA operative....how do we know that your miraculous intellectual conversion at the age of 55(?) isn't really just a repeat of the old CIA trick of trying to gain control of a opposition group so that you/the CIA/ the establishment can then proceed either water it down or make it look outright ridiculous by associating it with some repulsive group.

When do you think the CIA and guys like Ollie North gave up the drug smuggling business for good?

Do you think the fact that the CIA depended on drug smuggling for funding some of it's illegal projects and thus depended on artificially high drug prices ever helped drive the pro-drug war movement of Bush 1, Bush 2 and Bob Barr?

Can you see how libertarians in their 20's and 30's who have read all the libertarian arguments against the drug war for the last 15-20 years might not understand how a 50-60 year old could be so plain dumb to honestly believe prohibition was a good idea? and that when someone who in fact was that dumb suddenly changes their mind it makes us feel pretty wary of actually voting for such a idiot even if he claims he has NOW seen the light? people like us are saying boy I understood how black markets are created at the age of 16 why would I vote for someone soo much dumber than myself? or so much more dishonest?

[svf]

how a 50-60 year old could be so plain dumb to honestly believe prohibition was a good idea?

well, most 50-60 year olds in America believe (drug) prohibition was and still is a good idea, actually.

[Gabe Harris]

Mr Barr,
What is the MOST corrupt thing you ever saw a active republican do during your time in Congress? what was the most corrupt thing you ever saw a active democrat do during your time in congress?

give us something good and name names.

[Gabe Harris]

svf | July 31, 2008, 1:32pm | #

well, most 50-60 year olds in America believe (drug) prohibition was and still is a good idea, actually.

...I'm gonna go out on a limb and say most of us would not vote for most 50-60 year olds in America for POTUS. Arguing that you are as smart as the average american is not a good argument to convince me to vote for you.

[svf]

give us something good and name names.

... and while you're at it, name the GOP congressmen and/or senators that have asked you not to run as a libertarian...

[svf]

...I'm gonna go out on a limb and say most of us would not vote for most 50-60 year olds in America for POTUS.

No, but I'm saying we shouldn't be surprised if politicians support drug prohibition since that's the position the 50-60 year old people most likely to vote for them share.

The more 50-60-70+ year old current and/or former congressmen with the balls to come out and say "The Drug War Has Failed" the better. Why this is somehow a suspicious and nefarious-seeming thing to some people I don't understand...

[Gabe Harris]

Mr Barr,
Whose views on foreign polciy would you allign with more...Zbig or Kissinger?

What do you think is the best way to counter the heglian dialectic strategy? the false left right paradigm?

[svf]

Bob,

How excited are you exactly that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are starring in that new Atlas Shrugged movie?

[Gabe Harris]

We know the War on Terror is used to create such fear that republicans will happily give up liberties/taxes and soldiers lives to the state...we know that the frenzied climate change hysteria is used too convince secular liberals to sacrifice their standard of living and the future of their children to the state....we know that the drug war was succesfully used to destroy many civil liberties of the individual....How do you think we can get normally nice and peaceful democrats and republicans to see the way they are being manipulated? can you point out some of the common interest/groups who push all these anti-individual movements?

[Episiarch]

Bob, do you like gladiator movies? Ever been to a Turkish bath?

[Johnny Nowhere]

Bob,

what is your most significant accomplishment as a legislator?

if elected, what will you do to advance the cause of the mustachioed?

[Gabe]

I am quite happy to see old people convert, Bob Barr included. It is still a little hard to understand switch so completely on such a big issue at such a old age. Maybe I will understand better when I switch my belief system at the age of 65 and become a big advocate of the draft. until then it is difficult...I know I am not a big demographic and he doesn't care much about my vote, but Reason skews younger than 45 and most readers have probably been anti-drug war for a long time so it might be a common credibility problem for the Reason demographic...I'd have been happy in 1950 if Hitler's ghost came back and said he actually realized jews could be great people...that doesn't mean I vote for hitler's ghost for president.

The godwin's law nazis(and yes that is what they have become)may not like the comparison, but jailing marijuana users to be assraped is evil...bob barr is guilty of being a accomplice in ass rape... I thank him and forgive him due to his appologies, but it is still hard to be a big advocate for a reformed ass rape accomplice.

[Gabe]

Mr Barr,
What would you have done if you had been president instead of Jimmy Carter and Kissinger and David Rockefeller came and requested that you let the Shah and a few of his best secret police come hang out in America for a while?

