Gary Johnson Is Not A Libertarian
In the video link, ta da~
Gary Johnson is FOR forcible vaccination.
That is NOT a Libertarian!
Gary Johnson is FOR a carbon tax because he believes climate change is "man-caused."
That is NOT Libertarian!
Gary Johnson is FOR shutting down bakeries should any refuse to sell gay wedding cakes.
That is NOT Libertarian!
Gary Johnson is FOR (the George Soros supported) Black Lives Matter.
That is NOT Libertarian!
Gary Johnson is FOR TPP or global government on steroids.
That is NOT Libertarian!
Gary Johnson calls Shillary "a wonderful public servant.
That is NOT Libertarian and IS completely off the wall bonkers! Go listen. He says it.
Gary Johnson is a social justice warrior.
That is NOT Libertarian.
New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson inherited a $1.8 billion debt and left it with a debt of $4.6 billion.
That is NOT Libertarian.
Want to see Goofy Gary get mad? Say "Illegal immigrant" to his face.
That is NOT Libertarian.
Gary Johnson is FOR forcible vaccination.
That is NOT a Libertarian!
Gary Johnson is FOR a carbon tax because he believes climate change is "man-caused."
That is NOT Libertarian!
Gary Johnson is FOR shutting down bakeries should any refuse to sell gay wedding cakes.
That is NOT Libertarian!
Gary Johnson is FOR (the George Soros supported) Black Lives Matter.
That is NOT Libertarian!
Gary Johnson is FOR TPP or global government on steroids.
That is NOT Libertarian!
Gary Johnson calls Shillary "a wonderful public servant.
That is NOT Libertarian and IS completely off the wall bonkers! Go listen. He says it.
Gary Johnson is a social justice warrior.
That is NOT Libertarian.
New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson inherited a $1.8 billion debt and left it with a debt of $4.6 billion.
That is NOT Libertarian.
Want to see Goofy Gary get mad? Say "Illegal immigrant" to his face.
That is NOT Libertarian.
Gary Johnson is a Libertarian. His campaign messages have been purposely less focused on libertarian issues than previous campaigns because those campaigns L O S T and accomplished practically nothing as a result of their trumpeting ideology that voters can't understand.
It didn't work before and it won't work now. Libertarians can be like Hillary supporters and just wish the reality was different, or they can accept reality and do something that expands the libertarian message.
I don't agree with everything Johnson has said, but those things are not going to show up on Johnson's desk for action, so while I disagree it's a moot point.
The things that Johnson has promised to achieve are much more important and when achieved will make the other items irrelevant.
1. Close down the Dept of Education which will end the fedgov's propaganda monopoly and make it possible to the truth to be taught, and reason and achievement rewarded.
2. Balance the federal budget by reducing spending
3. End the Income tax on productivity This alone will completely change the face of America and the economy for the better.
Paul Joseph Watson is not libertarian and doesn't agree with libertarian platform. Not very surprising that he supports a statist Trump dictatorship instead of a statist Hillary dictatorship. Posting is rubbish from a completely biased source. Paul Joseph Watson is an irrational loon based upon his completely biased writings.
Better verify before posting, dino. The first two in your list are lies according to this:
http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/26/lib...
That puts all the rest of the claims in doubt as biased reporting as a source that supports evil in fear of Hillary.
I won't vote for Gary if just because he thinks illegal aliens are just wonderful.
That human flood is an economy killer and killers will be--are already--among among them.
We already know how Muslim refuges treat women, little girls and little boys in Europe.
Here is the link again:
http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/26/lib...
I have posted this link about 4 times in the Gulch because of misleading false articles about Johnson's stance on those issues. Biased writers don't care if what they post is true as long as it supports their irrational views. (Not referring to you, dino;^)
I don't agree with Johnson on immigration either, but Johnson's stance is consistent with libertarian principle of open borders. His experience with immigrants in New Mexico is obviously better than what you and I perceive. However, imo, Johnson has other more important and more far reaching issues right, e.g., income tax elimination, and cutting budgets for transfer payments (which means no support payments to illegals that encourage them to come and stay without producing.) The explosion in job creation that removal of income tax will bring will overwhelm any immigration issue, imo. The other candidates will not solve the problem because their solution is more government, (and an unlikely wall that would be a big drain on the economy, a big tax on consumers if built using tarriffs, and a blow against free trade.)
