Geoff Neale, Former Libertarian Party Chair, Endorses Governor Gary Johnson

Geoffrey J. Neale headshotFrom the Gary Johnson Campaign:

April 25, 2016, Salt Lake City, UT — Former Chairman of the National Libertarian Party Geoff Neale has endorsed Governor Gary Johnson for the Libertarian Party nomination for President.

Neale served as Chairman of the National Libertarian Party from 2002 to 2004, and again from 2012 to 2014. He also served two terms as Chairman of the Texas Libertarian Party, and five terms on the Libertarian National Committee. Neale joins former Libertarian Chairs Bill Redpath and Mark Hinkle in endorsing Gov. Gary Johnson.

Citing Johnson’s experience and appeal to independents, Neale said, “Gary Johnson, whose combination of business and political credentials are better than Clinton, or Sanders, or Cruz or Trump.” “I believe that Gary Johnson will be our best choice.”

This entry was posted in Libertarian Party and tagged , on by .

About Caryn Ann Harlos

Caryn Ann Harlos is a paralegal residing in Castle Rock, Colorado and presently serving as the Region 1 Representative on the Libertarian National Committee and is a candidate for LNC Secretary at the 2018 Libertarian Party Convention. Articles posted should NOT be considered the opinions of the LNC nor always those of Caryn Ann Harlos personally. Caryn Ann's goal is to provide information on items of interest and (sometimes) controversy about the Libertarian Party and minor parties in general not to necessarily endorse the contents.

38 thoughts on “Geoff Neale, Former Libertarian Party Chair, Endorses Governor Gary Johnson

  1. NewFederalist

    Is it me or is this year different with regard to endorsements? I don’t remember so many L/libertarian luminaries making endorsements like this. Most have been for Gary Johnson which if he is the “presumptive nominee” seem somewhat unnecessary.

  2. George Phillies

    Some of us do not think that boosting the dug war when you had a chance is Libertarian.

    Police the world? Johnson was too busy as governor expanding the war on drugs.

    With a tip of the hat to Tom Knapp
    http://knappster.blogspot.com/2016/04/home-stretch-questions-for-gary-johnson_28.html

    (To the extent possible under law, Thomas L. Knapp has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to KN@PPSTER. This work is published from: United States.)

    Governor Johnson,

    In a recent debate with fellow Libertarian presidential aspirant Austin Petersen in Oregon, you said “So I have a political arm, Our America Initiative, and we’ve been more outspoken regarding the Patriot Act perhaps than any other organization, writing editorials constantly about the Patriot Act and the infringement that it poses to all of us. As governor of New Mexico, I would have never ever established the Department of Homeland Security. I think it’s incredibly redundant.” You make that claim starting at about 26 minutes, 10 seconds into this video:

    https://youtu.be/2uQ1UtdftlY

    The National Governors Association says otherwise in its reprint of the New Mexico Department of Public Safety’s Homeland Security Strategic Plan:
    http://www.nga.org/files/live/sites/NGA/files/pdf/NMSTRATEGICPLAN.pdf

    In January 2002, Governor Johnson appointed the Department of Public Safety (DPS) Cabinet Secretary, Thomas L. English, as his Homeland Security Advisor. Mr. English immediately established the Office of Emergency Services and Security (OESS) to carry out homeland security functions and requirements. In July 2002, Mr. English established the DPS, Special Investigations Division, CounterTerrorism Intelligence Section (CTIS).

    The strategic plan describes an aggressive intelligence and surveillance plan, to include expanding New Mexico’s war on drugs under cover of the war on terror, in direct contradiction to your public statements indicating a desire to pare back the drug war:

    The State’s Homeland Security Advisor created a counterterrorism intelligence section within the Department of Public Safety, Special Investigations Division. This section will train law enforcement officers statewide in basic terrorism concepts and procedures in developing useful counter-terrorism intelligence. Another focus of this unit will be on identifying sources of drug funds and repositories for drug proceeds. It is believed that drug monies are being utilized to fund terrorist organizations.

    The record says that you actually did exactly what you now say you never would have done, not just on the broad issue of “Homeland Security” but with respect to the war on drugs and police militarization (as of the strategic report, using federal grants of more than $5 million for equipment purchases).

