Bob Barr Loses In Texas

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The Texas Supreme Court rejected a request Tuesday by Libertarian Party presidential nominee Bob Barr to keep Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama off the Texas ballot.

The court denied the request without explanation.

Barr filed a lawsuit last week claiming the Republican and Democratic presidential nominees should be removed from the Nov. 4 ballot. He says they weren't formally nominated by their parties before the filing deadline.

The Texas Secretary of State's Office has said repeatedly that the Texas ballot — including the names of McCain and Obama — was certified properly.

Pat Dixon, chair of the Libertarian Party of Texas, said the decision raises the question of whether parties are bound by the Texas Election Code and whether there is a "grace period" for meeting deadlines.

"We are naturally disappointed that the Supreme Court has refused to enforce the law against Republicans and Democrats in this case, when courts have repeatedly enforced the law against Libertarians, other minor parties, and independents in past cases," Dixon said.

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Texas/Southwest

Well, Republicans and Democrats are officially above the law in Texas.

 

[elvis]

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Texas/Southwest

Well, Republicans and Democrats are officially above the law in Texas.

What state are you in, if you dont mind me asking?

 

[jillian]

Kevin, did you really think Texas would keep the democratic and republican candidates off the ballot?

 

[Modbert]

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Texas/Southwest

Well, Republicans and Democrats are officially above the law in Texas.

Someone call Matlock to get on the case!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VH7VhP0Yr7c]YouTube - Matlock Intro[/ame]


Seriously though, if there is no explanation then I find that messed up. If they have no good reason to say why Bob Barr is wrong, then he's right.

Though hell would of had to frozen over first before they wouldn't allow Barack and John on the ballot Kevin. Even you knew that.

 

[Gunny]

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Texas/Southwest

Well, Republicans and Democrats are officially above the law in Texas.

Not that I would vote for Barr, but if it makes you feel any better, he's in the right on this one. But as Jillian says ... Did you really expect .....?

It's a shame really, that two political parties are allowed to rule this nation with an iron fist and keep any change out.

 

[Laine]

Color me not suprised. There have been rulings in the past that candidates can't be held responsible for the mistakes of their party. It is up to the Republican and Democrat parties in Texas to file for their candidates so, based off previous rulings Obama and McCain can't be punished.

If anything, this case just underscores the reason we need a single federal standard for ballot access in presidential races. I don't mind states setting their own standard for ballot access for candidates in state wide races but for federal office it should be a single standard.

 

[Modbert]

Kevin, the best chance for any third party viable future is really Ron Paul.

He won't win next time around if he will even run, but he can least make a party and a mark on the system.

I doubt we'll see a viable third party choice in the future as long as the two major parties have a chokehold on the system and keep 3rd party candidates out of things like debates,etc.

UNLESS, something is done and someone like Ron Paul runs.

 

[jillian]

Not that I would vote for Barr, but if it makes you feel any better, he's in the right on this one. But as Jillian says ... Did you really expect .....?

It's a shame really, that two political parties are allowed to rule this nation with an iron fist and keep any change out.

I actually agree with that. Apparently, as always, rules are rules... except when they're not....

Personally, I think it's time to think about a more parliamentary system where there's more proportionate representation.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Color me not suprised. There have been rulings in the past that candidates can't be held responsible for the mistakes of their party. It is up to the Republican and Democrat parties in Texas to file for their candidates so, based off previous rulings Obama and McCain can't be punished.

You can bet if the tables were reversed that Bob Barr wouldn't be on the ballot, which is actually what happened in W. Virginia. I live in Ohio elvis. And for the record, I did not expect Bob Barr to win this case. It's still disappointing to see the level that will be stooped to to keep the Republican/Democrat monopoly going in American politics.

 

[jillian]

Kevin, the best chance for any third party viable future is really Ron Paul.

He won't win next time around if he will even run, but he can least make a party and a mark on the system.

I doubt we'll see a viable third party choice in the future as long as the two major parties have a chokehold on the system and keep 3rd party candidates out of things like debates,etc.

UNLESS, something is done and someone like Ron Paul runs.

Ron Paul is incredibly dangerous, IMO...

As for him running, he has stockpiled enormous amounts of cash... he's going to use it for something, most likely another run.

Any viable third party candidate needs to be more centrist to be credible

 

[Laine]

You can bet if the tables were reversed that Bob Barr wouldn't be on the ballot, which is actually what happened in W. Virginia. I live in Ohio elvis. And for the record, I did not expect Bob Barr to win this case. It's still disappointing to see the level that will be stooped to to keep the Republican/Democrat monopoly going in American politics.

I am not saying I agree with the ruling but rather that precedent was not in the favor of Barr in this case. Nader's lawsuits in the 9th Circuit Court were more credible from the start and that is the reason he won his case.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Kevin, the best chance for any third party viable future is really Ron Paul.

He won't win next time around if he will even run, but he can least make a party and a mark on the system.

I doubt we'll see a viable third party choice in the future as long as the two major parties have a chokehold on the system and keep 3rd party candidates out of things like debates,etc.

UNLESS, something is done and someone like Ron Paul runs.

Ron Paul will not run as a third party candidate, he is committed to trying to work within the Republican Party. He will also probably never run for President again anyways, the man is now 73 years old.

 

[Modbert]

Ron Paul is incredibly dangerous, IMO...

As for him running, he has stockpiled enormous amounts of cash... he's going to use it for something, most likely another run.

Any viable third party candidate needs to be more centrist to be credible

Oh he can be incredibly dangerous, and he has stockpiled enormous amounts of cash.

He was making a fool of most of the republicans with the amount of raising he did.

I agree that any viable third party candidate in the future needs to be more centrist to be credible but at the moment who can step up and be that person?

 

[jschuck12001]

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Texas/Southwest

Well, Republicans and Democrats are officially above the law in Texas.

I always wondered about these people that file bogus lawsuits, this guy must be loaded with cash to just waste it on something like this.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Ron Paul is incredibly dangerous, IMO...

As for him running, he has stockpiled enormous amounts of cash... he's going to use it for something, most likely another run.

Any viable third party candidate needs to be more centrist to be credible

I'm not sure how his being fiscally conservative during his campaign can be conceived as a negative, but the money left over from his Presidential bid has been put to good use in Dr. Paul's new organization the Campaign For Liberty. As for being dangerous, Ron Paul is only dangerous to those against Liberty.

 

[Navy1960]

Seemed to me pretty clear that Barr was right on the money with this. However, it would have gone into that miracle catagory had they actaully sided with Barr on this. It is a shame though and Gunny your right that it just keeps a lock on the two party system we have. I had the chance to read some of Barr's webpage and got to thinking that it seems pretty shitty that a candidate has to go begging on bended knee to be included into a debate, simply because they don't have the right R or D credentials.

 

[Laine]

I always wondered about these people that file bogus lawsuits, this guy must be loaded with cash to just waste it on something like this.

I agree in principle with Barr but in terms of substance there was nothing there.

 

[Modbert]

Ron Paul will not run as a third party candidate, he is committed to trying to work within the Republican Party. He will also probably never run for President again anyways, the man is now 73 years old.

That's what I was wondering too, if he was perhaps too old. I wasn't sure if he was in late 60's or early 70's.

He is committed to trying to work within the Republican Party, but I'm wondering if he's willing to do that the rest of his life. I'm glad for example he didn't support John McCain for the presidency though that's what most of his fellow GOP members wanted.

I'm just stating at the present moment that Ron Paul is the most viable Third party Candidate.

The only one who is maybe more well known is Ralph Nader and we already been through that one.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I always wondered about these people that file bogus lawsuits, this guy must be loaded with cash to just waste it on something like this.

Bogus lawsuit? The Democrats and Republicans hadn't nominated either of their candidates, and McCain's V.P. pick had not yet been made public by the time the deadline to file in Texas came and went. If you want to discuss a bogus lawsuit I'll draw your attention to John McCain's campaign attempting to keep Barr off the ballot in Pennsylvania.

 

[Laine]

Bogus lawsuit? The Democrats and Republicans hadn't nominated either of their candidates, and McCain's V.P. pick had not yet been made public by the time the deadline to file in Texas came and went. If you want to discuss a bogus lawsuit I'll draw your attention to John McCain's campaign attempting to keep Barr off the ballot in Pennsylvania.

Yes, but as already stated previous similar lawsuits in Texas ruled that candidates can't be punished for the mistakes of their party. Whether you agree with it or not, precedence was not on Barr's side.

Of course the 04 ruling against Nader for filing late for the Texas ballot line underscores hypocrisy on this issue and the fact that several of the justices are Republicans up for relection doesn't make them look very good lol.