[Orange Line Special]

Here, let me help Weigel out:

"Do you support a) MassDeportations, b) reducing the numbers of IllegalAliens over time ThroughAttrition, c) some FormOfLegalization for current IllegalAliens, or d) something else?"

If c), how do you intend to push through your FBBFBPTHNCOEH after having given those groups that currently OpposeEnforcement - including the far-left, racial power groups, BusinessGroups, and the MexicanGovernment - even more power than they already have? Any FormOfLegalization - no matter what you call it - would give even more power to those groups that currently OpposeEnforcement, and they'd use the new power you'd give them to even more strongly OpposeEnforcement. Are you sure you've thought this through?

[T]

whatever one might think of barr, how does fooling people into giving him the LP nomination help him get "power over other people?" what could his motivation possibly be to lie about being libertarian? someone who was a well-known member of congress for years suddenly switches to an insignifncant minor party...to get more power??? going from the US congress to a third-rate debating society of wackos is a step up???

Yeah, that's how I've always looked at it. His conversion has to be sincere on some level because it makes no sense otherwise. Barring, of course, the paranoid conspiracy theories. Because having a reasonably sane-appearing guy running for the LP is going to make them look bad. And honestly, if Barr goes nowhere, the radical faction of the LP will crush any hope at reform next go-round.

[Brandybuck]

There are many reasons why Barr cannot win this election, but I think the number two reason is the huge faction within his own party who are actively working to prevent it.

[Jon Sattler]

What role should the government play in regulating sports? Should the govern punish athletes for using legal or controlled performance-enhancement drugs? Should combat sports like boxing and mixed martial arts require heavier regulation than team sports like hockey and American football?

[brandon]

He won't win, so from my perspective it doesn't really matter if he's sincerely converted to the libertarian line on every single issue. What matters is that he effectively communicates and sells the libertarian point of view generally (much less government, much more liberty), and that the major parties are both for too much government and too little liberty. I've seen him speak a number of times, and he does this well. Probably better than any of the LP's purer candidates could.

[Mike M.]

1) Monetary policy and the ending age of dollar hegemony.

2) Top three beaurocracies to cut.

3) Freddie/Fannie proposed bailout - and more generally, the role of the Federal Reserve (and whether there is one).

4) Views on globalization and how American can retain a competitative advantage. Should we suck it up and say manufacturing jobs are gone, or try and retain/attract more?

5) A definition of 'patriotism.'

6) Favorite founding father and why.

7) What role does a president's faith play while in office?

8) What philosophical and economic grounding does the War on Drugs have and should it be stopped?

9) How can we reestablish ourselves as educating our kids satisfactorily on the world stage?

[joe]

I feel sorry for people who don't get the Rick James/Dave Chappelle sketch joke.

[blimeytakkun]

"Why don't you have any statement about the War On Drugs on your website?"

YES!!! Ask this! And aso try to get some insight on what he specifically would do in the direction of pot decrim.

[Andy]

I assume it's too late, but I would be interested to know what his campaign plans to do to capture some of the excitement that was generated around the Ron Paul campaign. Barr's not going to win, but he can spread ideas of liberty using the same grassroots approach the Paul campaign had.

Honestly, I just want to see some of these young Obama supporters embarrassed by their lack of knowledge about anything.

[ChrisH]

1) More detail on how he became libertarian. I think I've heard him say, "and then I realized *this* and..." -- but I'm curious as to what event caused him to have that realization.

2) Young Democrat in college -- what was that all about? (I think this could be an advantage for him, but he never seems to bring it up.)

3) The celebration of the good works of Jesse Helms, you didn't know that would piss libt's off, or you didn't care?

4) In the rare event that he isn't elected in 2008, what's the way forward for the LP, and what will Bob Barr be doing to advance the LP and the wider libertarian movement.

5) In "The Meaning of 'Is'", he mentions having coffee with two shots of espresso. At the time of the convention, I believe you [Weigel] described him drinking coffee with five shots, but only once a day. The NY Times articles mentions him having five shots in a drink, which he only does a few times a day.

Ask if his changed view on the Drug War is in part empathy for addicts.

Go Dave!

[hlm]

Barr takes the difficult social issues, those that would offend conservatives, and says that they should be state matters. That sounds like evasion to me. I want to know what he thinks the states ought to do about the war on drugs, gay marriage, abortion, etc.

Any conservative can use their federalism as a mask to cover their social positions and avoid answering questions as to where they really stand. No one has nailed him on those issues and asked precisely what the states ought to do about this issues. Previous attempts to do so have either resulted in him repeating his same position without answering it or him complaining about hypothetical questions and refusing to answer.