Safety first. Without sufficient security, everything else goes to crap.
I should know. Between 1982 and 2013, I used to be security for someone in a variety of forms.
Respectfully yours, Me Dino.
Communism also needs security.
So I get your point.
Liberty ain't the insanity of open borders, though.
But what the hey? Rape prevention will be not letting our women and children go outside.
And we can always use guns to protect our homes.
That is, if all the new Dem voters elect people who would let us have any.
is not insanity. This country was built by immigrants in the first place. In the second place the current immigration laws are indeed insane. In the third place I agree you are not Libertarian. Hopefully you will not have to live under the kind of government the people you wish to deny are required to live under.
But what would that be? Insane? Yeah, "insane" strikes me as an adequate description.
How would you like to have a home on our present southern border right now?
Back in early 70s I crossed the Mexican border and drove from Mexicali to Tijuana just to see what there was to see.
Today I wouldn't go five miles near that border.
Up until recently I thought the Libertarian platform at least cared about public safety.
But when it at least comes to open borders, I guess Libertarians are like libtards.
Well, me dino sure as hell ain't like no lib anything anymore, I reckon.
I'll go back to calling myself just a Constitutional conservative.
No mo' "L's" for old dino.
http://www.lp.org/platform
"3.4 Free Trade and Migration
We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of humans as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a threat to security, health or property. "
The above reads kinda conflicted to old dino. With all that "unrestricted movement of humans" going on if not zooming past, how do we spot and sort out any potential bad guys? Rely on tips?
I first became leery of Johnson when I heard him say all you needed to beat a fence was a taller ladder.
I'd like to hear his opinion about all the Muslim refugees Obummer wants to swarm into the states "unrestrained."
Was it Ross Perot who proposed we have four lane super highways where truckers do not stop going either way at the Mexican border?
Some goofball did around that election time.
The current immigration laws are insane.
Therefore, we should allow criminals and ISIS members unrestricted entry into the country.
Have I presented your argument correctly?
I have no objection to restrictions on criminals and those who would come here to damage and cause harm, but that is not what people seem to be saying. They seem more concerned about immigrants not paying taxes or working on jobs that should go to Americans.
https://www.azlp.org/platform.php
It's way obsolete, and just plain awful -- little did I know! Then we see Gary Johnson carrying our banner, and he offers nothing better than the Big Two. Leaves me in a big pickle but then, we're all there!
I agree that Islam is a problem, perhaps the last great problem in the West, but is just one aspect of a deeper error.
And where did you find that poll? Who ran it? What was the actual question? How did their find their Muslims to ask?
Try this one:
http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/th...
Depending how the words are switched around it fits every occasion.
I get mail from Christian groups asking for signed petitions and donations to get organized persecution groups as well as the government off their backs.
I know some homosexuals. They don't bother me. One even plays the piano during Christian church services.
Some Christians actually follow the teachings of Christ.
You tell me. I don't see them calling for it. I see them trying to retain a right to believe what they want in spite of Obamacare and the Federal Government.
I can cite you the CDC studies on the STD rates among homosexuals if you want an argument against it. Or the suicide rates. Or the future of children. Or the morality in general. It's not just a religious argument. Religion presents some of the most potent arguments against homosexuality, but they depend on someone believing in the continuance beyond death.
"Christianity was used to justify slavery"
Uh, you're going to step in a hole going after that one. You show me where in Christianity's teachings they encourage slavery. You won't find it. And note that the slavery of the Old Testament is nowhere near the same as the slavery of the Africans.
Try the Hillsdale Course and the go look at something like America's Forgotten History series by David Ledbetter to make sure your school didn't leave anything out ha ha ha.
It was still being mentioned in college level history courses in the 60's not as an approval but as a part of history.
It's like saying the USA is not the biggest practitioner of Apartheid in he world.
I''ll legally migrate elsewhere.
--Or lose my head trying.
I'm a Christian. I prefer death over a forcible conversion. I much more prefer escaping that decision.
Think they'd want Christians dead before they moved on to killing atheists. But I may be wrong.
I also live in sweet home Alabama
But flood this country with Muslim refugees?
I'll be 70 in March.
I'll likely be gone before Muslims grow fruitful and multiply in order to take over.
As for my grown kids and their kids, they may have to move to a Hindu country like India.
I never heard of a Hindu terrorist, though some seem to think rape is okay until they are arrested.
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.or...
By contrast, the broader survey found that a 63% majority of those sampled said that “the freedom to engage in expression that offends Muslims or anybody else is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and cannot be restricted.”
The broader problem is simply assimilation. Give it time. The label "Cosa Nostra" was given to the Mafia because of a chance comment recorded by the FBI. One of the Mafia dons complained that the FBI "wants to interfere in you know cosa nostra." It means "our thing." The old Sicilians felt that they should be allowed to bring their old world customs of reprisals to the new world. Why should the FBI care if mafiosi kill each other? Well, we do care... We want them to leave the old world behind and join the new way of life. It takes time for a new generation to ascend, that's all. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court sat Justices Alito and Scalia... Eventually, just as it sat Jews, it will have an Arab.
Next you can write about the customs of Hispanic cartels.
I don't care.
Free country.
Write away!
At the center of immigration policy is really the Right to Association. But that is a two-way contract - not a one-way one. Those who are already part of the Association (in this case the nation known as the United States of America and occupying its defined geographical boundaries) are being ignored on whether or not they want to accept any more applicants!
To call an illegal alien an "undocumented immigrant" is PC speak.
I view an American as someone who wants to speak English, who values natural rights, and who values the rule of law. I view an American as someone who stands for the National Anthem with hand over heart (or saluting while in uniform) and who sings with passion - even if off-key. I view an American as someone who has read and understands (no mean feat there) the Constitution of the United States and the Declaration of Independence and would fight to defend both. I view an American as someone who doesn't disparage others for believing differently and will openly defend their right to speak their beliefs even though they disagree. I view an American as someone who takes the time to understand political candidates and their platforms before voting their conscience. I view an American as someone who works hard and enjoys the fruits of their own labors. I view an American as someone who does everything in their power to take care of themselves and who would never call for the government to force others to care for them.
Give me that kind of American and you will see those who can right the ship of this nation.
The representatives of the people in congress have the constitution on their side in this case. Or do you propose ignoring the constitutional authority of congress under Artilce I, Section 8?
The immigration laws made by congress are constitutional and they should be enforced, just as similar laws are enforced under laws in all advanced, industrialized countries in the world.
Perhaps you should lobby congress to make open immigration a part of any free trade agreement with other advanced countries.
I do mean no offense. I am just attempting to teach you what, I think, might be a better way.
http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/26/lib...
If you think you're voting for the lesser of 2 evils, remember you're still voting for evil. Me? I'll take door # 3...
Look what happened to Ron Paul and Rand Paul, who I would say are more libertarian than Gary Johnson.
Where's Ross Perot?
I'm easy.
IMO, ISIS needs to be destroyed.
Johnson is pandering to some statist ideas that are currently popular, so that he gets at least his 9%, instead of 1% if he stuck to strictly libertarian ideas.
I wouldn't call anything Johnson is doing pandering, but I can see why a Trump supporter would want to transfer one of Trump's least endearing traits to Johnson.
I agree that Johnson has avoided supporting libertarian issues that voters don't understand because they have been brainwashed by the statist biased (and supported) media.
Johnson represents your values and principles, and promises to accomplish things that will save your business. You should be supporting Johnson on principle so he gets in the debates even if you still decide to vote for someone else later.
Its the right decision for the long term and gives you options in the short term.
I support Johnson and the libertarians actually. I really dont know how to influence the "approval rating" thing to get him into the debates, however, and I doubt he will get to the 15% point (arbitrary) by the time of the debates. And they arent really "debates" at all. Just opportunities for the media to make one or more candidates look bad. In this case, the media will try to make hillary look good and trump look bad. They would leave Johnson alone, as he has NO chance to be a threat to the establishment.
I just dont think he has a snowball's chance of winning THIS time around, so I will vote for Trump so as to NOT get Hillary.
George Soros endorses Shillary.
So there ya go . . .
But the issues that give me pause right now are: 1. Keeping Hillary & Bill OUT. 2. Applying the same laws to Mexicans and others coming into the USA that their home countries apply to Americans. For example, when I go to Mexico I must first buy valid auto liability insurance. If I want to stay more than 90 days in the country, I need to get legal permits (an FM-3 Card). If I'm in Mexico and I want free food, free medical care, free housing, welfare, social security, etc. etc. - they tell me to get lost. So how is it that Mexicans and others aren't expected to respect American laws the same as we must respect theirs?
It is because the power hungry elites of the Jackass Party view incoming Mexicans, Hispanics and Muslims as future dim for Dem low information voters.
When those waves of children swarmed over the border, I recall Princess Pelosi with a big giddy smile saying that she viewed that illegal alien youth invasion as "an opportunity."
Me dino knew exactly what kooky kow meant by that without even have to think about it.
If the rules written by the GOP and Dems to prevent any competition from any third party were fair, then I am convinced that the libertarian party would already be a major party and the libertarian party would be the one with the largest share of the vote based on their complete disclosure and a better understanding of their policies by the voters..
I understand and share your frustration.
Article is biased and untrue.
http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/26/lib...
Johnson is more libertarian than many so-called libertarians. He is avoiding discussing libertarian issues that are confusing to voters because that has been prove to be a losing strategy. Johnson understands that he must get on the debate stage in order to reach voters, and he must concentrate on issues they understand to get there.
(I don't like some of this strategy either, Tassie, but I understand the reason for it.)
You quote that rag? That's worse than unsupported subjective personal opinion. And it smacks of a George Lykoff tactic. As in tacky.
http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/26/lib...
Johnson promises to:
1. Close down the Dept of Education which will end the fedgov's propaganda monopoly and make it possible to the truth to be taught, and reason and achievement rewarded.
2. Balance the federal budget by reducing spending
3. End the Income tax on productivity This alone will completely change the face of America and the economy for the better.
These programs will do more for freedom and individual liberty than anything done by anyone in the past 100 years.
The author, Paul Joseph Watson is not libertarian and doesn't agree with libertarian platform. Not very surprising that he supports a statist Trump dictatorship instead of a statist Hillary dictatorship. Posting is rubbish from a completely biased source. Paul Joseph Watson is an irrational loon based upon his completely biased writings.
Trump's policy proposals are much worse for freedom and liberty than Johnson's.
Johnson IS anti-liberty, anti-freedom, and anti-business in regards to a private owner's right to sell to whomever he/she wants
Polls
Election 2016
Video
Writers
More
Polls
Arrow
Quick Poll/Map Links
Advanced Search
Find Any Poll
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein
8.4k Shares
National: Trump vs. Clinton | 4-Way (Johnson & Stein)
National RCP Average | RCP Electoral Map | Florida | Ohio | Pennsylvania | Michigan | N.H. | Virginia | North Carolina | Clinton Favorability | Trump Favorability | Democratic Nomination | Republican Nomination | Latest 2016 Polls
Polling Data
Poll Date Sample MoE
Clinton (D)
Trump (R)
Johnson (L)
Stein (G)
Spread
RCP Average 8/26 - 9/8 -- -- 41.8 39.6 9.1 2.9 Clinton +2.2
Why post? Because we have a bunch of Gulchers who favor that party above all others.
Furthermore, Gary Johnson is NOT a Libertarian.
But that wild bunch here are gonna vote Libertarian anyway because they disagree with my personal opinion about that.
Wild Bunch? Thanks for the compliment, I think.;^)
While I do respect your opinions and agree with many of them, your personal opinion is not a significant part of my voting decision, dino. (Nor should my opinion be significant in your voting decision.;^) Just the facts, dino.
;^)
Being an old dino, I decided to see how it would splash. Just for the hell of it.
Try this
Polls
Election 2016
Video
Writers
More
Polls
Arrow
Quick Poll/Map Links
Advanced Search
Find Any Poll
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein
8.4k Shares
National: Trump vs. Clinton | 4-Way (Johnson & Stein)
National RCP Average | RCP Electoral Map | Florida | Ohio | Pennsylvania | Michigan | N.H. | Virginia | North Carolina | Clinton Favorability | Trump Favorability | Democratic Nomination | Republican Nomination | Latest 2016 Polls
Polling Data
Poll Date Sample MoE
Clinton (D)
Trump (R)
Johnson (L)
Stein (G)
Spread
RCP Average 8/26 - 9/8 -- -- 41.8 39.6 9.1 2.9 Clinton +2.2
The nine point one and holding for a month with no progress means what? He's ethical. ha ha ha try out his great economic record in New Mexico.
Rule 6 - Never apologize, its a sign of weakness.
http://www.fanpop.com/clubs/ncis/arti...
It was irrational, but he did lose cred as you said DrZ.
The Case Against a Libertarian Political Party.
http://www.worldcat.org/title/case-ag...
(See Erwin Strauss here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_S...
His point was only that power and market are mutually exclusive. You cannot bring about a free market by political means. You get a constitutionally limited government from a free market.
Moreover, in mimicking the political modes of the big parties, the Libertarians commit a consistent and constant series of strategic and tactical errors, such as nominating warmed-over Republicans to stand for the Presidency on their ticket.
I have never been to an LP national convention. (I have been at state conventions, but never as a delegate: I had a vendor table.) I have been told that at the national conventions, these forward thinking radicals are arrayed in alphabetical order by state. When the name of their preferred candidate is spoken by the chair, the delegates in support beat their sign poles on the ground and hoot.
BTW: another thread is in order on this, but if you know the works of Jane Jacobs, you may know of her essays on the two modes of survival, the trading ethic and the guardian ethic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems...
Can a free market be destroyed by political means?
The answer is "YES"
For example: Political favors grant monopoly staus.
Is it possible these favors be reversed and the free market improved by political means?
The answer is "YES"
Hows if feel to see your girl losing ground and your boy standing still?
On the bright side check Clintons losses in the Electoral College Section and the ever popular four way spread. Clinton at 2.2 in the one that counts 3.0 in the other one and Johnson at 9.1? She only gains point eight with Johnson AND Klein out of the picture. I'm guessing that's from deducting the Klein votes. Did they schedule the Libertarian Town Hall Meetin yet
Election 2016 Clinton Trump Spread
Poll Average 45.9 42.9 Clinton +3.0
4-Way RCP Average 41.8 39.6 Clinton +2.2
Favorability Ratings -13.1 -20.7 Clinton +7.6
Betting Odds 71.0 29.0
Electoral College Clinton Trump Spread
RCP Electoral Map 209 154 Clinton +55
No Toss Up States 311 227
Polls
Election 2016
Video
Writers
More
Polls
Arrow
Quick Poll/Map Links
Advanced Search
Find Any Poll
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein
8.4k Shares
National: Trump vs. Clinton | 4-Way (Johnson & Stein)
National RCP Average | RCP Electoral Map | Florida | Ohio | Pennsylvania | Michigan | N.H. | Virginia | North Carolina | Clinton Favorability | Trump Favorability | Democratic Nomination | Republican Nomination | Latest 2016 Polls
Polling Data
Poll Date Sample MoE
Clinton (D)
Trump (R)
Johnson (L)
Stein (G)
Spread
RCP Average 8/26 - 9/8 -- -- 41.8 39.6 9.1 2.9 Clinton +2.2