It's Official: Gary Johnson Is A Left-Wing Candidate

Posted by $ nickursis 7 years, 8 months ago to Politics
80 comments | Share | Flag

An interesting discussion of Gary Johnson and the Libertarian slide into depravity (i.e. the "political" world). Note the AR reference at the end. Maybe time to form some kind of Objectivist party..


All Comments

  • Posted by $ 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    MSC is a unique world unto itself. I heard it paid well, I almostt signed up for a SURTASS ship, until Intel gave me a better offer with no water.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It seemed like the names were mentioned for quite a long time. Isn't it normal for caucus or convention type selections to do their campaigning early and come to some kind of delegate consensus. The Iowa system uses a number of locations perhaps one per county but it looks like in the Demo's case the superdelegate system overwhelmed the caucus results.

    For sure I'd like to see the entry fee to run for office include automatic placement on the ballot no matter how long the list - and in the voters pamphlet - everywhere. That, operating the election and tabulating/reporting results should be the sum total of public expenditures. Just for starters. True the parties operate their own primary candidate selection and neither State nor federal can interfere short of a criminal action such as stuffed boxes but the candidates on the ballot should neither be limited nor given preferential placement but randomnly with out duplicatin the location in the ensuing years.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    You were worse than the Army must be the captive audience. I've worked ships with people retired from the Navy. It killed them my attitude was "So I was in the military what was your excuse." Many had retired as E6's Killed them I out ranked them in the military game too. Then along would come one of my former USMC buddies ....." We would go out on the bridge wing and light up a cigar. Now mind you I don't smoke so that was a sacrifice. They weren't invited. The former Marine commented once "this is the military veterans section.' that was an MSC ship.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yep, the payroll deduction made the shakedown a lot easier. They had Navy Relief (which for some reason when you needed it, you never qualified for), and CFC (Give to everyone). The biggest scam was the 50.00 you were told to donate for every CPO retirement. Because I refused to give in to the CPO "come join us in 20 section watch rotation" when my senior watch station was 3 section (and all the rest were 4), I did not qualify for such an august reward. I also refused to pay for all of them to go get drunk up at the CPO club either. Illustrative of just how "flexible" their "Cpo Brotherhood" was. Never looked back on that mess.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Almost forgot the Vietnam era had some of the senior NCO's running the NCO Club ripoff scandal and it eventually led to the Command Sergeant Major Of The Army. Embarassing yes but it wasn't swept under the rug.

    There is a always a group in the military that upon commissioning and pinning on the gold bar of an Ensing or Second Lieutenant immediately forgets their Cadets oath. 'will not lie, cheat, steal, nor tolerate those who do.' The better Officer, Non-Commissioned schools had one of those as well. The proof was the 100% participation signs in front of each company HQ for donations to various this and that.

    Now i't s mostly done by payroll deduction but the method I'm betting is the same. Strong Arming, Blackmailing and a form of Protection Racket. If you don't then it's all the dirty jobs, no promotions, and a very low efficiency rating. As one Sergeant Major candidly put it to me "Spit Rolls Down Hill. You are at the bottom."

    Having been given a truthful explanation laid down two envelopes. and shoved over the first one. Back then we gave cash until the deduction system started. That was the $2 and change they said was my fair share. He asked what was in the other one?

    That one Sergeant Major was for just being asked politely. It was a $20. I put it in my pocket. He shook my hand and next month I received a promotion. From then on he refused to accept anything over the 'fair share amount.' We were 100% in that unit but collected less than half of the previous amouonts.That's how you roll spit uphill...

