Gary Johnson Judge Napolitano on Gary Johnson at Freedom Fest 2012

[cheapseats]

Who is angry? I'm not.

You SHOULD be.

Howard Beale, NETWORK: "All I know is that first you've got to get mad."

But that wasn't even my point. My point is that, dangerous as it is, Anger serves purposes. Perfectionism serves NONE.

...And to assume I am all talk and no action is an idiotic assumption to make an dit makes you sound like a self-righteous a-hole...

Ah, but it is YOU making an assumption about me making an assumption that I have, in point of fact, NOT made.

That I am not doing the exact thing you are doesn't mean I am not working to push the cause forward...

That's some irony right there, that's what THAT is.

Suffice it to say, I couldn't agree with you more.

 

[PierzStyx]

You SHOULD be.

Howard Beale, NETWORK: "All I know is that first you've got to get mad."

But that wasn't even my point. My point is that, dangerous as it is, Anger serves purposes. Perfectionism serves NONE.





Ah, but it is YOU making an assumption about me making an assumption that I have, in point of fact, NOT made.





That's some irony right there, that's what THAT is.

Suffice it to say, I couldn't agree with you more.

Are you sure you aren't a leftist? Your ability to take things out of context and to self-deceive would make it seem like you're a liberal.

 

[cheapseats]

Are you sure you aren't a leftist?

Quite sure.

...ability to take things out of context and to self-deceive...

Again, SUPER ironic coming from a Ron Paul Die Hard.

 

[cajuncocoa]

There is still a chance to expose people to something outside the conventional (R) (D) box and that is to get Gary Johnson into the debates. Even if you can't (or won't) support him, don't you think that it would be a good thing to Let Gary Debate?

Write in Ron Paul if you want. But let's get Gary into the debates.

Yes, definitely.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

We all have principles. Often the same principles. The difference is your faction dislikes anyone who isn't 100% Ron Paul. You have to align with someone on every single issue. I can align with someone if they are a constitutionalist, something GJ is.

I'm so sick and tired of hearing the "how is that different than voting for Romney" argument. It's different because Romney and Obama have or have proposed violating the Constitution in numerous ways. Gary has, and has promised to uphold his OATH. And that's where the divide is between where I stand and where you stand.

Me: Will support a constitutionalist, so long as they uphold their oath, respect the law of the land, even if I don't 100% agree with the approach to an issue.
You and ideologues: Have to align with someone on 100% every single issue. Can't distinguish between a constitutionalist and someone that violates their oath.

It's entirely a perception thing and it's the common libertarian problem. If it's not all at once...or a complete 180 degree reversal at one time it's never good enough for you. That's where most of the problem lies. You'll never reverse a policy or remove an institution all at once...but many of you here still seem to think that's possible.

I often wonder, if Ron had taken the "whittle the stone" approach early in his congressional career instead of 2 years before he retired his position, if we would ALREADY have had an audit of the fed. Ron has already seen more success with his recent, gradual approach in 2 years than he has in many more years prior to that where it was "all or nothing."

And the most important thing about that is it never came at the cost of compromising principle.

Why would I ever be anything else? Ideals are what matter, why should I sacrifice mine to vote for someone whom I think is the wrong candidate when there is a better choice? And if I did how would it be any better than voting for Romney? I mean if I'm going to vote for the guy better than Obama who has "a better chance to get elected" I might as well vote for the guy who has the most chance right?

 

[TheTexan]

You and ideologues: Have to align with someone on 100% every single issue.

Nope. Just one. Currency freedom.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

Yet the most conservative governor this nation has ever had, by record, who carries the ringing endorsement of Judge Nap and Ron before he entered the presidential race, is continuously talked down upon by you and others.

It is entirely uncalled for and counterproductive. God himself, the founding fathers, and Murray Rothbard could endorse GJ and it still wouldn't be enough for you.

Nope. Just one. Currency freedom.

 

[TheTexan]

God himself, the founding fathers, and Murray Rothbard could endorse GJ and it still wouldn't be enough for you.

You're right. I don't base my support on who endorsed who.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

No, you don't base it on record.

The biggest allies of liberty support him, those that have been fighting along side us, yet he still doesn't pass your absurd "purity" test. It's like a child crying over getting the wrong flavor of ice cream. It's still delicious ice cream, yet you still throw fits.

You're right. I don't base my support on who endorsed who.

 

[TheTexan]

Considering that Gary Johnson doesn't even support sound money, he's not even shit-flavored ice cream. He's shit-flavored shit.

 

[Wren]

When will the GJ shills stop wasting their time? They're not going to build up GJ off the back of RP and his supporters. Probably a handful or more, but most of us already know that Johnson sucks balls.

 

[Nathan Hale]

When will the GJ shills stop wasting their time? They're not going to build up GJ off the back of RP and his supporters. Probably a handful or more, but most of us already know that Johnson sucks balls.

I like horsies.

Opinions are great, aren't they? Too bad yours has no greater standing in this movement than a GJ supporter's.

 

[CaptUSA]

Guys, don't think that if you don't support Gary Johnson for President, that you have to vilify him. He's on our side - even if you don't like the way he shows it.

Personally, I'm voting for Ron Paul. But I will hold no ill will for those that choose to vote for Gary.

I bet the PTB love to see threads like this where individuals in a individual liberty movement have voluntarily placed themselves into factions and have no problem throwing stones at the other side.

I see all of us working at this from differing flanks. While it can be highly advantageous to coalesce our forces for certain strategic battles, it makes absolutely no sense to fight amongst ourselves. "Join my side... No Join MY side... Your side's stupid... Your side is unreasonable..." Meanwhile, our real enemies are stealing our liberties.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

THIS!

Wren is exactly what's wrong with what this movement has become. I've been at this for decades and we were pumping GJ for governor before president and he did the job. Wren, where were you? What were you doing? Just like the neocons hijacked the republican party, the "new freedom movement" has hijacked the old. This didn't begin with Ron Paul. He became the figurehead for his extreme consistency in congress, but the liberty movement was never solely Ron Paul.

I would infer you are the shill for undermining the original liberty movement that sought to support all candidates supporting liberty.

Guys, don't think that if you don't support Gary Johnson for President, that you have to vilify him. He's on our side - even if you don't like the way he shows it.

Personally, I'm voting for Ron Paul. But I will hold no ill will for those that choose to vote for Gary.

I bet the PTB love to see threads like this where individuals in a individual liberty movement have voluntarily placed themselves into factions and have no problem throwing stones at the other side.

I see all of us working at this from differing flanks. While it can be highly advantageous to coalesce our forces for certain strategic battles, it makes absolutely no sense to fight amongst ourselves. "Join my side... No Join MY side... Your side's stupid... Your side is unreasonable..." Meanwhile, our real enemies are stealing our liberties.

 

[rockandrollsouls]

Pure bunk.

GJ has stated he would sign the bills if they came to his desk, but he's trying to get elected. Screaming "gold standard" doesn't get votes. You can spit ideology all you want, but it doesn't get jack done unless you get into office. GJ has also stated he supports abolishing the Fed. Numerous times.

The only difference between Ron and Gary is the approach. You simply continue to stick your fingers in your ears like a child because you don't want to acknowledge another candidate actually supports freedom and liberty. Example: Gary has stated numerous times he would end the Fed, has created a video ad stating the Fed should be ended, yet you continually say" GJ doesn't support ending the Fed," as in your signature. You're downright lying.

Again, I wouldn't care if the candidate was GJ, or Napolitano, or someone else who is a lover of liberty. I find it sickening, disgusting, appalling, and shameful the lengths you will go to splinter this liberty movement.

And I WILL remind you Ron endorsed third parties last election cycle FAR left of himself and GJ. Ron understands it's a matter of upholding the oath, honesty, and dismantling the banking cartel and military industrial complex. If Ron, Napolitano, GJ, and our other liberty candidates can all support each other, and THEY DO, I support any single one of them.

Proof you are a liar.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dZX12pH7CI

Considering that Gary Johnson doesn't even support sound money, he's not even shit-flavored ice cream. He's shit-flavored shit.

 

[Wren]

THIS!

Wren is exactly what's wrong with what this movement has become. I've been at this for decades and we were pumping GJ for governor before president and he did the job. Wren, where were you? What were you doing? Just like the neocons hijacked the republican party, the "new freedom movement" has hijacked the old. This didn't begin with Ron Paul. He became the figurehead for his extreme consistency in congress, but the liberty movement was never solely Ron Paul.

I would infer you are the shill for undermining the original liberty movement that sought to support all candidates supporting liberty.

I didn't come here for any movement; I came here for Ron Paul and the issues he campaigned on. I came here because I am sick of the bullshit. I'm not interested in joining any movement to blindly get behind whoever they spit forward. Rand Paul or Gary Johnson, whoever the 'movement' decides to get behind, I refuse to follow if I think they suck. And to be frank, Gary Johnson sucks. But who cares, I'm just one guy right? Well, look around. I'm not the only one who think GJ sucks.

I'll leave when this forum starts being "liberty forest" again, but right now it's about Ron Paul.

 

[kathy88]

I am NOBP. However I think getting Johnson in the debates would be a good thing. There are a lot of GOP mot satisfied with Romney. If GJ gets in the debates by some miracle they won't be able to completely take it out on us when Romney gets spanked.

 

[Working Poor]

I wish we would all decide what we want to do either write in Ron Paul or vote for Gary Johnson just so we can show our numbers. I know that not all states allow write ins as bad I I want to vote for Ron Paul maybe if we all voted for Gary Johnson at least we would have a good show of our numbers. I think we all know voting for Mittens is the same as voting for Obama.

 

[axiomata]

I get two votes. A vote for Johnson on paper and a vote for Paul in my heart.

 

[ssjevot]

My state doesn't count write-ins so the decision is already made. I have no qualms voting Libertarian the for my 3rd presidential election, it's what I did in the last two.