Gary Johnson Gary Johnson - Is he a lesser of 3 evils or not

[freedomordeath]

Never been a fan (my gut told me NO lol)... but to be honest never worried about poeple voting for him. Every now and then I would write some comment when annoyed that some pro Gary dude would tell all the Ron Paulers they were wasting their vote, but other then this I had no problem poeple voting for him.

Today I read some interesting comments that I thought I would post here and maybe we can sort the facts froms the lies so that a true Ron Pauler does not make the mistake voting for the lesser of 3 evils. If the bad stuff is irrelevent then sure vote for Gary Johnson.

My aim here is not to prevent you voting for Gary Johnson my aim is to apeal to your BRAIN, get back to first principles and anaylize why you voting for Gary, make it an informed decision, and not walk into another prison for your mind (a matrix within a matrix)

Here is the link to the source of the comments found below the article http://www.dailypaul.com/258961/am-i-crazy

The comment on the fair tax raised an eyebrow for me

respectfully disagree
Submitted by C_T_CZ on Mon, 10/15/2012 - 16:26. Permalink

Gary Johnson has made it abundantly clear that he is extremely different than the (R) and (D) candidates on a wide variety of issues, including foreign policy, the economy, and social issues. Perhaps you should acquaint yourself with Gary Johnson's stand on issues, found on his website:

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues

In fact there is about 92.4% alignment between Gary Johnson's policies and Ron Paul's policies, making Gary Johnson the best second choice for anyone who wanted to vote for Ron Paul.
—

The Liberty Movement can still win in November, by voting for Gary Johnson!! http://http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues
I'm a Ron Paul Republican, a GOP precinct delegate, and I approved this message.

Login or register to post comments

Vote up!
+1
Vote down!
That 92.4% stat is cute, but meaningless...
Submitted by Pauling Is My Hobby on Mon, 10/15/2012 - 16:35. Permalink

once you consider that the things on which RP and GJ differ are fundamental tenets of the liberty movement: a FULL end to our insane foreign policy, not a half-assed one; an END to the IRS and the legalized theft known as the income tax, not just a shifting of the burden; the right to LIFE, period, not just when a scientist or bureaucrat says you can live, etc.

So keep spitting out your inane percentages to obscure the issues. I'll stick to my gut and write in Ron Paul, the ONLY dependable pro-liberty voice we have.
—

I don't play, I commission the league.

Login or register to post comments

Vote up!
-1
Vote down!
Gary Johnson
Submitted by WestCoastPatriot on Mon, 10/15/2012 - 18:04. Permalink

I understand your reservations about Gary Johnson, and I respect your decision to write in Ron Paul, but I think you are going a little overboard here. First, Gary Johnson has nothing to do with the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). Here is their roster at the J's: http://www.cfr.org/about/membership/roster.html?letter=J His name is not there. When you throw out untrue statements, it diminishes your ideas to everyone. True, Gary Johnson is not Ron Paul. True, Ron Paul is not staunch Libertarian, but considered a conservative Libertarian. The Facts: You can only write in Ron Paul as his name will not be on the ballot in any state. With the blatant disregard of rules and federal law, the RNC was able to steal the nomination from Paul. They will do the same thing with write ins, find a way to give those votes to Romney as they are going to be desperate for Romney votes (do not think they cannot do it). Virgil Goode is a good choice, but alas, he will only be on the ballot in 26 states, the rest will be write in and again, the RNC is desperate for Romney votes. Gary Johnson is actually on the ballot in 48 states, and there is still a good chance that he will be on the other two. He is a Liberty candidate that is the opposite of Mitt and Barack, so that makes him a better choice than the two Goldman Sachs boys. He has said, "Be Libertarian with me for ONE election, and if after four years, you want to go back to the present system, vote them back." If enough people vote for the Libertarian Party in all the states, we will then have a viable vehicle for the Liberty Movement going forward as we will then have funding available. This movement has always been about more than just one person, and we may NEVER see another as good as Ron Paul, but we must continue to fight and win the battles for Freedom at every turn. That is my take on this, anyone else?

Login or register to post comments

Vote up!
+3
Vote down!
1. While Gary himself isn't a
Submitted by Pauling Is My Hobby on Mon, 10/15/2012 - 18:46. Permalink

1. While Gary himself isn't a CFR member, his advisor Doug Turner is.

2. Nothing's stopping the vote-counters from flipping Gary Johnson votes to Willard... in fact, it's probably easier for them to flip those instead of the write-ins. Even if they throw all the write-in votes in the trash, making the corrupt shills see Ron Paul's name millions of times on election day until it's seared into their retinas is a FAR stronger message than voting for an irrelevant neocon just because he has an L next to his name.

3. Virgil Goode is just as bad as Gary Johnson, but instead of advocating for forcing abortionist and warmonger views on us, he's pushing an overtly-religious agenda instead.

4. There are many talking points Gary has in common with Willard and Barack... do some research and find out. His record shows that he isn't what he says he is.

"Be Libertarian for one election"... maybe Gary should take his own advice. He doesn't even know what the Non-Aggression Principle is, a fundamental tenet of libertarianism.


And how do you get what Ron Paul himself said we need?
Submitted by C_T_CZ on Mon, 10/15/2012 - 16:28. Permalink

A vote for Gary Johnson takes us one step closer to fulfilling what Ron Paul himself said we need.
—

The Liberty Movement can still win in November, by voting for Gary Johnson!! http://http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues
I'm a Ron Paul Republican, a GOP precinct delegate, and I approved this message.

Login or register to post comments

Vote up!
+5
Vote down!
A FairTax Expands the Federal Government Further into the States
Submitted by Richard Taylor APP on Mon, 10/15/2012 - 18:34. Permalink

Unenumerated Taxation is Unenumerated Taxation.

The NEW FEDERAL BUREAUCRACY under the Fairtax, will not only regulate AND monitor Business taxes in your state, it will define what is and is not a business.

There was a very good reason that the ORIGINAL Constitution required that federal taxes (Only for two things - National Defense and the National Dept - from tariffs in Consequence of the "Welfare Clause" - Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788).

The Income Tax, the FairTax and Flat Tax are all UNENUMERATED FLAT PERCENTAGE TAXES that INCREASE MONEY TO GOVERNMENT WITHOUT CONSENT OR OVERSIGHT. Then they decide where THEY want to spend it!

The Fair Tax is even more dangerous in that it allows the Federal and State Governments to merge... NOT GOOD. And Dictate What is and What is not a Business... WORSE! it invites them into your home and computer....

The Original Constitutional Tax, Enumerated What the Tax Was For "BEFORE" it was CONSENSUALLY collected - READ IT.

Ron Paul Wants to return to that because it limits government.

If the Federal government stayed within the Constitution it would have little to do (and far less to spend),

* Can only collect taxes under the Welfare clause for Debt and Defense;

* Could only procecute 4 crimes (se the Convention Constitution and Kentucky Resolutions #2 - AND NO OTHER CRIMES WHATSOEVER - Thomas Jefferson;

* And Could not govern police outside the 10 miles square of Washington DC. Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788.

All on our 4 Suggested Reading Documents http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc

Gary Johnson, by promoting the FairTax, what is actually a BUY SELL AND TRADE TAX, is far worse that Obama or Romney who at least keep the federal taxes separate from the states;

Instead of simply nullifying unconstitutional laws, he wants to "submit a balanced budget to congress"... big deal.... and they will say NO because their bought off with Unions, Corporations and Special Interest Groups Dependent upon a wasteful Government.

I am sure Gary will feel very good about himself making such a Great and Glorious Sacrifice, in that he wrote a letter to Congress in hopes that they might give some consideration and mercy upon his wishes before they answer.

He is totally OPPOSITE of Ron Paul; in that he has shown no will to do what is really necessary to reduce the Federal Government;

And that is to SHUT IT DOWN and CLOSE IT DOWN within the states and SLAP their hands away from the purse by getting rid of the Income tax and Replace it with NOTHING!

American Patriot Party.CC
http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc
—

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Login or register to post comments

Vote up!
Vote down!
psnow's picture
Thanks..
Submitted by psnow on Mon, 10/15/2012 - 19:08. Permalink

Thanks for the clarification & the link Richard. Good luck, I think your on to something.

 

[misean]

Never been a fan (my gut told me NO lol)... \

Almost stopped reading after that. I'm not sure gut feel is the best way to make decisions.

Gary Johnson isn't the lesser of any evils. He's great and I'm thankful someone like him is running. He is the most credible Libertarian Party candidate.... EVER

I think a consumption tax makes a lot of sense. It gets taxation incentives properly aligned. People like Ron Paul's biggest donor Peter Thiel agree.

And lol at the CFR reference. Milton Friedman was affiliated with CFR. I'm not so sure Milton was part of the Illuminati.

 

[acptulsa]

He is the most credible Libertarian Party candidate.... EVER

I tend to disagree. I really, really liked that LP candidate I voted for back in 1988.

That said, yes, Johnson is the lesser evil by such a huge margin that he doesn't really qualify for the 'evil' title at all. By Washington standards, he's a saint. Good 'nuff.

 

[TheTexan]

Indeed. GJ is about as credible as clown shoes on a golden retriever. If you want a credible LP candidate, look to Harry Browne. GJ has fucked up everything the LP ever claimed to stood for.

Sound money? GJ is clueless.

Non-interventionism? Clueless.

Drug war? Clueless. (Tax & regulate marijuana? Keep the hard drugs illegal? Absurdity.)

Furthermore, this "pragmatism/cost-benefit-analysis" approach to liberty isn't doing him any favors as far as his electability is concerned. All he's doing is making the LP look bad.

With that said, he is a fine protest vote. However, I don't want him anywhere near the debates, it would do more harm than good

 

[misean]

I tend to disagree. I really, really liked that LP candidate I voted for back in 1988.

I like Ron Paul better, but he isn't more credible. Gary Johnson is a two term governor of a state. Ron Paul is a Congressman. He's never won a broad election or even been a leader. I guess maybe he ran a doctor's office. Though Gary Johnson ran a business with 1000 employees that he started.

 

[TheTexan]

I like Ron Paul better, but he isn't more credible. Gary Johnson is a two term governor of a state. Ron Paul is a Congressman. He's never won a broad election or even been a leader. I guess maybe he ran a doctor's office. Though Gary Johnson ran a business with 1000 employees that he started.

Who polled higher in national polls for the Republican nomination for the Office of the President of the United States?

 

[acptulsa]

I like Ron Paul better, but he isn't more credible. Gary Johnson is a two term governor of a state. Ron Paul is a Congressman.

That's the conventional viewpoint. It is not, however, my viewpoint.

Congressmen have dealt with national issues. Congressmen have, in fact dealt with Congress. And Congress isn't exactly like a state legislature. What's more, connections in some state legislature doesn't do a president a bit of good; connections in Congress, however, might.

Besides, we've had governors in the White House before. Men like Carter, Reagan, and Dubya. Maybe I'm just weird, but when I get results like that I tend to be ready to try something else. Anything else, even.

 

[misean]

Who polled higher in national polls for the Republican nomination for the Office of the President of the United States?

That's obviously an idiotic response.

 

[TheTexan]

That's obviously an idiotic response.

No more idiotic than claiming Gary Johnson is somehow credible because he "ran a business."

I guess Romney is ridiculously credible by that standard

 

[misean]

No more idiotic than claiming Gary Johnson is somehow credible because he "ran a business."

I guess Romney is ridiculously credible by that standard

I didn't claim he was credible because he ran a business.

 

[TheTexan]

I didn't claim he was credible because he ran a business.

I like Ron Paul better, but he isn't more credible. Gary Johnson is a two term governor of a state. Ron Paul is a Congressman. He's never won a broad election or even been a leader. I guess maybe he ran a doctor's office. Though Gary Johnson ran a business with 1000 employees that he started.

You certainly implied it.

 

[misean]

You certainly implied it.

I certainly did not imply it. I tried to come up with an argument that someone might use in support of Ron Paul's leadership experience and made the point that it pales compared with someone like Johnson. Ron Paul's resume is pretty thin to be President.

More importantly, I don't get why people can't see how big Johnson could be for libertarian ideas in politics. Being good on policy and ideology is only part of the equation and its probably not even 50% of the equation for being a leader.

 

[TheTexan]

I certainly did not imply it. I tried to come up with an argument that someone might use in support of Ron Paul's leadership experience and made the point that it pales compared with someone like Johnson. Ron Paul's resume is pretty thin to be President.

I think you're just dancing around your own words at this point, but /shrug

More importantly, I don't get why people can't see how big Johnson could be for libertarian ideas in politics. Being good on policy and ideology is only part of the equation and its probably not even 50% of the equation for being a leader.

First of all, he's not good on policy and ideology. Second, being a good "leader" does not make one a better President. I would go so far as to say Obama is a great leader. Despite all his failures, he continues to inspire millions. But he's "leading" us to our own doom.

I don't want a "leader." Fuck your "leader." I want a representative.

 

[farreri]

Enjoy Obama or Romney, Johnson-haters.

 

[Jay C]

I wish I could vote for Gary or Ron but I learned in Bush vs Gore that the lesser of two evils is well worth voting for. Romney would be a far worse outcome than Obama. At least Obama would keep us out of useless wars. I'm voting AGAINST useless wars and that means I will have to vote for Obama. Romney would be a disaster of Bush proportions.

 

[Dick Chaney]

He's an improvement, but certainly not the answer.

 

[TheTexan]

I wish I could vote for Gary or Ron but I learned in Bush vs Gore that the lesser of two evils is well worth voting for. Romney would be a far worse outcome than Obama. At least Obama would keep us out of useless wars. I'm voting AGAINST useless wars and that means I will have to vote for Obama. Romney would be a disaster of Bush proportions.

Even if it were true that Obama is better [it isnt], voting for the lesser of two evils can only be a short term gain at the most... you are ensuring long term destruction by perpetuating the broken system

 

[brooks009]

I still have not seen any good arguments against voting for Gary including anything in this thread.

 

[acptulsa]

At least Obama would keep us out of useless wars.

I hope you don't mind terribly if I ask Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya and Somalia for a second opinion...?

You can say the first two are different, as Dubya stuck our fists in those Tar Babies, and pulling out would allegedly be 'irresponsible' at this point. I could argue that not pulling out is more irresponsible, but we'll set that aside. The other three are new Tar Babies, and Obama is responsible for us getting both feet and our pointed head stuck too.

Romney promises war. Obama promises peace but delivers war. Obama promises big government programs. Romney promises small government, but gives his electorate things like the Big Dig with its deadly falling ceiling tiles. Romney promises corporatism, like support of Monsanto. Obama promises a reduction of corporatism, then appoints Tom Vilsack as Secretary of Agriculture. Obama promises socialized medicine. Romney comes out against socialized medicine, then makes his state the first in the nation with it.

You may consider the noises, outbursts and mumbo jumbo of these two idiots significant. I prefer to look at what they do. And when you look at what they do, as opposed to what they say, they're as identical as Tweedledum and Tweedledee.

 

[69360]

I still have not seen any good arguments against voting for Gary including anything in this thread.

I haven't either. The people complaining about GJ are so nitpicky they will never have a candidate in power.