    In those days at paygrade E-5 with jump pay of $55 a month added I was making a hair over $300 a month. $20 was a large chunk of change
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Oh, I understand that, been there, done it. Like almost any "training" today (except where results are actually checked). But the only place I have seen a resurgance of ethics is in the last 3-4 years Intel has made it a annual training where they actually make you have to figure out various scenarios and then explain why it is wrong or right, even if it is a multiple guess web training.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Good grief, you must have missed the article about the cheating scandal at the Navy Independent Corpsman school. It was a huge ring of CPO's on down providing answers and cheating for tests to prove their competence. They have since implemented "strict training on ethics". The only thing I found 1976 to 1996 was that they had training on the "government ethics" statement, and vague rumblings on "leadership". Ethics was never a distinct subject except in ethical conduct with contracts.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Well put and for one good reason. They would have no need going back to your first sentence. Our unit lived by the dictum we are the fish that swimi in their sea. The failures came when the rear area types made side deals with the dictators. so much simpler to lie up to our motto and the idea behind our countries birth and have it all with less problems less strain more gain. There were times when i truly felt the first part of any plan was doing in our own rear area - first. Stating with DC. Things have changed a lot we are no longer the bastard step children of JFK. No everyone wants to be special but there only 7000 plus Seals, Rangers, etc. There is a lot of world out there anf sll it takes is one Carter, LBJ, Kerry to upgeschaft. Being elected doesn't make one an Alexander or Temujin nor even a Boy Scout leader. .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by lrshultis 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The trouble is that there is no way to pin down what a libertarian believes. Many contemporary libertarians in the USA came from studying Rand. But In the rest of the world, libertarian deals more with types of liberty and who has them. There is a political spectrum of left to right libertarianism, maybe even here in the USA where libertarians have an non-aggression belief and what ever background philosophical political beliefs.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by lrshultis 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Large libraries may still keep copies. I searched the
    Wisconsin libraries catalog and found nothing.
    There were copies locally until about 2008 when they started to disappear.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    They must have quit having the classes on that then. The first is the prime statement, the second supports the first but the first is always prime IF a military officer of any variety or the Commander-In-Chief are found to be wanting or in violation of their oath etc. they automatically disqualify themselves short version. Military doesn't get much leeway and rarely any choice at all. The whole thing revolves around the Constitutional Oath. the preferred methods is let them vacate the office and as long as the Constitution is there we rely on the civilians to do the right thing Events of the last few years have signaled a huge change. The comment about 'bigget threat this government faces' was an admission that the DOHS was doing wrong and so was the President. That Secretary was replaced for saying so out loud. Obeyme saying he wanted to incease the power of the DHS into equal or better than the military was and admission and recognition of their oath, which is not to him but the Constitution he's violated so much. the military is now and has for sometime been firing shots across his bows - time to leave. They serve as warnings to the next one.

    In my day we discussed and talked it out with good instructors. Mabe 'in the day' they don't have time for 'ethics?'
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I know a lot of retired military, and almost all I talk to do not support the government. I also know a few active duty, and most of them see the same things we do, inside the military. They have enforce quotas, discriminate rules, and idiot bureaucracy. They do have a conflict between their sworn oaths to defend the Constitution, as well as obey the orders lawfully placed above them. The oath is a series of contradictions, as it says you must defend the Constitution as well as obey the orders of those above you. The idea of choosing one over the other is always a source og great angst.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Term, I don't think it would be they would scare the populace, they would just scare the segment that depends on the government as a source of income and increased business through regulation. The regulation and control has probably got 50% of the economy under it's direct thumb. Eliminate that and if it is no longer required, that money all dries up, niot being forced to pay out. So, they will fight tooth and nail for what they need, as real work is out of the question for most of them. They exist in the "regulations say you must" world, and that is all they know. So, if those regulations go, they have no skills or original products to sell. The threat level and amounts are so high, it is no wonder Clinton gets away with murder on a regular basis.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The idea of the military being loyal to the constitution is a little questionable. They seem to be loyal to Obama, and HE isnt loyal to the constitution. They fight the wars they are TOLD to fight. I have never seen an analysis of how the military has voted in the past, and what policies they support. I suspect there are a lot of statists in there at this point, however.

    Cruz was the closest I have seen this cycle to a loyalist to the constitution. Before that was Ron Paul. But you can see how far they get in a general election with mob rule being the law.

    I would say that the constitutional republic vote is never talked about in the polls. It is not ZERO by any means, but I would estimate it at a portion of the votes Cruz got, plus definitely some from the military.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It did come through. More than pretty much as you described it . Now to wait for the book.I can see why the full edition with essays is collector's item at $118!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 7 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Primaries are very expensive and no third party candidate can afford to go through that charade.
    mspalding describes the nomination process. Johnson and Weld were nominated in 2 separate ballot processes.. In the first ballot (the best indicator of the real intent of the voters) 52% voted against Johnson (for other candidates) and 58% against Weld. (The VP is selected separartely, not selected by the pres candidate.) In the second ballot 48% voted against Johnson and 49% against Weld. So they won the nomination with 52% and 51% respectively, IIRC.
    The less than libertarian campaign approach has been a surprise to many libertarians. Johnson ran in 2012 and thinks that the same approach would be a futile waste of effort. His goal is to get enough support to get in the debates and present the rational libertarian alternative to the people.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by cem4881 7 years, 8 months ago
    Don't read somebody else's opinion of him and take it as your own. Listen to Gary himself.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo