Press "Enter" to skip to content

The Daily Caller: “Gary Johnson’s Strange Foreign Policy”

Here is the Daily Caller article referrred to by James Antle in the post below.

Libertarian Party presidential contender Gary Johnson has been portrayed as an anti-war candidate, but that isn’t quite so clear.

Johnson sat down with reporters and editors from The Daily Caller last week, generously providing his time to answer any and all questions, no matter how difficult or ludicrous.

But when pressed on foreign policy topics throughout the interview, Johnson gave answers that didn’t always seem to add up and were often, at best, unorthodox positions for a man who has been painted as a non-interventionist…

See more…

106 Comments

  1. paulie paulie April 12, 2012

    Most of Ron Paul’s support – and most of his potential support – does not come out of the rank-and-file Republican Party.

    True, but some does.

    More importantly, there are a lot of people who support Ron Paul because they think he has a chance at the Republican nomination and thus the presidency. Many of those people will not believe he has a chance as an independent or alt party candidate to actually become president and will thus see him as a “spoiler” that will get the greater evil elected. If they start out not thinking that, some of them will conclude that as the election gets closer.

  2. Andy Andy April 12, 2012

    Paulie said: “If you mean compared with poll numbers that show him at 15% or 20% or what have you, no, I don’t think those support levels would hold up. They already include the people that are not voting for him in Republican primaries, and unless he manages to stay competitive in a 3 or 4 way race, they will be dropping for all the usual reasons.”

    Most of Ron Paul’s support – and most of his potential support – does not come out of the rank-and-file Republican Party. Ron Paul does very well at winning over independents and non-voters. I’d go so far as to say that if only independents and non-voters voted in the election that Ron Paul would win, and the results may be such that it wouldn’t be close enough for the establishment to rig the election against Ron Paul without it being blatantly obvious under this scenario.

    I think that Ron Paul could make a good showing if he ran as a minor party or independent candidate, particularly if he picked a charismatic and well known candidate for Vice President like Jesse Ventura or Andrew Napolitano.

  3. paulie paulie April 12, 2012

    Another more important factor since we are talking about the Libertarian Party’s presidential nomination, and that’s that Gary Johnson is less libertarian than the average Libertarian Party member.

    I wouldn’t assume that either. A lot of people join the LP, most for a short time, for a variety of reasons, and many of them are not all that libertarian.

  4. paulie paulie April 12, 2012

    The vast majority of Ron Paul supporters are more libertarian than Gary Jonson is when it comes to taxes, foreign policy, and granting pardons,

    Ron Paul is. I would not say that the vast majority of Ron Paul supporters necessarily are.

    and these are 3 of the most important issues.

    According to some people. Which issues are most important vary from person to person.

    I’ve communicated with literally thousands of Ron Paul supporters

    I have too. I wonder why we have come away with such different impressions.

  5. paulie paulie April 12, 2012

    Ron Paul would also pick up a lot of supporters if he went the minor party or independent route, because a lot of people don’t even pay attention to politics until after the primaries, and there are a lot of people who’d be open to supporting Dr. Paul but who hate the Republican Party so much that they’d only get on board if Ron Paul ran outside the Republican Party.

    Yes, he’d lose some support as well, but I think that he’d pick up more support than he’d lose.

    If you mean compared with his actual voted in Republican primaries, true. If you mean compared with poll numbers that show him at 15% or 20% or what have you, no, I don’t think those support levels would hold up. They already include the people that are not voting for him in Republican primaries, and unless he manages to stay competitive in a 3 or 4 way race, they will be dropping for all the usual reasons.

  6. paulie paulie April 12, 2012

    Ron Paul is a much better candidate than Gary Johnson, overall on issues as well as when it comes to the nuts and bolts of politics.

    Overall on issues both have some areas where I like one better than the other. I’ve detailed that elsewhere.

    On nuts and bolts, Johnson was able to veto 750 bills and pardon at least some people, although not nearly as many as he should have. Ron Paul has passed maybe one or two bills in all his years in Congress, and in his many famous “no” voted he was usually so far out voted that he has rarely if ever been the deciding no vote on any bill.

    It’s true that so fa Ron Paul has been a much more successful presidential candidate than Johnson, but it is possible that this could yet change given enough time, and Johnson probably has a lot more time left for that than Paul does.

  7. Andy Andy April 12, 2012

    Another more important factor since we are talking about the Libertarian Party’s presidential nomination, and that’s that Gary Johnson is less libertarian than the average Libertarian Party member.

  8. Andy Andy April 12, 2012

    “paulie // Apr 12, 2012 at 2:18 pm

    ‘Given the many different kinds of Ron Paul supporters I have met in real life and online, I think that they are more libertarian than Gary Johnson on average.’

    I have to disagree and I don’t think it’s a close call, either.”

    The vast majority of Ron Paul supporters are more libertarian than Gary Jonson is when it comes to taxes, foreign policy, and granting pardons, and these are 3 of the most important issues.

    I’ve communicated with literally thousands of Ron Paul supporters and the most of them are more libertarian than Gary Johnson, particularly if they are hardcore activist types, the vast majority of them are certainly more libertarian than Gary Johnson.

  9. Andy Andy April 12, 2012

    “even if the name on the ballot was Ron Paul, he would lose some of his supporters during the course of the campaign as more and more of them would be convinced that he can’t win and that we can’t let Obama (or for a few of them Romney) win.”

    Ron Paul would also pick up a lot of supporters if he went the minor party or independent route, because a lot of people don’t even pay attention to politics until after the primaries, and there are a lot of people who’d be open to supporting Dr. Paul but who hate the Republican Party so much that they’d only get on board if Ron Paul ran outside the Republican Party.

    Yes, he’d lose some support as well, but I think that he’d pick up more support than he’d lose.

  10. Andy Andy April 12, 2012

    Paulie: “There are some things about Ron Paul that I don’t like either. I don’t think Johnson is overall as bad as you seem to think, despite the fact that I agree with you about those same issues you mention.”

    Ron Paul is a much better candidate than Gary Johnson, overall on issues as well as when it comes to the nuts and bolts of politics.

  11. paulie paulie April 12, 2012

    Some Ron Paul supporters accept no substitutes.

    If you have any doubts that this is true, evidence is not hard to find on facebook, twitter, Ron Paul Forums, etc.

  12. paulie paulie April 12, 2012

    I just watched some of the Gary Johnson ads that are posted on YouTube. They look pretty good. It’s too bad that Gary Johnson has to ruin it by supporting the highly toxic and deceptive anti-libertarian Fair Tax plan, along with some other flaws, like his waffling on foreign policy, etc…

    There are some things about Ron Paul that I don’t like either. I don’t think Johnson is overall as bad as you seem to think, despite the fact that I agree with you about those same issues you mention.

    I imagine there is exactly 0 % chance that Dr. Paul would agree to be Gary Johnson’s vp. It’s a ridiculous notion, and it ain’t gonna happen.

    Agreed.

    do you think the Paulistas would be Paulistas if RP was “just” a doctor who decided to run for the GOP nomination? If RP had never been in Congress, IOW?

    My answer is No. A doctor would not get into the debates. There would be no “rEVOLution.”

    This implies that resume is a gating item in grooming candidates. Agree?

    I agree with Robert on this.

