Gary Johnson Explain to me Gary Johnson

[Travlyr]

Keep in mind that most of the "intrusive government" was school, police, fire. Can we live without those things? I suppose, but it would take a total reorganization of society that most people are fervently against. His job isn't to force lack of government on people. It's to give people more of the government THEY want, while protecting the minority from the majority. It's a tough balance, but I think he was able to cut the size of governement relative to population growth. He cut regulation, he cut manpower. Much of the savings went to education. And even there, he found out that the money he passed on didn't improve education. This was part of his real world learning experience. People wanted more money spent on education, he obliged and showed everyone that this wasn't what education needed.

The difference is that the Federal government has delegated authorities that it has expanded 4 or 5 fold. He is FAR more comfortable chopping those down than he does telling a state that wants more education that they can't have it because HE doesn't think it's a good idea.

This is why you should take some time to understand what Ron Paul has been saying for the last 40 years. Read his books or listen to his debates. It really isn't a matter of opinion; it is a matter of honesty vs. dishonesty. The people in charge are stealing from production every day. The faster we can end that then the faster that society becomes peaceful, prosperous, and free. End The Fed and implement honest money.

"By this means government may secretly and unobserved, confiscate the wealth of the people, and not one man in a million will detect the theft." - Lord John Maynard Keynes, "Economic Consequences of Peace"

The economic consequences of peace is bad news for the powers in charge. That is why we have perpetual wars.

"In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the 'hidden' confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights." - Alan Greenspan, Gold and Economic Freedom

And that is my biggest opposition to Gary Johnson. Gary is not yet working diligently for sound money, fully redeemable.

"The Purse & The Sword" by Dr. Edwin Vieira Jr.

 

[JohnAshman]

My latest theory about GJ goes a little something like this:

GJ represents the beltway or establishment libertarians. These institutions (Reason, CATO, ARI, etc.) seem pretty comfortable with the status quo and never seem to get around to affecting policy or legislation. I mean CATO was cofounded by one of the Koch brothers for crying out loud. Not that I have anything against them, only that there are powerful interests heading these organizations.

Hah, yes, and libertarian hero and Ron Paul best buddy Murray Rothbard!

These organizations cast the impression that they're doing something to change Washington and advance their professed political philosophy, but with no real intent to succeed. This is precisely why I believe these groups never fully embrace Ron Paul and his candidacy, and on occasion put him down. The Libertarian paradigm requires representation to some degree through the Beltway, it is only natural that the obedient and counterfeit groups have thrived. GJ is a fraud and it is high time we treat him like a fraud ought to be treated.

They influence the agenda, they have no power to change it. If Gary is some counterfeit put out by these people, why the heck haven't the Koch Bros dropped $10M or so on him to get him going? No, they're playing the same game Ron Paul is, support the establishment and bend it.

GJ continues to be disingenuous and equivocating on his position with respect to Paul's campaign. One minute he is asserting that Dr. Paul cannot win the nomination while deliberately distorting Dr. Paul's policy positions to draw feigned contrast. The next minute he takes the position of the humble and dutiful fallback candidate. GJ cannot be trusted.

Gary Johnson consistently points out that their platforms are nearly the same. He hasn't disparaged Ron Paul's positions, except to say that he felt putting up a border fence is a waste of taxpayer money. So, you're free to your theory, but it connects dots that are unrelated.

 

[JohnAshman]

You again? We're still waiting for you to provide any evidence of your claim.

We've already told you GJ never authorized a tax increase, and more tax revenue does not equate to a tax increase. We've given you a number of probable and possible reasons for this, including but not limited to an increase in the tax base, economic growth, population growth, and the Laffer curve.

You should probably take a basic course in economics, accounting, or finance.

R&RS, I don't want to anger you, but I would suggest taking the higher road. I don't think there's a reason to be upset. Persuasion is better than name calling. The truth wins if you let it.

 

[W_BRANDON]

R&RS, I don't want to anger you, but I would suggest taking the higher road. I don't think there's a reason to be upset. Persuasion is better than name calling. The truth wins if you let it.

I don't agree with you on Gary Johnson but I respect this piece of advise.

