Behind Bob Barr’s Gay Flip Flop

bobbarrf.jpg
Bob Barr obviously believes in selective memory.

The Libertarian presidential nominee told voters last week that he opposes the Defense of Marriage Act, a piece of legislation he wrote while the Republican Governor of Georgia. The turnaround garnered him some praise and gave Libertarian voters hope that their candidate would fight for their free-wheeling, states rights values. Too bad Barr doesn’t really buy what he’s selling.

Homo-journo Michelangelo Signorile informs us that Barr appeared on his radio show two days before the Libertarian convention and again vowed to support DOMA. So, what changed? Party leaders pressured Barr to change his stance – or lose the nomination:

On [May 23] Barr came on my radio program to talk about his run for the presidency. The Libertarian Party was convening that weekend in Denver, and he was hopeful that he would get the nomination.

We went back and forth about DOMA, the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution, and how, in my view, his position just didn’t gel with libertarian principles. Nonetheless, he staunchly defended DOMA.

Then, two days later, in his acceptance speech after snagging the Libertarian Party nomination, Barr vowed that he would work to repeal DOMA!

What the hell happened? According to Brian Miller, a Libertarian Party member and a member of Outright Libertarians, an LGBT group, Barr was told he wouldn’t get the nomination unless he changed his position on DOMA. Outright Libertarians led the charge with the leadership to pressure Barr…

Hooray for homo-politico power.

The Libertians party hopes to be a spoiler in this year’s election by taking votes from John McCain. Barr’s this little flip-flop, however, could damage Barr’s standing in the party, which some say remains shaky:

…Some political observers have cast some doubt that Mr. Barr – who once supported the Patriot Act and strict drug laws, and helped lead the impeachment of President Clinton – could energize enough in the party to make a difference.

“I’m not sure he’s the optimal messenger,” said Charlie Cook, the political analyst.

Apparently not.