  13. paulie paulie April 12, 2012

    Well GJ has shown up at LP conventions all over America and is applauded and gets 67 to 85% of the straw votes almost everytime. So if there is so much “hate” for some of these positions why so much support ?

    Because a candidate is judged on totality of positions as well as resume, presentation, etc.

    If someone votes that they prefer Johnson to the other available choices, that does not mean they agree with every single position Johnson takes.

    A draft of Ron Paul as Veep would make for the most major media coverage in LP convention history!

    It’s against both the bylaws (according to more than one source in IPR comments) and non-initiation of force principles. There will be no such draft. And in the unlikely even that Ron Paul does agree to run on the LP ticket, it will be for P, not for VP.

    There will be no Johnson/Paul ticket. I will lay money on it right now if you want. A Paul/Johnson ticket is improbable, but not impossible.

  14. paulie paulie April 12, 2012

    It depends on how vocal Ron Paul was about the endorsement, and also how well the person and party receiving the endorsement were able to capitalize on it.

    No amount of campaigning by Ron Paul will make another candidate as popular as Ron Paul, if the name on the ballot is not Ron Paul. And, even if the name on the ballot was Ron Paul, he would lose some of his supporters during the course of the campaign as more and more of them would be convinced that he can’t win and that we can’t let Obama (or for a few of them Romney) win.

    I also don’t think Ron Paul will put a lot of energy behind an endorsement even if he does make one.

  15. paulie paulie April 12, 2012

    Given the many different kinds of Ron Paul supporters I have met in real life and online, I think that they are more libertarian than Gary Johnson on average.

    I have to disagree and I don’t think it’s a close call, either.

  16. paulie paulie April 12, 2012

    Also TANSTAAFL keeps saying over and over that Ron Paul fans are loyal to him and only him.

    Some are, some aren’t. There are a lot of different kinds of Ron Paul supporters. Some could become Johnson supporters easily, some could with a lot of persuasion, some never will no matter what.

    Some Ron Paul supporters are only Ron Paul supporters so long as he does not run against the Republican nominee in the general election, and will no longer be Ron Paul supporters if and when he does. Others on the other hand displayed Ron Paul stickers, argued for him online, etc, but have never and will never actually vote in Republican primaries – even for Ron Paul. They would be thrilled with a Ron Paul run. Some are cult of personality types who would vote for Ron Paul but no one else no matter what. Some line up with one alt party or another, but not all with the same one.

  17. paulie paulie April 12, 2012

    The majority of Ron Paul supporters would support a minor party or independent presidential candidate (other than Ron Paul) if there was such a candidate that had their act together.

    Maybe initially, but after a while many of them would be convinced by their friends, relatives, people they argue with online etc that they have to “stop Obama” or whatever.

    My experience after talking to literally thousands of Ron Paul supporters around the country is that the majority of them would vote for a Libertarian Party candidate for President (other than Ron Paul) if the LP nominated the right person who had their act together, and if the Libertarian Party had its act together.

    It’s always easier to say that in theory. However, any real life candidate will have some drawbacks.

    Whether’s it’s Johnson, Wrights, or even if say Ventura drops in and gets it, some of them will end up finding fault with that candidate, and/or campaign, and/or the LP for one thing or another or a combination of things.

  18. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 12, 2012

    87 a, do you think the Paulistas would be Paulistas if RP was “just” a doctor who decided to run for the GOP nomination? If RP had never been in Congress, IOW?

    My answer is No. A doctor would not get into the debates. There would be no “rEVOLution.”

    This implies that resume is a gating item in grooming candidates. Agree?

  19. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp April 12, 2012

    T-Rex @ 83,

    “A draft of [Ron Paul] as VP could happen with him absent.”

    Yes, it could.

    However it could not happen without his consent/cooperation. LP Bylaws, Article 14, Section 2;

    “No candidate may be nominated for President or Vice-President who … has not expressed a willingness to accept the nomination of the Party …”

  20. Andy Andy April 12, 2012

    Paulie said: “Some Ron Paul supporters accept no substitutes.

    If Ron Paul is not on the November ballot they will simply not vote, or they will write him in even if it is meaningless and not even counted, regardless if he endorses someone else or not.”

    The majority of Ron Paul supporters would support a minor party or independent presidential candidate (other than Ron Paul) if there was such a candidate that had their act together.

    My experience after talking to literally thousands of Ron Paul supporters around the country is that the majority of them would vote for a Libertarian Party candidate for President (other than Ron Paul) if the LP nominated the right person who had their act together, and if the Libertarian Party had its act together.

    The Libertarian Party not bringing these people in is a sign of the party being a dysfunctional mess and nominating lemons for candidates (and not being able to turn those lemons into lemonade).

  21. Darryl W. Perry Darryl W. Perry April 12, 2012

    From AntiWar.com

    In an interview with the Daily Caller, presumptive Libertarian Party nominee for president Gary Johnson, tries heartily to describe his foreign policy…or at least a foreign policy. Plainly put, the man is confused.

    He says he supports U.S. military intervention in Uganda to root out the Lords Resistance Army and kill its leader, Joseph Kony. He thinks the drone war in Pakistan and Yemen creates more enemies than it eliminates, but doesn’t want to take drone strikes off the proverbial “table.” He wants to “completely withdraw our military presence” from Afghanistan, but wants to keep our military bases there. In fact, U.S. military bases should be maintained throughout the Middle East, he says, even though America faces “no military threats.” He supports “humanitarian intervention.” He wants to cut military and defense budgets by 43 percent, but only reduce national security spending to 2003 levels, “and just wring out the excess.”

    Johnson is putting forth an image of himself of a former New Mexico governor who is outside the political establishment and serious about cutting spending. But evidently, the man hasn’t a clue what he is talking about with regards to foreign policy. His musings about war and intervention are little more than guesswork, wading his way through what he supposes is the libertarian position, while making clear he is no non-interventionist.

  22. Andy Andy April 12, 2012

    I just watched some of the Gary Johnson ads that are posted on YouTube. They look pretty good. It’s too bad that Gary Johnson has to ruin it by supporting the highly toxic and deceptive anti-libertarian Fair Tax plan, along with some other flaws, like his waffling on foreign policy, etc…

  23. Jill Pyeatt Jill Pyeatt April 12, 2012

    Lttrotreu2t @ 83: I imagine there is exactly 0 % chance that Dr. Paul would agree to be Gary Johnson’s vp. It’s a ridiculous notion, and it ain’t gonna happen.

  24. Someone needs to hand GJ a copy of “A Foreign Policy of Freedom” when they see him. I think he would read it.

    The “Party of Principle” sounds good doesn’t it? Well GJ has shown up at LP conventions all over America and is applauded and gets 67 to 85% of the straw votes almost everytime. So if there is so much “hate” for some of these positions why so much support ? The Party of Principle must have individuals with different definitions of Principle ! If these convention goers had “stood up” against the FairTax and his other flaws and voted against Johnson he may have dropped them by now. But NO, a vast majority supported him with his flaws, allowing him to continue on with them. I submit the Party of Princible has fumbled the ball on correcting Mr.Johnson’s “flaws”

    So what now? Johnson wins on the first ballot. I see no other outcome with current straw poll results. A draft of Ron Paul as Veep would make for the most major media coverage in LP convention history! A Johnson/Paul ticket coming out of Vegas would gather over 5% of the vote in Nov. Lock Paul on the ticket and most of his supporters vote for and work for the LP at least through Nov. and even some beyond. Now is the time to move into the big leagues for good !

    Most Paul people won’t go along with that idea, but if Paul wants the LP POTUS nod he must show up. A draft of him as VP could happen with him absent. He could still attempt his futile R gambit and then after their convention carry his message on as the LP VP candidate. This IMO would be the best senario for major LP growth. (Get’em in, then educate them) The LP needs to make this bold move even if Paul doesn’t show up !

    John Stossel – Who Creates Jobs? – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QOSX5vvO_I&feature=related

    Gary Johnson 2012: The People’s President – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54PLUhpL8Y4&feature=related

    Gary Johnson 2012: Don’t Get Fooled: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNXdoeF3KaM&NR=1

    Got Jobs? Johnson, Romney, Obama – http://garyjohnsongrassrootsblog.blogspot.com/2012/01/charles-lupton-created-nice-job-growth.html

  25. Andy Andy April 12, 2012

    “paulie // Apr 11, 2012 at 6:52 pm

    If Ron Paul was running LP himself now he might be able to do it. I don’t think a mere endorsement from him would be enough to jump to that level.”

    It depends on how vocal Ron Paul was about the endorsement, and also how well the person and party receiving the endorsement were able to capitalize on it.

  26. Andy Andy April 11, 2012

    Paulie said: ” Given the many different kinds of Ron Paul supporters I have met in real life and online, I don’t think they are more libertarian than Johnson on average.”

    Given the many different kinds of Ron Paul supporters I have met in real life and online, I think that they are more libertarian than Gary Johnson on average.

  27. John Jay Myers John Jay Myers April 11, 2012

    Also TANSTAAFL keeps saying over and over that Ron Paul fans are loyal to him and only him. That is not true, it may seem that way to you because they may not be tuning into Gary Johnson right now, but if Gary would present a consistent message that they could get behind, they would get behind him once Paul is out of the race.

    That is why the next two months are so important. Ron Paul is an idea…. an idea that “Freedom is popular”. It is, but wishy-washy? Not so much.

    When people are looking for the next Ron Paul they need to see someone knee deep in Liberty. All of this is not a slight to Gary, and I am going to play nice. I am trying to offer real constructive criticism.

    Gary has said some things here, and some things there, he needs to ground what he is saying in the philosophy of liberty. Not just what seems appropriate, it’s like Ernie Hancock says, “Freedom is the answer!”…….”What’s the question?”

    He needs to read “A Foreign Policy of Freedom” to get a sense of how all these wars go wrong, and seem to be dishonest…. at best.

  28. John Jay Myers John Jay Myers April 11, 2012

    I have never heard those quotes from Paul, for what it is worth I think for the Federal Government to have ANYTHING to do with marriage would take an amendment.

    However for the Federal government to tell States that having anything to do with marriage is also none of their business there is already an amendment… the first amendment.

    In my opinion marriage is no ones business.

  29. paulie paulie April 11, 2012

    If Ron Paul was running LP himself now he might be able to do it. I don’t think a mere endorsement from him would be enough to jump to that level.

  30. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 11, 2012

    72 p, I don’t disagree. For the LP nominee to break into Anderson-type levels, we’d need far more than the Paulistas.

  31. paulie paulie April 11, 2012

    Yes, there are certainly a lot of different types of people who support Ron Paul, however, on average, I would say that many of them are more libertarian than Gary Johnson, particularly the ones who tend to be the most active and are early adopters.

    Given the many different kinds of Ron Paul supporters I have met in real life and online, I don’t think they are more libertarian than Johnson on average.

  32. paulie paulie April 11, 2012

    The “Fair Tax” at best is just as bad as the current system, and there’s a good chance that it may be even worse than the current system

    It is most definitely worse than the current system.

    What is “fair” about paying 30% sales tax on items with my savings that have already been taxed at 35%?

    You’ll be “fairly” less loaded with “extra” cash and goods, and thus will fit through the eye of the needle more easily when you pass on. 🙂

  33. Wes Wagner Wes Wagner April 11, 2012

    P @71

    Your advice is a page out of the playbook of Kotter’s steps for organizational change… one imperative is to set goals for change that are reasonable and can be accomplish quickly to establish momentum in the right direction. (your specifics are related to step 6 in many ways)

    You are very correct in the dangers of setting unrealistic goals.

    I have a plan very much in alignment with what you are suggesting, but it involves more member-based ownership of the goal setting and outcomes, with appropriate balanced-scorecard measurement.

  34. paulie paulie April 11, 2012

    I don’t think you understand Ron Paul’s gay marriage stance.

    Johnson is better on marriage equality than Ron Paul is.

  35. paulie paulie April 11, 2012

    To date, RP’s scored about 1.2MM votes in the primaries. We might triple that to capture the rest of the states. 3.6MM would be excellent, but that doesn’t get GJ to 5% of say 130MM total votes, only about half way.

    No question GJ and the LP need to reach out to a built in constituency, but it was to double that RP constituency.

    Ron Paul supporters include a lot of people who do not actually vote in Republican primaries and caucuses, even if you trust the Republican numbers as being accurately reported.

    If in the RP voter’s mind, GJ might be say 80% Paul. Contrast that with Romney who might be, what, 20% of Paul, or Obama who might be 18% of Paul.

    GJ is in the Paul neighborhood. No one else is that I can see…

    Some Ron Paul supporters accept no substitutes.

    If Ron Paul is not on the November ballot they will simply not vote, or they will write him in even if it is meaningless and not even counted, regardless if he endorses someone else or not.

    Some Ron Paul supporters will consider the number one goal to defeat Obama (some may also consider the number one goal to defeat the Republicans if they consider them to be the more pro-war party, but not as many as in 2008). They will vote Republican even if they agree with Johnson 80% and Romney 20%.

    Some Ron Paul supporters will support the Constitution Party; some will support the American Third Position, Americans Elect, Greens, BTP, or what have you.

    Johnson will get some of the Ron Paul supporters (even Barr did). He won’t get all of them. He’ll probably get a higher percentage than Barr did. If he is pretty smart about his approach he will get significantly more support than Barr from these folks, but no matter what he does it will not be anything like universal.

  36. paulie paulie April 11, 2012

    Unfortunately Gary’s campaign does not stand a chance at even achieving our modest 5% goal, without Ron Paul people.

    5% is not a modest goal, it is over 1,000% of what the LP has pulled in 1984, 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004 or 2008 – all ranging between 0.3% and 0.5%, including two runs by Harry Browne as well as runs by ex-Congressmen Paul and Barr. It is also more than any strongly ideological party has pulled in decades. It is about 500% of what the LP got in 1980, when the Cato/Reason and Rockwell/Rothbard wings of the Libertarian Movement were still backing the LP and when the Kochs spent millions of dollars on behalf of the campaign. It is about double what Nader managed as the Green Party candidate in 2000 after four decades of building his name recognition to near-universal levels and before Democrats started blaming him (unfairly) for their loss that year.

    The LP needs to set other, more achievable goals for the presidential election.

    In the meantime, set some more immediately achievable goals consisting of X number of new LP dues paying members, X number new LP inquiries shared with all levels of the national, state and local party orgs, X new chartered county and local affiliates, X new student clubs, X number of candidates elected to lower level offices, X increase in average vote percentage for LP candidates at all levels, X percent increase in registered libertarian voters, X percentage increase in the LP’s budget for 2013 compared to 2012 or 2009 (discounting any matching funds that we might grasp for), and so on.

    If we don’t set and seriously pursue those less awe inspiring but more achievable intermediate goals the most likely after-effect will be disappointment/washout/burnout.

  37. Andy Andy April 11, 2012

    “I don’t think so. Average Ron Paul supporters are a very mixed bag.”

    Yes, there are certainly a lot of different types of people who support Ron Paul, however, on average, I would say that many of them are more libertarian than Gary Johnson, particularly the ones who tend to be the most active and are early adopters.

  38. B4Liberty B4Liberty April 11, 2012

    What is “fair” about paying 30% sales tax on items with my savings that have already been taxed at 35%? When does paying “our fair share” end?

  39. paulie paulie April 11, 2012

    You keep whining about the welfare possibilities with the Fair Tax, WE ALREADY HAVE IT!!!

    No, 90%+ of the country receiving a government check every month is not the same thing as what we have now, among many other problems with the fraudulent “fair” tax scheme.

    The Fair (sic) Tax eliminates the income tax.

    No, that’s just propaganda. It’s a lot harder to get rid of a tax, and especially to get rid of it permanently, than it is to institute a new one. The fraudulent tax “sunsets” the income tax, which can be extended indefinitely by congress once it is instituted (common practice with sunset clauses). Even if it is in fact sunsetted it can be brought back.

    it. It is an imperfect solution to a destructive problem and so many libertarians would rather stand still than take a step forward because it is not a big enough step.

    No, I oppose it because I consider it a major step in the wrong direction, not because it is not a big enough step in the right direction. If I considered it any kind of step in the right direction, big or small, I would be for it. It is exactly the opposite of that.

  40. Andy Andy April 11, 2012

    paulie // Apr 11, 2012 at 4:47 pm

    ‘Roemer’s tariffs on the ChiComs are looking better than Johnson’s FairTax every day….’

    They both suck ass.”

    I’m not a fan of tariffs, but I’d have to see what tariff rate Roemer is suggesting and then compare it to the Fair Tax that Gary Johnson is pushing.

    Since tariffs are an already existing tax and the Fair Tax would be something new, I’d tend to say that creating a new tax is generally a worse idea, however, the bottom line rests more with the level of the tax than the type of tax.

    I remember in 2008 that the Constitution Party’s candidate for President, Chuck Baldwin, had a tax plan that called for a 10% general tariff, but at the same time he wanted to eliminate the income tax, eliminate Social Security taxes, and shut down the Federal Reserve System. His plan also called for big cuts in government spending.

    I think that Chuck Baldwin’s plan on taxes was better (and more libertarian) than the plans offered by the Libertarian Party’s Presidential candidate in 2008, Bob Barr, as well as current candidate for the LP’s Presidential nomination, Gary Johnson. Note that Barr and Johnson both support the Fair Tax plan.

    Also, note that the Constitution Party’s National Committee passed a resolution rejecting the Fair Tax plan.

    The Libertarian Party having a candidate for President who supports the Fair Tax puts the Libertarian Party in the awkward position of having a candidate with a view on federal taxation that is less libertarian than the Constitution Party on the same issue.

    The Fair Tax is NOT an incremental step towards more liberty. The Fair Tax at best is just as bad as the current system, and there’s a good chance that it may be even worse than the current system. This is why I urge all Libertarians and small “l” libertarians to reject the toxic Fair Tax, and to also reject any candidate who supports this toxic plan.

  41. paulie paulie April 11, 2012

    and he’s probably less libertarian than the average Ron Paul supporter as well.

    I don’t think so. Average Ron Paul supporters are a very mixed bag.

  42. paulie paulie April 11, 2012

    write-in candidates for President don’t have an electoral slate.

    That depends on who, where and when. Ron Paul write-in CA 2008 had an electoral slate, for example.

  43. TANSTAAFL TANSTAAFL April 11, 2012

    “I don’t think you understand Ron Paul’s gay marriage stance.”

    He wants to leave gay marriage up to the states. That’s pretty clear to me.

    Then there’s this:

    “Like the majority of Iowans, I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman and must be protected. I supported the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’ constitutional authority to define what other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a same sex marriage license issued in another state.”

    “I will stand with the people of Iowa, against Unconstitutional federal power grabs, and will fight to protect each state’s right not to be forced to recognize a same sex marriage against the will of its people. ”

    States cannot pass laws that violate their own citizens’ rights and denying homosexuals the right to form a union as heterosexuals do is a violation.

    Not very Libertarian of him. Let’s dismiss him because he isn’t Libertarian enough and discount the 95% of libertarian ideals he does represent!!

  44. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp April 11, 2012

    JJM@59,

    “I don’t think you understand Ron Paul’s gay marriage stance.”

    Well, that would be “stances.”

    When he’s talking to libertarians who have their checkbooks with them, he wants governments out of marriage.

    When he’s talking to conservatives who have their checkbooks with them, he brags about proposing unconstitutional legislation to exempt the states from the full faith and credit and equal protection clauses so they can keep same-sex couples form marrying.

  45. paulie paulie April 11, 2012

    Yeah, Barr comes off as about 25 IQ points higher…

    Gingrich/Duvalier 2012?

  46. paulie paulie April 11, 2012

    Nope GJ isn’t a strict non-interventionist. Are you ?

    Who do you mean by you? If you mean what I personally want the US government to do, yes, I am.

    Wonder who will play this role at the Convention? Christine Smith against FAKE Libertarian Bob Barr – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPNLxv8-g1E&feature=related

    RJ Harris and/or Bill Still look like likely candidates for this.

  47. paulie paulie April 11, 2012

    Roemer’s tariffs on the ChiComs are looking better than Johnson’s FairTax every day….

    They both suck ass.

  48. John Jay Myers John Jay Myers April 11, 2012

    TANSTAAFL, what we are encouraging Gary to do is make his message seem more consistent, because it doesn’t matter if you want to get out of certain areas, if you want to stay in some, and get into new ones. He needs consistency or his other views will be questioned.

    I don’t think you understand Ron Paul’s gay marriage stance.

  49. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 11, 2012

    54 jjm: Unfortunately Gary’s campaign does not stand a chance at even achieving our modest 5% goal, without Ron Paul people.

    me: To date, RP’s scored about 1.2MM votes in the primaries. We might triple that to capture the rest of the states. 3.6MM would be excellent, but that doesn’t get GJ to 5% of say 130MM total votes, only about half way.

    No question GJ and the LP need to reach out to a built in constituency, but it was to double that RP constituency.

    If in the RP voter’s mind, GJ might be say 80% Paul. Contrast that with Romney who might be, what, 20% of Paul, or Obama who might be 18% of Paul.

    GJ is in the Paul neighborhood. No one else is that I can see…

  50. TANSTAAFL TANSTAAFL April 11, 2012

    “Unfortunately Gary’s campaign does not stand a chance at even achieving our modest 5% goal, without Ron Paul people.”

    Yes, we can try and try hard as a party, but I fear much of the ron paul movement is loyal to him more than the cause of liberty.