 

[JohnAshman]

This is why you should take some time to understand what Ron Paul has been saying for the last 40 years. Read his books or listen to his debates. It really isn't a matter of opinion; it is a matter of honesty vs. dishonesty. The people in charge are stealing from production every day. The faster we can end that then the faster that society becomes peaceful, prosperous, and free. End The Fed and implement honest money.

I agree! Thomas Jefferson had it right 200 years ago. Gary agrees. his idea is only that if he can't eliminate it, he'll try to tame it. Exact same as Ron.

And that is my biggest opposition to Gary Johnson. Gary is not yet working diligently for sound money, fully redeemable.

Okay, he has different priorities. Ron Paul is all about End the Fed, Gary is more about smaller government, more freedom. You need to build support for ending the Fed, but it's building. I'm less certain about the gold standard. I haven't heard a persuasive argument on it and have heard some seemingly valid reasons why not.

 

[Travlyr]

I agree! Thomas Jefferson had it right 200 years ago. Gary agrees. his idea is only that if he can't eliminate it, he'll try to tame it. Exact same as Ron.

Okay, he has different priorities. Ron Paul is all about End the Fed, Gary is more about smaller government, more freedom. You need to build support for ending the Fed, but it's building. I'm less certain about the gold standard. I haven't heard a persuasive argument on it and have heard some seemingly valid reasons why not.

That is why I linked to Ron Paul debating Federal Reserve governor Charles Partee. Ron Paul makes it very clear in his writings and debates.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

No. This guy has been spreading the same misinformation for weeks without posting any evidence. I'm not trying to persuade him. I'm trying to get him to back up his argument.

He can't. He can't show one shred of evidence to support it. It's obnoxious, it's damaging to this movement.

R&RS, I don't want to anger you, but I would suggest taking the higher road. I don't think there's a reason to be upset. Persuasion is better than name calling. The truth wins if you let it.

 

[JohnAshman]

No. This guy has been spreading the same misinformation for weeks without posting any evidence. I'm not trying to persuade him. I'm trying to get him to back up his argument.

He can't. He can't show one shred of evidence to support it. It's obnoxious, it's damaging to this movement.

Well, let him. I'd just counter with the truth. And post the links. People will figure it out.

I mean, look, sure, tax revenue DID to up, but not because Gary raised taxes. Both are true.

Some people are fixated with tax revenue decreasing. I'd like to see it, hell, it HAS happened during this recession, but tax revenue going down with no changes is BAD for everyone. Tax revenue should be going UP because that means things are going in the right direction.

It's a way of implying something good is something bad. But you can't stop him framing it that way.

People are stressed about Gary because the are enthralled by Ron. Or because they believe Ron would some how be perfect and wave his magic wand and do the impossible.

 

[Travlyr]

No. This guy has been spreading the same misinformation for weeks without posting any evidence. I'm not trying to persuade him. I'm trying to get him to back up his argument.

He can't. He can't show one shred of evidence to support it. It's obnoxious, it's damaging to this movement.

Not one shred of evidence? WTF dude? Gary Johnson built two prisons. Do your own research. Gary will fuckin throw your ass in prison and take away your freedom and call it good government. Gary did that for thousands of people. That is his record... not mine. I am just the messenger... telling the truth. If telling the truth is bad for the movement, then endorse the liars. I do not care.

 

[JohnAshman]

Not one shred of evidence? WTF dude? Gary Johnson built two prisons. Do your own research. Gary will fuckin throw your ass in prison and take away your freedom and call it good government. Gary did that for thousands of people. That is his record... not mine. I am just the messenger... telling the truth. If telling the truth is bad for the movement, then endorse the liars. I do not care.

I'm not sure of your objection. What do we do with murderes and thieves? NM as a HUGE gang problem. It has one of the highest rates of violent and property crime in the US. There wasn't enough prison space, so the justice system decided to just let people out or not even try to put them in jail anymore. The police largely now just ticket speeders. What do we do? Use our libertarian non-interference principle on them? Lord knows that hasn't worked! Is Gary the ONLY governor to build a prison? Is NM the ONLY state that has prisons? Did you think he should just pardon everyone and hope they're so appreciative that no one ever gets out?

Your implication that there were a bunch of young innocent kids in jail in NM state prisons is simply fallacious. About the only way you go to jail in NM is if you a) kill someone, or b) try to kill someone. Anything less than that, like burglary, robbery, assault, rape, etc, the justice system will give you a 6mon-2year sentence and you'll be free to do it all over again. Virtually ever murder in NM is done by someone who couldn't POSSIBLY be out of jail, and yet they were, because of lack of prison space and lack of desire to keep violent criminals off the streets.

The reality is that by far, most people who are doing a marijuana charge are known gang members with a long rap sheet and are a proven threat to lives. NM doesn't have a 3-strikes law, hasn't imprisoned anyone for stealing a slice of pizza, hasn't jailed anyone for life for selling or possessing a joint.

I know a college kid who was a fairly big and successrul marijuana dealer who got busted and never served a day in jail. They plea-bargained him and gave him probation BECAUSE Gary Johnson got alternative sentencing for non-violent drug offenders. If it hadn't been for Gary, he might have done actual time.

Yes, Gary built prisons to deal with the massive gang problem and violent crimes in NM WHILE changing the laws to help make sure non-violent, non-aggressive drug offenders do NOT get put in them. The people doing hard time for simple drug problems are in federal prisons and Gary had no power to pardon them.

GUILTY AS CHARGED.

Now show me Ron Paul stating we should never build prisons to hold violent criminals.

 

[newyearsrevolution08]

these are all great arguements

Luckily I am voting for Ron Paul as are all the ron paul patriots I know.

There is not amount of gary convincing or how about "words" that will sway me from voting for MY candidate.

Everyone else do as you please but IF Gary was the one to lead this rEVOLution we WOULD be on the dailygary or johnson site but where are we?

RON PAUL FORUMS and happily here for many years and MANY YEARS to come.

Dr. Ron Paul is getting my vote and I suggest Gary Johnson endorse and vote for Ron Paul as well especially if he wants to so call "continue the revolution" next election cylce. I do love that he is attempting to snag up the revolution even when we are STILL fighting to get Ron Paul elected.

I think the gary johnson guys who supposedly "used to be" ron paul supporters are too easy to jump ship and something they really need to LEARN from us ron paul supporters.

It isn't about kicking a dead horse, or wasting your vote and all that b.s. you keep attempting to PROVE or that gary is LIKE ron or he would vote LIKE or closest to ron so we should back him if we are for liberty? NO liberty is voting for YOUR CANDIDATE and gary is NOT the rEVOLution candidate in 2012, he also wasn't out candidate in 2008 BUT who knows maybe he can be in 2016 if he stops trying to ride rons coat tails and actually makes a NAME for himself versus sending his 3 supports out in hopes of telling the revolution to NOT vote for ron and support gary instead.

GARY will NOT be getting my vote and I would be SHOCKED to hear any real deal ron paul supporter flipping to support him over ron paul. Hell compromise your vote in 2016 if you feel the need to but why ABANDON ron right near the end of the battle? Just walk away....

my team didn't make it to the super bowl, change shirts, ok now we support um the NEXT team

wow very patriotic.

 

[JohnAshman]

Yes, those crazy fools who boarded the lifeboats on the Titanic. Your team is done. Unless Ron Paul has stated that he will run in 2016.

Any Ron Paul supporter who wastes his vote by sitting at home or by writing in Ron Paul is missing a grand opportunity to further freedom by getting the Libertarian Party more established and more capable of weakening the Republican Party from without so that it is easier to take over.

If Romney wins, it actually seriously harms an open shot in 2016 because we will be fighting yet another incumbent. If "Liberty" people (and I have to now use that in quotes the same way I use them with "liberals", thank you) refuse to vote for Johnson, it will send the message that the "Liberty" movement isn't serious at all and will devolve into nothing but a bunch of purists in a circular firing squad.

You're not patriotic, you're an egoist. (of course, patriotism is statism, so I'm not sure why you'd use that term).

 

[cheapseats]

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/gary-johnson-leaves-gop-declares-for-libertarian-party-nomination/

Gary Johnson Leaves GOP, Declares For Libertarian Party Nomination

DOUG MATACONIS · WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 28, 2011


As expected, today former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson abandoned his quixotic bid for the Republican Party nomination for President and announced his equally quixotic bid for the Libertarian Party’s nomination for President:

(CNN) – Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson announced his intention to seek the Libertarian nomination for president Wednesday.