    What other parts of your actual record as governor of New Mexico are the exact opposite of the claims you make about that record today?

    Read more at http://knappster.blogspot.com/#e5tc2Emw06QZCEKW.99
    Home Stretch Questions for Gary Johnson #4 | KN@PPSTER
    political commentary, tech whinging and salacious gossip
    knappster.blogspot.com|By Thomas L. Knapp

  3. Stewart Flood

    There were actually significantly more endorsements last time. Several state parties, including my own, actually passed resolutions encouraging him to seek our nomination.

    Endorsements from internal party leaders who have a long history and are respected (and of course also hated) by many members is certainly worth taking the time to get.

    If you were to stack up McAfee’s latest endorsement against this one, I’d say it is worth 100 more delegates who are undecided. Petersen hasn’t announced any endorsements lately that I’m aware of.

  4. Stewart Flood

    Not to harp on the fact that I still think that Bob Barr was honestly trying to change, but Bob said that he did things, some of which he didn’t want to do, but he “carried the water” as congressmen are frequently told to by the party leaders. The official public record actually indicates that he authored the amendment to the patriot act that added the sunset provision and didn’t make it automatically a permanent law. Yes, he authored DOMA.

    He said in 2006 (to me) and in 2008 (publicly) that his position on a number of things had changed, and then he apologized to the delegates and the party for what he’d done. He didn’t deny it. He didn’t say he never did it and never would have. He said he now believe he was wrong in supporting the positions he had advocated.

    Just pointing this out since there appears to be a significant difference between Congressman Barr and Governor Johnson regarding their records. Governor Johnson needs to explain this at the convention. And if it turns out that the report above is true, then he needs to not only apologize for his actions but apologize for lying about it. Assuming of course that the above is true. I’m not calling Governor Johnson a liar, but is sure looks like the accusation might be made in Orlando.

  5. Gene Berkman

    Investigating whether funds from drug dealing are being used to promote terrorism is different from promoting drug prohibition in general.

    One of the unintended consequences of drug prohibition is the possibility of making serious money from black market dealing, and people have resorted to this form of money making for a variety of reasons.

    Ending drug prohibition would end the possibility of exploiting this black market to raise funds for terrorism or other questionable activities.

  6. George Dance

    Gene Berkman: “Investigating whether funds from drug dealing are being used to promote terrorism is different from promoting drug prohibition in general.”

    Thank you for pointing that out; “the record” does not say the same thing as TK/GP’s spin.

    Your other point is even better: The best way to stop illegal drug profits being used to finance terrorism is to eliminate those profits, by eliminating prohibition.

  7. George Phillies

    Stepping up drug law enforcement is stepping up drug law enforcement, whether you approve of the pretext or not.

  8. George Dance

    Stewart Flood: “Bob said that he did things, some of which he didn’t want to do, but he “carried the water” as congressmen are frequently told to by the party leaders. The official public record actually indicates that he authored the amendment to the patriot act that added the sunset provision and didn’t make it automatically a permanent law.”

    Not only did he author the sunset amendment in the House version of the Act, but he served on the conference committee to successfully get it in the final version. (The price for that being that he had to vote for the final Act.) I got that from Brad Jansen, Ron Paul’s congressional aide at the time, and wrote about it during the Denver convention; it was a bit of a sensation at the time.

    “Yes, he authored DOMA.” What I got from Richard Viguerie (years later, admittedly), was that DOMA was conceived as a way of forestalling a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage (which probably would have passed in those years). With the SCOTUS ruling last year, we can all see the wisdom behind that.

    “he apologized to the delegates and the party for what he’d done”. Yes, he grovelled; because grovelling was far easier, politically, than trying to defend his actions and explain what was really going on. As far as I’m concerned, though, Barr had nothing to apologize for. He’s guilty of playing the political game, nothing else.

    He said in 2006 (to me) and in 2008 (publicly) that his position on a number of things had changed, and then he apologized to the delegates and the party for what he’d done. He didn’t deny it. He didn’t say he never did it and never would have. He said he now believe he was wrong in supporting the positions he had advocated.