[Guy Teague]

the libertarian party completely lost me as a member the day they stamped his card. he is a piss-ignorant georgia peckerwood racist who cannot even control his own handgun.

/guy

[Bill Woolsey]

Bob Barr has explained many times what caused him to become a Libertarian.

It was the Cheny-Woo theory of presidential royalism in response to 9-11.

He says that this over-reaching caused him to reassess what he thought the federal government should do. He claims that since the American people were pretty much free, having the federal government do this or that wasn't such a problem. But, after 911, and the great restrictions on freedom imposed by the Bush Administration, a new assessment of what the Federal govenment should do was necessary. (This was certainly not my experience.)

My interpretation is that the Bush administration's willingness to shred the Constitution in the name of the war on terror led Barr to commit to a more narrow reading of Constitutional powers than before.

Imagine that you are arguing against some unconstitutional usurpation of power, and the absurd response you receive is... very similar to arguments you made in the past. Further, if the Constitution is going to restrict government at all, you have to take it seriously. If something you strongly oppose something that you think is unconstitutional, a more general appreciation of the Constitution is natural. We need to follow the Constitution--no exceptions. If you don't like it, amend it.

It is normal. Many, and maybe most, Libertarians were conservative Republicans who felt betrayed by one big government policy by a Republican administration. Usually, it is a tax hike or some gun control regulation. Suddenly, the scales fall away from their eyes, and they are no longer defending what they had thought was the small-government, individual liberty, "team's" psoitions on various issues. They are now on the Libertarian team.

What is unusual about Barr is that it was 4th amendment rights that caused the change. I believe that with him there is a bit of penance for voting for the Patriot Act. A feeling of personal betrayal regarding oral guarantees from the administration that the Patriot act would be used narrowly. Deep disappointment that the "sunset" provisions in the bill for which he traded his vote did little good. That is, even after a few years, his old "team" had next to no interest in revisiting those provisions--you know, it is just a piece of paper, Bob.

Finally, when someone switches teams, and is now working with others opposed to the Cheney-Woo approach, there comes a new exposure to, and willingness to take seriously, the many utilitarian arguments against big goverment.

Like many libertarian economists, the reason I favor libertarian policies is because they have good consequences. I certainly hope that someone willing to look at our arguments and evidence with an even slightly open mind will support those policies as well.

Conversion? It is what I expect, because libertarian arguments are correct.

[Bill Woolsey]

During the early sixties, there was a division in the conservative movement between "traditionalists" and "libertarians." The traditionalists believed that promoting traditional moral values is an appropriate role for government. This could include many things, including a complete prohibition of various vices. The libertarians believed that this is not a proper role for government.

I think that most "traditionalist" conservatives believed that these traditional values were right. And considered their own deviations to be sins--personal failings. The "libertarians" included many who shared a personal commitment to traditional values, but opposed government involvement, along with those who found nothing wrong with various "deviations," including sometimes, their own.

The rise of the "Christian Right," including first the moral majority and then, the Christian coalition, involved a mass movement of "conservatives" who were especially worried about moral corruption in society. From their perspective, reversing this decline wasn't just a legitimate role for government, it was the key role of government. While it is only explicit at the extreme, there is a view that government is morally obligated to suppress vice. Failure to do so can result in Divine retribution against the entire nation! (insert appropriate quotes from Falwell, Robertson, and even Chuck Baldwin.)

From the point of view of the "traditionalist" conservative, there is nothing wrong with pandering to the policy views of the Religious Right. Promoting (and enforcing) traditional moral values is a legitmate function of government. But there may be other considertations. And certainly, other priorities.

I believe that Barr was a "traditionalist" conservative. I believe that other priorities (opposing the Cheny-Woo theory of presidential royalism and, perhaps, looming financial disaster,) created some new considerations. He is now on the libertarian side.

[svf]

too late now but I hope you asked him if he would pardon all non-violent drug offenders on his first day in office (as Harry Browne and several other LP presidential candidates have promised to do...)

[Vantigan]

I would like to know what he thinks of the law effectively outlawing Americans from betting in online poker. What, if any, changes would he support regarding this law?

[Joseph]

His reply on the wicca-in-the-military thing was very specific. At the time, he made many broad statements basically calling wicca and related religious beliefs nonsense; such as "The fact of the matter is--and witches won't like this--our country was founded on a basic belief in God."

You might want to ask him if he still harbors his bigoted positions on wicca and pagan religion in general, regardless of his official stance on wiccan practices on military bases. Of course, you might want to phrase it a bit less confrontationally...