Calling his choice “both a difficult decision-and an easy one,” in a statement, Johnson decried the Republican presidential nomination process and pledged to bring a “libertarian voice” to the 2012 race.

Johnson blasted the inclusion of “candidates with no national name identification like Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, and John Huntsman” as well as “candidates with no executive experience like Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum” in presidential debates while he was “arbitrarily excluded by elitist media organizations in New York.”

The former two-term governor struggled to gain footing in national polls measuring support for GOP candidates seeking the 2012 presidential nomination and failed to meet criteria necessary to participate in debates. However, he has attended two debates: one in May, and another in September after reaching one percent support in five national polls.

And after “appeals to the Republican National Chairman for basic fairness were ignored,” Johnson said he concluded that “the best answer is the simplest.”

“I’m a Libertarian in belief. I successfully governed as a Libertarian in everything but the name, and I am running for president as a Libertarian.”

As for that other Libertarian already running for president, “While Ron Paul is a good man and a libertarian who I proudly endorsed for president in 2008, there is no guarantee he will be the Republican nominee,” Johnson said.

So far, he claimed “just the speculation that I might run as a Libertarian has garnered more national media attention than I ever received as a Republican candidate.”
“I am excited,” Johnson said. “I am liberated.”

Johnson’s candidacy is by now means assured, of course. There are already several candidates actively seeking the LP nomination, although none of them have the name recognition or the political experience that Johnson has. Additionally, Johnson’s status as a former Republican is likely to draw some criticism from party activists, especially since there seems to have been some degree of blowback within the party from the 2008 candidacy of former Congressman Bob Barr. Nonetheless, for much the same reason that LP delegates went with Barr in 2008, they may well back Johnson in 2012 for the simple reason that his presence on the ticket is likely to generate more media coverage than any other candidate would. Of course, for all the media attention Barr got in 2008, it didn’t really translate into much of an impact on the race, although Barr did get more votes than any Libertarian Party Presidential candidate since 1980.

Johnson’s status as a former New Mexico Governor who is still relatively popular in his home state could, however, have a potential impact on the outcome of the Presidential election:

In the swing state of New Mexico, Johnson as a Libertarian would draw 20 to 23 percent support in a three-way race for president, with Obama at 44 to 45 percent, and Gingrich or Romney coming in second, at 28 percent and 27 percent respectively, according to a recent Public Policy Polling (PPP) New Mexico survey.

It’s not necessarily likely because voters tend to coalesce around the major party candidates as Election Day draws near, but New Mexico’s five electoral votes could stand in the balance.

From his campaign announcement, here’s what Johnson says his agenda is:

“My Agenda for America, a libertarian agenda, is clear. It is not at an agenda you will hear from any other candidate or party.

- I want to end deficit spending and cut federal spending by 43%. – I want to enact the Fair Tax to stimulate real economic growth and job creation.

- I want to end the manipulation of our money by the Federal Reserve. – I support the Second Amendment and oppose gun control.

- I oppose expensive foreign wars in places like Libya and Afghanistan where our national interest is not clear. -I want to cut the over-regulation of our families, our businesses and our lives.

- I support a woman’s right to choose.

- I support marriage equality for gay Americans, as required by the Constitution.

- I support the legalization of marijuana, which will save us billions and do no harm.

- I demand a government free of special interest influence, crony capitalism and corruption.

- I support returning strict adherence to Constitutional principles to our government.

“I am confident this agenda will resonate with the American people because it actually reflects the true beliefs of a clear majority of Americans.

“Sadly, neither the Republicans nor Democrats will offer this agenda to the American people. The Republicans talk about cutting spending and taxes but insist on government regulating our personal lives. The Democrats support more liberal social policies but they will tax and spend and borrow us into bankruptcy. America needs a third way.

As I’ve noted before, Johnson has been virtually alone among the Republican candidates in reaching out to the Occupy movement and speaking out against crony capitalism. These, perhaps, are issues that could resonate well in 2012.