    Also, as much as GJ should reach out to them, he should not pretend to be something he is not. I think they will dislike an imposter much more than someone who may be softer on foreign policy but better on gay marriage, executive experience and abortion.

  51. TANSTAAFL TANSTAAFL April 11, 2012

    “But a really moderate message that sounds much like what the R’s and or D’s are saying now isn’t going to achieve our modest goal.”

    Getting out of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, leaving Israel to handle Iran, slashing the military by 43%, closing down most of the other bases around the world is similar to the R and D’s????

    Let’s be clear, Johnson is exactly what a small L libertarian is. He is not a republican or a democrat because he tries to moderate his message for an election in which he will need to appeal to independents who are not libertarian. That is an exaggeration. Just say, he isn’t my first choice, but stop the Bob Barr comparisons.

  52. TANSTAAFL TANSTAAFL April 11, 2012

    “The LP isn’t just a party – we have plenty of those already and they can be wishy-washy and moderate if they want and they still lose …”

    No we have 1 of those with two parts. We need a viable third. And it should not be more than a party, it should be a party. If you think that, you are using the wrong vehicle for change. You are in a car trying to figure out how to fly. That is part of the problem. The other two parties fight it out in the primaries and then rally around their candidate. This is what distinguishes a political party from a group of people with overlapping platforms.

  53. John Jay Myers John Jay Myers April 11, 2012

    Unfortunately Gary’s campaign does not stand a chance at even achieving our modest 5% goal, without Ron Paul people.

    By courting Ron Paul people he is also courting libertarians and trying to prove to people who have left this party that the party stands for something.

    We have to convince people that Root and Bob Barr were just passing fancies and we understand …. basically what Ron Paul talks about when talks about Freedom.

    Being Anti-war and anti-bank (ie the fed) strongly, are the kind of things that get those who have stop voting or never voted to get off of their couch.

    But a really moderate message that sounds much like what the R’s and or D’s are saying now isn’t going to achieve our modest goal.

  54. George Phillies George Phillies April 11, 2012

    “The Fair Tax eliminates the income tax.”

    By replacing it with a different tax. I’m so utterly thrilled. Especially when I note that it will add 30 percentage points to my through-retirement taxes.

  55. Theres no such thing as a fair tax Theres no such thing as a fair tax April 11, 2012

    TNSTAAFL…..GJ shouldn’t be moderating in preperation for the general electorate before he has won the nomination of his own party. If he wants to win over ‘L’ libertarians maybe he should try taking on and standing up for some of the core issues within the LP bylaws and platforms. I personally would like to see his stance on internal affairs rather than the standard FB posts ad naseum about a small number of issues like gay marriage or the drug war. Where does he stand on the NAP? Take a stand on some of the platform or bylaw issues….show that he is in tune with what is happening within the party. That kind of stuff will go a long way with party activist respect if he does win the nomination. That….he’s on a jet campaigning and doesn’t have time for the internet BS might work after the convention, but sounds pretty weak before it

  56. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp April 11, 2012

    @49,

    “The income tax will never go away unless people think there is a viable alternative to REPLACE it. It is an imperfect solution to a destructive problem and so many libertarians would rather stand still than take a step forward because it is not a big enough step.”

    No, many libertarians would rather stand still than take a step IN THE WRONG DIRECTION of 50 new IRSes, a universal federal welfare entitlement, and the most economically damn-foolish plan since Smoot-Hawley.

  57. Be Rational Be Rational April 11, 2012

    @ 49

    The LP isn’t just a party – we have plenty of those already and they can be wishy-washy and moderate if they want and they still lose …

    The LP is a “Party of Principle” and part of what it is intended to do is articulate a vision of what a Libertarian future can and should be.

    Presenting those principles – a program for Liberty – can be done in a peaceful, moderate and modest way. But, it must not throw away our principles in doing so.

    What you call “compromise” on the unFair tax looks to others in the LP like a complete abandonment of what a libertarian should stand for.

    In this case, Gary Johnson needs to change. He’s the one who’s out of step with a Party that he has joined long ago, a Party he has returned to, a Party he is courting to garner support from it’s members and a nomination to represent that Party for the office of President of the United States.

    As such, if nominated, Gary Johnson will carry our banner, and if he cannot adequately represent what it truly means to be a Libertarian, then he will not earn the support of enough of the Party membership to run a united campaign or perhaps not enough to win the nomination at all.

    If Gary Johnson does not drop his support of the unFair tax, he does not deserve and must not be nominated as the LP candidate for President.

  58. TANSTAAFL TANSTAAFL April 11, 2012

    “If Gary Johnson supports the “prebate” welfare expansion under the “Fair” tax, then I will NOT support him either at the convention or as the nominee of the Libertarian Party.”

    Jeebus Christ on a stick! the whining about the fair tax may be the biggest hissy fit I have ever seen.
    It will eliminate the “Income tax” maybe the most destructive tax possible because it specifically punishes production, investing and savings.

    You keep whining about the welfare possibilities with the Fair Tax, WE ALREADY HAVE IT!!!! right now we have an income tax and social engineering/welfare subsidies. The Fair Tax eliminates the income tax. That is 50% better than what we have.

    The income tax will never go away unless people think there is a viable alternative to REPLACE it. It is an imperfect solution to a destructive problem and so many libertarians would rather stand still than take a step forward because it is not a big enough step.

    This is a political party not a philosophy club. Politics is compromise. Don’t like it. Find another vehicle for change, but don’t step on the field and expect to win if you don’t play the game.

  59. TANSTAAFL TANSTAAFL April 11, 2012

    “This is the type of problems we get with a candidate that does not articulate strong libertarian principles. ”

    I disagree. I think that he is preparing for the general election with the media and trying to take a moderate stance on many issues that the majority of voters would not support a truly libertarian stance – ie, non-interventionism.

    “and I think that Gary Johnson is less libertarian than the average Libertarian Party member, and he’s probably less libertarian than the average Ron Paul supporter as well.”

    To do well in the general election a candidate needs to be less partisan than the average party member. If not, they can count only on votes of their party. Just look at Romney as the GOP nominee. Obama was an abbe ration due to his personal popularity. Clinton was much more moderate and even many democrats think she would do much better than him in the 2012 election.

    Also, Ron Paul supporters (for the most part) are just that – supporters of Ron Paul. In many ways they are like Obama supporters in that it is the person more than the principles that they are supporting. Don’t believe me? watch what happens to them after he is out of the race. They will take their ball and go home. That is not a political party, it is a group of people that support a single candidate.

    Finally, the LP gets an average of .2-.5% of the votes in a presidential election including such libertarian greats as Harry Browne (maybe one of the best advocates of our ideals). We have to reach out and broaden our base by including more small L’s (or even micro-L’s) or single issue libertarians or else continue to wallow in obscurity.

    Gary Johnson vetoes 750 bills in 8 years and left his state with a smaller government than when he arrived, advocated for school choice, and is a vocal supporter of gay marriage and marijuana decriminalization, supported neither Iraq, Afghan nation building, nor Libya. Give me another example of an effective small government, pro-liberty office holder? Paul for all his accomplishments in spreading the message never accomplished any tangible legislative results. AND he too has taken very UN-libertarian stances such as leaving gay marriage to the states (in violation of the constitution) and voting for building a wall across the border.

  60. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 11, 2012

    45 jjm, I think Anderson and Perot, using liberty as the True North. So, I guess we have to agree to disagree…

  61. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 11, 2012

    44 jjm, sorry, but you are changing the subject and possibly jumping to conclusions not in evidence. You set up a hypothetical comparing Assad and Obama and how media bias might play out under similar circumstances in the respective nations.

    I do see a difference in how Obama got into office vs. Assad. You?

    I’ve said nothing about “spreading democracy,” and I suspect we’d largely agree that such behavior is contra-indicated and virtually always counter-productive.

  62. John Jay Myers John Jay Myers April 11, 2012

    Capozzi, the reason we have to worry about Gary’s stance is because we don’t expect him to win the election, we simply want him to get at least 5% hopefully 15%.

    Centrist policies do not cause people to lose their comfortable shoe of Republican/Democrat policies. Only a strong stance on these issues will bring in enough people to get the percentages we need.

    Trying to be a moderate will result in another 1% vote total. Sorry.

  63. John Jay Myers John Jay Myers April 11, 2012

    RC, “Democracy”? Really, would any real journalist lead people to believe that is what we spread in the Middle East?

    Did we spread democracy when we took out Mossadegh in Iran? How much Democracy was spread by backing General Musharraf? Was it Democracy we were after when we backed Saddam? Oh I remember the Democracy we longed for when we gave Mubarak $80 Billion dollars?

    “Democracy” gee whiz.

  64. zapper zapper April 11, 2012

    For me it still comes down to this:

    If Gary Johnson supports the “prebate” welfare expansion under the “Fair” tax, then I will NOT support him either at the convention or as the nominee of the Libertarian Party.

    If Johnson dumps his support of the “Fair” tax, he can call for replacement of all taxes with a single flat-rate consumption tax with no welfare component, and the Constitutional repeal of all other taxes.

    Then I will support him as the nominee of our party.

  65. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 11, 2012

    41 a: I think that his support of the Fair Tax and his support of at least some US government intervention in foreign affairs is enough to keep a lot of small “l” libertarians and independents from supporting his campaign and from voting for him in November.

    me: On balance, my guess is you are not correct, especially on foreign policy. STRICT non-interventionism is a very rare stance, especially among independents. But you might be correct…do you have any empirical data to back your assertion? I don’t, btw, just a gut sense.

  66. Andy Andy April 11, 2012

    This is the type of problems we get with a candidate that does not articulate strong libertarian principles.

    Many Libertarian Party members are so enamored with the fact that Gary Johnson is a former elected Governor that they are overlooking the fact that he’s flawed from a libertarian perspective. He’s got flaws on foreign policy, he’s flawed by supporting the Fair Tax sham, and he’s got other flaws as well. I think that his support of the Fair Tax and his support of at least some US government intervention in foreign affairs is enough to keep a lot of small “l” libertarians and independents from supporting his campaign and from voting for him in November. If so, then the Libertarian Party will still be regarded as an irrelevant joke by these people, and these are the people that the Libertarian Party desperately needs to bring in if it ever wants to expand.

    If Gary Johnson is less Libertarian than the average Libertarian Party member, as well as the average Ron Paul supporter, then I think that we’ve got a serious problem if he becomes the Libertarian Party’s candidate for President, and I think that Gary Johnson is less libertarian than the average Libertarian Party member, and he’s probably less libertarian than the average Ron Paul supporter as well.

  67. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 11, 2012

    38 jjm, oh, sure, the media is biased. They generally take the “side” of the elected, so they have a democracy bias.

    I tend to as well.

    The media tend to be biased on a number of fronts, and I’d say bias is the human condition.

  68. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 11, 2012

    37 tk, NED, CIA, and other shadowy government or quasi-government agencies may well be involved in Syria. If pressed, I’d say they probably are in some fashion. Whether they call the shots there, try to steer the uprising, try to manipulate the uprising, or whatever, I just dunno.

    Similarly, there may well be a cult of the omnipotent state, but honestly I’ve never met one person who blindly believes that the state should be all powerful.

    It’s not to say I don’t occasionally have paranoid moments, but generally I’m mindful that my worst fears are more often than not overblown.

  69. John Jay Myers John Jay Myers April 11, 2012

    Capozzi to understand the media bias, look at the words used. “Murder”, “killing his own people”, if there was a group of armed men hell bent on killing Obama right now, and they were all shot and killed in a stand off, do you believe our media would call it “murder” or “killing our own people”.

    I hardly think Assad considers people pointing guns at him to be “his people”.

    Just sayin’

  70. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp April 11, 2012

    RC@35,

    Not necessarily CIA per se, but there’s a fairly good case for the Syrian uprising to be US-backed, US-funded and US-instigated from the git-go.

    If you look at the “non-governmental organizations” which purport to speak for the Syrian “opposition,” such as the Human Rights Observatory, you’ll find that most of them receive the bulk of their funding from a US government organization called the National Endowment for Democracy, established in the 1980s as a sop to neoconservatives for their support of Reagan.

    Entirely coincidentally, of course, groups which are funded by the NED always seem to pop up behind internal insurgencies in countries with regimes that just happen to be at odds with the US regime’s line at any particular moment.

  71. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 11, 2012

    dropped a “t”…I can’t read minds.

  72. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 11, 2012

    34 jjm: if you don’t believe our CIA starts these coups and our media backs them, I am sorry for you.

    me: I simply don’t know what the CIA is doing in Syria. Might be involved, might be agitating, might be at the center of the protest movement. Recall: I’m the one who can’ read minds.

    Similarly, I don’t know when the media covers things with ulterior motives or not. In part, I think they cover wars because they know if it bleeds, it leads, and gets eyeballs.

    Whether there’s a massive conspiracy between the CIA, the media, and – I dunno – the Rothchilds, I’d need something more concrete to buy the theory.

  73. John Jay Myers John Jay Myers April 11, 2012

    Robert, here is our media’s MO, first demonize someone, make them seem like the ultimate evil, then start a mini revolution in the country, where maybe a revolution in the country only enjoys about 20% popularity, let the revolution get violent burn busses, buildings, be armed.

    When the leader of that country responds to the revolution, use this as the only thing you show on television “He is killing his own people!”

    Show only videos where civilians are harmed, as many as you can. Then distort the numbers saying things like “10,000 people have been killed since this began.” The missing piece to that puzzle is that 3000 are soldiers on one side, and 3000 are soldiers on the other.

    There are two facts to remember, one if we are going to charge everyone who has killed 4000 civilians during a conflict with war crimes, let us start with George HW Bush, Bill Clinton, George W Bush, and Barack Obama, Benjamin Netanyahu.

    The second one is that if there were armed revolutionaries in this country lighting busses on fire, burning down buildings carrying small arms, what type of response do you think we would have?

    I can tell you from first hand experience if you protest at the Republican National Parties convention, by sitting in the grass, you will be tear gassed and met with an army of police in riot gear and batons.

    So all I ask is for a little perspective, and if you don’t believe our CIA starts these coups and our media backs them, I am sorry for you. There is no other way to interpret the information we are fed.

  74. just saying just saying April 11, 2012

    @26 – write-in candidates for President don’t have an electoral slate. You might as well write in the Cookie Monster.

  75. TANSTAAFL TANSTAAFL April 11, 2012

    “btw, it appears that Romney’s great grandfather was a polygamist”

    Ha! That’s rich. I can bet my kid’s college fund the Daily Caller doesn’t bring that up in an interview. Matt Taibibi maybe or MSNBC, but not fox or TDC.

  76. TANSTAAFL TANSTAAFL April 11, 2012

    Robert 29,

    I completely agree that he could do a much better job of answering (and deflecting) questions that are designed to ensnare him. I am simply pointing out the hostile milieu in which this article and interview were conducted and that people on this thread should keep in mind.

  77. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 11, 2012

    more…

    btw, it appears that Romney’s great grandfather was a polygamist.

  78. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 11, 2012

    Suggested answer for the polygamy question in light of support for same-gender marriage:

    “Polygamy has been practiced in the US and is currently practiced in many parts of the world. While it is an interesting philosophical question, my campaign’s focus is on issues that are ripe for the public square in this nation at this time. Delving into such hypotheticals is counterproductive.”

  79. TANSTAAFL TANSTAAFL April 11, 2012

    Here’s a little more love for libertarianism from the Daily Caller:

    “When one questioner suggested that it’s difficult to support gay marriage philosophically and not support polygamy between consenting adults, Johnson replied: ‘I agree with that philosophically.'”

    “Asked if he has a libertarian view on consenting adults having more than one spouse, Johnson made clear he didn’t want to discuss the topic, replying that ‘if you talk about those kinds of issues you will be labeled as kooky.’ ”

    Looks like some pretty unbiased journalism to me. Questions go from gay marriage equality to polygamy in record time.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/05/10-things-about-libertarian-presidential-candidate-gary-johnson/#ixzz1rkNgm0nu

  80. TANSTAAFL TANSTAAFL April 11, 2012

    Before everybody gets their panties in a wad, consider the source and lack of context of the article – The Daily Caller. A publication unfriendly to libertarian principles unless they are spouted by establishment republicans. Take a look at today’s article about Johnson in which he talks about the unfairness of drinking age laws especially for 18 year old soldiers. They entitled it – “Gary Johnson – Lower the Drinking Age!”. Yeah, they aren’t trying to make him (or libertarians) look bad, huh?

  81. Austin Battenberg Austin Battenberg April 11, 2012

    Hmmm, I really was thinking about voting for Gary should he get the Libertarian nod. Perhaps I will write in Ron Paul after all.

    I have much to think about.

  82. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 11, 2012

    24 jjm: Syria is another boondoggle, we are simply taking over their country. We are using the media to do it.

    me: Is this some sort of shorthand, because I don’t get what you’re saying here? The US media is taking over Syria? Please clarify….

  83. John Jay Myers John Jay Myers April 11, 2012

    t-rex, I hear you, and I hope that Gary pulls this together, but, certain things don’t square. If I were to talk to him, it would be to spend a day getting deep into foreign policy and see what doesn’t add up.

    Namely, how do you reduce defense spending by 43% yet stand ready to back Israel, drone attack random third world countries, start new wars in Africa we have hardly been a part of…. and the list goes on.

    But more importantly, this isn’t about affordability it is about what is really going on. There is something far more sinister at play here, prior to Kony’s side taking power the other side was killing people in much the same way, and if we kill Kony (who isn’t even in the country they want us to invade) then who takes over and what do they want? And… how do they want to do it?

    Syria is another boondoggle, we are simply taking over their country. We are using the media to do it. I don’t expect Johnson to go this far, but that is what is happening.

    Prior to our taking over Iran we need to destabilize their allies. It’s been working, but we need that oil, so let the guns and ammo fly.

    Obviously that is sarcasm, but what is unseen is that these people in all these countries aren’t as stupid as the average American, and when they realize what is really going on, the back lash is going to be tremendous, and unless we are looking forward to a future of check points on every other block, we better quit being the dick of the world.

  84. just saying just saying April 11, 2012

    @21 “GJ is NOT Bob Barr”

    Yeah, Barr comes off as about 25 IQ points higher…

  85. just saying just saying April 11, 2012

    “Does withdrawing our military presence from Afghanistan mean that we would still have a base open in Afghanistan if they allowed us to keep a base open? Perhaps.”

    This is just flaky.

    Then when you add in the Kony nonsense ….

    Roemer’s tariffs on the ChiComs are looking better than Johnson’s FairTax every day….

  86. Nope GJ isn’t a strict non-interventionist. Are you ? Where does the Daily Caller come down? Not L for sure. When they say ron paul’s foreign policy is “a radically extreme one” they aren’t going to be friendly to any LP POTUS candidate. Gary Johnson is a moderate Libertarian.

    GJ has called for another look at all deployments. I can live with a 43% reduction across the board and an end to foreign aid! Can you ?
    That figure means the policy would be moving in a L direction. Which is the correct direction. Europe, Japan and Korea are definitely on GJ’s table. I know it’s delusional thinking to most, but GJ has never lost an election. I think even today he feels if he can debate Obama and Romney in primetime on national TV he has a chance to even win this year! A complete non-intervention/non-policeman of the world policy (which I agree with 100%) won’t sale now. It plays into the fearmongers hands. It scares too many people. The masses must be educated and a gradual move made back to the original U.S. foreign policy of the founding fathers! GJ can be those first steps toward a restoration of our L position.

    Myers I’m sure you could help him on FP, but don’t expect him to be reading IPR. He is campaigning heavy and is on jets regularly. Contact your state reps AND the Utah HQ and explain the need and your willingness to help! I’ll try to put in a good word 4 you with the regional rep in my area. After the nomination GJ will need all of our help !

    Wonder who will play this role at the Convention? Christine Smith against FAKE Libertarian Bob Barr – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPNLxv8-g1E&feature=related
    (funny I used this one as what she refers to about CIA, Fed prosecutor and Columbia is why I opposed Barr so early. )

    Again I say GJ is NOT Bob Barr and I hope no one will even consider grandstanding this year harming the Party even more! Vote for your candidate, when Johnson wins it will be time to move on. No room for circular firing squads this year. The LP needs to make it’s largest effect on national politics in it’s history. We are living in very serious times and the Libertarian message needs to be heard now more than at anytime in our lives.

    Gary Johnson 2012: Let’s Talk About The ISSUES – http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues

    I can live with this LP nom being right on 80 to 90% of the issues. Can you ?

    Vote Different – Vote Libertarian – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxO6i0khqhk&feature=player_embedded

  87. paulie paulie April 10, 2012

    Justin Raimondo looked at Johnson’s foreign policy a year ago here:

    http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/04/21/gary-johnson-caveat-emptor/

    Raimondo overstates his case in quite a few particulars.

    For example

    Yes, Johnson is against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan: and yes, he wants to bring the troops home from Europe and other places where they have no business being, but he is clearly tailoring his campaign to suit the softcore sensibilities of the Beltway crowd. For example, he’s supposedly against foreign aid – except, perhaps, when it comes to Israel. It’s not clear if, like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), he would end that particular boondoggle,

    Rand Paul is hardly a purist when it comes to foreign policy and the “war on terror”.

    It is all too clear to me what the Johnson campaign represents: the attempt by the so-called “cosmopolitan” (cosmotarian?) wing of our movement to create “the next Ron Paul” – and dump all that antiwar, anti-Federal Reserve “kooky” stuff, which the Beltway libertarian organizations funded by the so-called”Kochtopus” look down their noses at. These sophisticates sniff disdainfully at Paul’s Christianity, his country-doctor-bourgeois persona, his personal opposition to abortion: they are especially embarrassed by his opposition to the pernicious role played by the central bankers of the Federal Reserve in destroying our economy because this is something that is never brought up at Georgetown cocktail parties.

    I’ve commented on another thread earlier this evening showing that Johnson’s position on the federal reserve is not significantly, if at all, different from Ron Paul’s, and as for dumping “all” the antiwar stuff, didn’t I just quote the very same article saying

    Yes, Johnson is against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan: and yes, he wants to bring the troops home from Europe and other places where they have no business being…

    Why, yes, I did.

    Dumping ALL the antiwar stuff? Hardly.

    It is, however, entirely true that Johnson’s abortion position envisions significantly less of a role for the state in the matter than Ron Paul’s or Rand Paul’s.

  88. Trent Hill Trent Hill April 10, 2012

    Essentially, all they’re saying is that he would not commit to doctrinaire non-interventionism.

    LPers should keep this within context. Sometimes it’s necessary for a to give answers to specific questions, instead of answering only in absolutes. He says he doesn’t want to close the door–but essentially everytime he’s asked about a specific scenario, he closes the door. So what’s the difference?

  89. Steven R Linnabary Steven R Linnabary April 10, 2012

    Why is it up to us to police Kony?

    Because he can be taken seriously. Another rebel leader in Africa doesn’t have the same problem, even though he uses the same tactics. Who can take General Butt Naked seriously?

    PEACE

  90. Ad Hoc Ad Hoc April 10, 2012

    ^
    asshat

  91. Noble White Knight Noble White Knight April 10, 2012

    Face the music, kinfolk!

    The losertarians will nominate pro-war, pro-zionist Johnson and the constipated party will nominate pro-war, pro-zionist Goode.

    There is only one true choice for those who put America First over the 30 pieces of silver of the Elders of Zion….only one choice to carry forth the true and noble White Banner of the Ron Paul revolution…only one last great hope for secure the existence of our people and a future for our children…

    Merlin Miller of the American Third Position!

    A true Grand Wizard among noble White Knights everywhere.

    A leader of the American Intifada, a savior of our heritage!

    Merlin Miller rides to the rescue!

  92. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 10, 2012

    11 ds, yes, sorry, “some.”

  93. LibertarianGirl LibertarianGirl April 10, 2012

    Im voting for Lee Wrights …the consistent antiwar candidate….ending war is simply not an issue that can involve compromise IMO.

  94. Steven Wilson Steven Wilson April 10, 2012

    Lee Wrights in 2012!!

    He won’t let you down.
    He will help you up.

    End all war!!

  95. Double Standard? Double Standard? April 10, 2012

    Capozzi: IPR readers are sophisticated. They know that the media does hatchet jobs all the time. They know that sailing away from the status quo is no easy task. They’ve seen Ron Paul often seem rambling, even incoherent.

    You mean SOME IPR readers, yes?

    I’ve never seen Ron Paul rambling or incoherent.

  96. NewFederalist NewFederalist April 10, 2012

    I lived in New Mexico the entire time Johnson was governor and he was a GREAT governor especially for a Republican (or Democrat, for that matter). Will he be a really good representative for the LP as the presidential nominee? Perhaps not. Goode will be really bad for the CP as well IMHO. Minor parties should nominate people who actually represent their views (like Wrights or Castle) not people who fail in the major parties’ contests. In the end the vote totals will be about the same and the almost certain later embarrassment can be avoided. Just my $0.02 worth.

  97. Jill Pyeatt Jill Pyeatt April 10, 2012

    This article is very disturbing to me. We need to really vet this man, and not just assume he’s the appropriate choice for President.

    I’m choosing the consistent anti-war condidate, Mr. Lee Wrights.

  98. ATBAFT ATBAFT April 10, 2012

    We’ve accepted all sorts of half-way measures from our candidates in re drug legalization.
    Why not foreign policy? As Mr. Capozzi says, unwinding the current situation takes time.

    Gene McCarthy was the “peace candidate” though I bet his views were a little more nuanced than “war is not or never the answer.”
    We need to brand Johnson as the guy to bring the troops home now from Afghan., as soon as possible under treaties with Japan, Korea, etc. and to eschew “invasions of the month.” The LP Platform may indeed be tougher than Johnson, or any of our House and Senate candidates are prepared to advance on the stump.

  99. Joe Buchman Joe Buchman April 10, 2012

    John @ 2. I hope he reaches out. These are not the kind of answers that would work, IMO, if he were to get into the general election debates.

    And they will do a lot of damage to the Libertarian brand/message. As I’d expect if he gets into those debates that his R and D opponents will quote this back at him.

    IMO, You need to help him be prepared for THAT.

  100. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 10, 2012

    tk 5, a great question. Of course, IPR readers are sophisticated. They know that the media does hatchet jobs all the time.

    They know that sailing away from the status quo is no easy task.

    They’ve seen Ron Paul often seem rambling, even incoherent. Even those who “get” Paul’s message may notice that it’s not easy to lay out an entirely different paradigm than the prevailing one. Sometimes, he struggles to frame the message in ways that communicate.

    GJ has and will struggle, too. His f.p. views are even less black-and-white compared with RP’s, who uses (his interpretation of) the Constitution as his fallback position.

    And, of course, we IPR readers know that no one will be 100% satisfied with any candidate. Expecting that is a setup for failure….

  101. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp April 10, 2012

    The question the LP should be asking itself — or maybe DOES ask itself and then gives itself the wrong answer — is not “will this guy get us more publicity and more votes?”

    Rather it is “will the publicity and votes this guy gets us help us accomplish our goals?”

    To take it to the reductio level, there’s a reason Nike touts endorsements from star athletes rather than from Charles Manson and Joseph Kony.

  102. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi April 10, 2012

    Developing a simplistic, theoretical construct is a relatively easy thing. Even some anarchoLs concede, for ex., that unwinding SS is not something that is just done with the wave of a hand.

    Similarly, unwinding a decades-long interventionist foreign policy is not effected by pointing to Lincoln Brigades. Leaving options open sounds reasonable to me.

    Some Ls believe that spending one penny to contribute to putting down a genocide is “immoral.” I can’t say I agree, and I’d venture to say most of humanity wouldn’t either.

  103. John Jay Myers John Jay Myers April 10, 2012

    Gary, call me. I will help you with this. At least 15% of this country is so ani-war they would vote for libertarian if presented with the right candidate, and that is what we are shooting for right?

    The DC pointed out what I have been trying to tell you for a while, your foreign policy doesn’t make sense and comes across wishy washy. Why is it up to us to police Kony? Why do we need to be launching drones against terrorism, that creates terrorism. Let’s talk, let me help you with the foundation to a libertarian foreign

  104. Mike Kane Mike Kane April 10, 2012

    Johnson is far from a non-interventionist. In my upcoming letter to delegates I will be posting many a statement by Johnson, including my own interactions with him, that prove he will infact use U.S. troops and tax payer funds to meddle with other countries affairs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

nineteen − 9 =