But the Barr campaign expects to run nearly 14 million households with their television ads. They’ve posted their first TV spot on YouTube:

I think it’s obvious that Barr’s campaign has less cash to work with than John McCain’s or Barack Obama’s in the production quality of the video — but, at the same time, it’s a well put together piece that does manage to introduce Barr’s platform clearly.

Post from: EveryJoe

Barr Campaign Steps Up Advertising

Peter Camejo, Ralph Nader’s 2004 running mate, passed away this weekend. He was a leading member of the Green Party, and ran for Governor of California in 2002, 2003 and 2006.

Camejo marched in Selma, Alabama with Martin Luther King, Jr. In 1968, Ronald Reagan (then Governor of California) put Camejo on the list of the 10 most dangerous people in California because Camejo was “present at all anti-war demonstrations.” The New York Times has an obituary.

Post from: EveryJoe

Peter Camejo Passed Away

Instead, Paul is endorsing the four leading independent candidates:

• Cynthia McKinney (Green Party)
• Bob Barr (Libertarian Party)
• Ralph Nader (independent)
• Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party)

Paul said that he is supporting third-party candidates because the two major parties — and the media — have avoided discussing real political issues. The announcement comes after a call that Paul said he had received from the McCain campaign yesterday, asking for his endorsement.

According to Paul, there’s really no difference between McCain and Obama and the American people shouldn’t have to choose the lesser of two evils. “We just don’t need to do that anymore.”

Post from: EveryJoe

Ron Paul’s Endorsement Goes To…

The majority seem to agree that Bob Barr should be included (6 votes), but almost as many (4 votes) think he doesn’t need to be included.

It’s an especially interesting question now that the news has come out that neither the Democratic nor Republican parties managed dotted every i and crossed every t necessary to have their candidates on the ballot in Texas. It looks like the Democratic and Republican candidates will still be on the ballot, but the Libertarian Party is not too happy to be held to higher standards than the two major parties. Can’t really blame them, either.

Post from: EveryJoe

Should Bob Barr be included in the debates?

Do you think he should be included, or should he be excluded?

Vote in the poll we have in our side bar!

Post from: EveryJoe

New Poll: Bob Barr’s Participation

Bob Barr’s name will be on the ballot in all fifty states, come November. To say that Barr is a viable third party candidate is putting the situation mildly.

Ralph Nader was accused of ’spoiling’ John Kerry’s run for president in 2004. Nader was only on the ballot in 34 states.

I won’t argue that Barr has come near to either Barack Obama or John McCain’s numbers. But I think that his candidacy is already having a significant affect on this presidential campaign. The margin between Obama and McCain remains narrow enough that both candidates have to seriously consider the chance that Barr might have a Nader effect.

Conservatives who feel that McCain is too moderate like Barr — his voting record during his tenure as the representative from Georgia’s 7th congressional district makes that clear. He’s undergone something of a transformation to become the Libertarian Presidential candidate, but many of his actual stances remain the same. The real change is that Barr has come to the conclusion that issues like same-sex marriages should be a decision made at the state level, rather than the federal.

But because Barr believes that marriage is not a federal issue, quite a few Democrats feel comfortable with him as a candidate. There are more than a few Democrats who haven’t committed to Obama, from reasons as varied as his defeat of Clinton and his relative youth. I have a feeling that Barr could pick up a few of those votes as well.

The way that Barr is running his campaign is also worth a look. Obama has gotten a lot of praise for his use of social media, but Barr has committed himself to making connections through sites beyond the usual suspects (Facebook, MySpace, etc.). Despite having less ‘real world’ name recognition, Barr has hundreds of online friends even on Digg.

This race is close enough that I’m willing to bet that Obama and McCain’s staffs are keeping tabs on Barr, and I think the rest of us should do the same.

Thanks to Brian Layman for a head’s up on recent Barr developments.

Post from: EveryJoe

The Bob Barr Option

McKinney has been on the mainstream radar at least a little bit as a member of the House of Representatives. But Clemente’s background is a little different. She’s known as a Hip-Hop activist and journalist. She’s active in efforts to incorporate the Hip-Hop generation’s needs into a political agenda.

Clemente is definitely a different sort of choice.

More information about Rosa Clemente is available through her website.

Post from: EveryJoe

The Green Party’s VP

Image details: Green Party Candidate Cynthia McKinney Holds News Conference served by picapp.com

I have to admit that I’ve gotten pretty used to seeing Ralph Nader’s name on the ballot, right next to the Green Party. But, according to various sources, Cynthia McKinney seems to have tied up this year’s Green Party nomination. She’s managed to tie up more than half of the Green Party delegates who will pick the nominee at the party’s convention in July, essentially guaranteeing her the nomination.

McKinney has served several terms in the House of Representatives, representing Georgia’s fourth congressional district. She’s gotten pretty used to breaking down barriers — McKinney was the first African-American woman to Georgians have elected to the House of Representative. She also has a long history of activism. At the same time, McKinney is a controversial figure. And after some time spent on her site, I can only tell you that McKinney is concerned with environmentalism and minority rights. I’m pretty sure she’s against the Iraq war — she introduced articles of impeachment against George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice. But when it comes to healthcare, small business, immigration and a score of other issues, McKinney’s stance isn’t exactly clear.

Nader’s still running, by the way — he’s just running as an independent. He’s turning into the 21st centuries version of William Jennings Bryan or Eugene Debs — guys who just keep running for President, but never actually getting anywhere.

Post from: EveryJoe

Cynthia McKinney: a New Green Nominee

Allow me to interpret: nobody quite knows who will be the Libertarian nominee yet. In my opinion, no matter your political party, we’re looking at a far more entertaining convention this weekend than either the Republicans or Democrats will stage in the next couple of months.

Highlights from the Convention so far:

•  Newspapers, such as The Washington Times, are focusing on the fact that one of the first events of the convention was a reception hosted by the Marijuana Policy Project. Implications seem to include that all Libertarian candidates must smoke pot.
• A small group of Libertarian Party members have accused Bob Barr (a former Republican) of attempting to hijack the party towards more conservative values.
• Rumors are circulating about more names being tossed in the hat, including Tucker Carlson, the former host of Crossfire.
• The numerous comments on Ron Paul’s absence (he has run as a Libertarian candidate in the past).
• The rising support of a number of conservatives who don’t wish to throw in with John McCain.

The Libertarian Party is the third largest political party in the U.S., with over 600 elected officials to their credit. As of the beginning of May, the Libertarian Party will be on the presidential ballot in 28 states. Two lawsuits are pending against state officials (Oklahoma and Pennsylvania), meaning that the Libertarian candidate could get on the ballots in both those states — as well as others where there is still a chance of meeting ballot requirements. South Dakota residents, however, will definitely not be seeing Libertarians on their ballots.

Post from: EveryJoe

The Libertarian National Convention Is On A Roll

The Alaskan Independence Party is basically a libertarian party with Alaska-specific concerns. Among the party’s primary goals are:

1. A statewide referendum on statehood status, during which the party will support some form of independence for Alaska. This may not necessarily be complete secession from the US, but will definitely involve far greater independence for Alaska than current interpretations of the US Constitution allow.
2. A literal interpretation of the US and Alaska Constitutions. Interestingly, this may conflict with the party’s position on the 2nd Amendment. There are two types of Constitutional Literalists – Historical and Contemporary. Historical Literalists consider only late eighteenth-century meaning of the words in the Constitution – what the words meant when they were written. Contemporary Literalists consider only the meaning of the words as they are used today. The Alaskan Independence Party “supports the right of the individual to keep and bear arms,” but of course the 2nd Amendment does not say anything about individuals. Instead, it discusses “militias.” The eighteenth-century meaning of the word “militia” was men between the ages of 17 and 45 who are physically fit for military duty. Today’s meaning of the word militia most directly refers to the National Guard. Neither of these literal meanings of “militia” lends itself to an individual right to bear arms.
3. A return of all federally-owned lands in Alaska to Alaskan control.
4. The support of logging, mining, and other activities that use Alaska’s environment to support the state’s economy.
5. The abolition of all property taxes.
6. “Jobs for Alaskans…first! …Alaskans should have first crack at jobs here. We should not have to compete with people who do not live or love Alaska like we do.” There is at least one problem here. In the US Supreme Court case of Hicklin v. Orbeck (1978), the Court ruled that an Alaska law giving preference to Alaskans for jobs in the state’s oil and gas industry violated Article 4’s Privileges and Immunities Clause, which states that “the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states.”

The party hit a high point in 1990-1994, when Walter Hickel, a party member, served as the state’s governor. Hickel opposed outright independence for Alaska, but did support some of the party’s other goals. He left the Alaskan Independence Party and rejoined the Republicans in 1994.

The party has not yet endorsed a candidate for president this year, but check back again after their convention this weekend. They may have made a choice!

Post from: EveryJoe

Third Party Thursday Presents – The Alaskan Independence Party