All Original Content Copyright 2003-2012 by OTB. All Rights Reserved

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/gary-johnson-leaves-gop-declares-for-libertarian-party-nomination/

 

[Respect38]

these are all great arguements

Luckily I am voting for Ron Paul as are all the ron paul patriots I know.

You must not know that many "ron paul patriots", do you?

I know of several people who are voting for Gary Johnson if Ron Paul is not on the ballot. (also, names are capitalized, this is something you learn very soon in school)

There is not amount of gary convincing or how about "words" that will sway me from voting for MY candidate.

Robamney thanks you for the half-vote.

Everyone else do as you please but IF Gary was the one to lead this rEVOLution we WOULD be on the dailygary or johnson site but where are we?

I don't understand what if matters for who "leads" the revolution, as long as we still get the end result we want... I'm pretty sure Ron didn't want this to become a revolution of one person, anyway.

RON PAUL FORUMS and happily here for many years and MANY YEARS to come.

Congratulations, but what does this mean, exactly? That you'll continue to support Ron Paul, for the presidency, even when he's not running?

Dr. Ron Paul is getting my vote and I suggest Gary Johnson endorse and vote for Ron Paul as well especially if he wants to so call "continue the revolution" next election cylce. I do love that he is attempting to snag up the revolution even when we are STILL fighting to get Ron Paul elected.

Right now, it's looking like Gary Johnson has the better odds of getting the presidency. Dropping out RIGHT NOW would be a horrific mistake, as it would put all our eggs into one basket (Ron Paul getting the nomination in August) and if he doesn't, then the 2012 is over for us, just like in 2008.

I think the gary johnson guys who supposedly "used to be" ron paul supporters are too easy to jump ship and something they really need to LEARN from us ron paul supporters.

False dilemma, you can support both at the same time.

I, for one, am a Gary Johnson supporter who was, and still is, a Ron Paul supporter.

It isn't about kicking a dead horse, or wasting your vote and all that b.s. you keep attempting to PROVE or that gary is LIKE ron or he would vote LIKE or closest to ron so we should back him if we are for liberty? NO liberty is voting for YOUR CANDIDATE and gary is NOT the rEVOLution candidate in 2012, he also wasn't out candidate in 2008 BUT who knows maybe he can be in 2016 if he stops trying to ride rons coat tails and actually makes a NAME for himself versus sending his 3 supports out in hopes of telling the revolution to NOT vote for ron and support gary instead.

So you're saying that voting for president isn't about trying to elect a president, but it's about making a statement that nobody would care about?

Nor would it make a statement near as large as Gary Johnson getting a significant amount of vote.

GARY will NOT be getting my vote and I would be SHOCKED to hear any real deal ron paul supporter flipping to support him over ron paul. Hell compromise your vote in 2016 if you feel the need to but why ABANDON ron right near the end of the battle? Just walk away....

This is by no means "abandoning" Ron Paul, as you can see that in 2008 he: 1) endorsed someone, and 2) didn't apply for write-in votes.

He doesn't want us to write him in. He's already shown this before, yet a large number of people just didn't get it.

my team didn't make it to the super bowl, change shirts, ok now we support um the NEXT team

This isn't quite an accurate comparison between politics, sports =/= politics. There are numerous differences that make this invalid. Please keep the discussion on politics and the political reasons to write-in Ron Paul instead of voting for Gary Johnson. (or, maybe you can't do that because there aren't any)

wow very patriotic.

Once again, this kind of attitude is why we will not get a liberty-loving candidate elected, and it's sad.

I consider trying as hard as you can to get someone into the White House to be patriotic. This statement has as much power as what you just said did.

 

[misean]

Gary will NOT be getting my vote and I would be SHOCKED to hear any real deal ron paul supporter flipping to support him over ron paul. Hell compromise your vote in 2016 if you feel the need to but why ABANDON ron right near the end of the battle? Just walk away....

You seem rational.

 

[cheapseats]

...why ABANDON ron right near the end of the battle?....

Voting for Gary Johnson IF RON PAUL IS NOT ON THE BALLOT constitutes "abandoning" Ron Paul like having sex with a new partner constitutes Adultery IF YOUR SPOUSE IS DEAD.