You are right. We need to stop using statements such as the benefit of everyone. We need to concentrate on getting the government to at least follow the Constitution. Thats all I want. I want them to follow the Constitution.

There are certain things a government does that help to maximize individual liberty, to the benefit of everyone. The example was a system of criminal justice. If you can show how a private system or systems of criminal justice can work better, please do so.

A government that exists to secure the rights of the individual benefits everyone, how else would you put it? Why should we be afraid of that term? One of the reasons for the establishment of the constitution was to promote the general welfare, which is done by ensuring free markets and protecting individual rights.

Just because it gets twisted by people who misinterpret the role of government to provide all things instead of securing the right of individuals to determine their own priorities and pursue their own visions is no reason to avoid talking about social benefits. I think it is better to address the issue directly rather than ban words from the libertarian discussion.

Back to the line of the thread, what has Barr done or said that is so inconsistent with maximizing liberty that he should be removed as the presidential nominee?

I have been thinking what would be some tangible goals we should set to see if Barr was a good pick for us.  One million votes comes to mind.  I think the media exposure has been there, for sure. 

We might not know until 2012 if other members of the LP are with us or not because of him winning the nomination.  Where is Clint Eastwood when we need him?  Him just running would catapult a 3rd choice.  I guy can wish, can't he?