  9. Laura Brown

    I couldn’t agree more, Jeff. In this weird election season, the Libertarian candidate may be able to siphon votes from Trump, or from another extreme candidate. Our best shot at getting these protest votes is having an accomplished, experienced candidate like Gary Johnson??

  10. Stewart Flood

    I agree that he was playing the political game. That’s what he meant by carrying the water. Yes, “groveling” was easier than trying to explain things like the protections he got for the patriot act. That’s why I will still defend him and why I still consider him a friend.

    He wasn’t treated right by the party after the campaign. His work, especially on the road talking to colleges, was on-mark and giving the right message — and he was clearly sincere.

    And I know that he only ran for president because we had no one running worth nominating. I’m not slamming Dr Ruwart in saying this. Neither of them were in the race when he decided to run. Once he decided, he was in 100%. He worked his tail off in that campaign. On election night he was calling supporters and thanking them.

    But back to Johnson’s record…if (IF) what he did was different from what he has said he did then he has some explaining to do.

    We’re now exactly four weeks out from the convention. Four weeks from now, hundreds of delegates — possibly even a thousand of us — will be gathering to listen to the candidates and decide who to vote for.

    This was a significant endorsement. It is just part of a series of them, and they appear to be timed to keep momentum going. That’s what this discussion really should be about.

  11. Andy

    The Sunset Clause that Barr inserted into the Patriot Act did not sunset the entire act, just parts of it.

  12. Andy

    How about Congressman Barr’s vote for the Lautenberg Amendment (a gun control law)?

  13. Michelle Catlin

    Oh boy more out of context conspiracy theories from a failed 2008 candidate and his wacky cowboy sidekick who crawled back to the LP after his own little party couldn’t last a single election cycle.

  14. langa

    Sometimes I wonder just how many non-libertarian positions Johnson would have to take for his sycophants to abandon him. If he said that he wanted to double all taxes, totally ban alcohol, tobacco and caffeine, and simultaneously invade Russia and China, I wonder if that would be enough. I doubt it. After all, he would still have all that “experience” and all those “credentials” and other qualities that make him such a “respectable” candidate, and that’s what really matters, right?

  15. Anthony

    You can keep wondering that because it won’t actually happen in the real world.

  16. langa

    You can keep wondering that because it won’t actually happen in the real world.

    Why not? Between his burqa banning and his bakery slavery, Johnson has pretty clearly abandoned all pretense of being a libertarian, in favor of pandering to the worst aspects of both the right and the left.

  17. George Whitfield

    Excellent endorsement from Geoff Neale. On Geoff’s Facebook page is his complete endorsement and rationale. It is worth reading.

  18. Cody Quirk

    “Petersen hasn’t announced any endorsements lately that I’m aware of.”

    I wonder why?

  19. robert capozzi

    L: Sometimes I wonder just how many non-libertarian positions Johnson would have to take for his sycophants to abandon him.

    Me: Interesting perception. I have a different one. It seems to me I’ve seen many who support GJ who’ve acknowledged they disagree with him on some issues.

    I indicated when he announced and called for banning burqas, I said I was seriously considering not voting this year. That’s how disappointing I found his position, which — thankfully — he walked back.

    So, I wonder how many statements by GJ supporters stating that they don’t agree with him on some issues it would take for YOU to retract your charge of “sycophant”? 😉

  20. langa

    So, I wonder how many statements by GJ supporters stating that they don’t agree with him on some issues it would take for YOU to retract your charge of “sycophant”?

    This question makes no sense. If someone admits that they disagree with Johnson’s substantive positions, yet they still support his candidacy, that would make them more, rather than less, of a sycophant.

  21. George Phillies

    Gene,

    I found it by asking Knapp. It starts on the page numbered “6” which is page 9 of the 24.

    “Proactive Efforts:
    Critical Mission Areas:
    Intelligence and warning capabilities:
    Domestic counter-terrorism.
    These efforts are designed to prevent and mitigate terrorist actions.
    State, local and federal law enforcement agencies are critical to completing the functions required in these mission areas. The NM Department of Public Safety (DPS), Special Investigations
    Division (SID) will lead the counter-terrorism and intelligence gathering efforts for the state.
    The State’s Homeland SecurityAdvisor created a counter-terrorism intelligence section within the Department of Public Safety, Special Investigations Division. This section will train law enforcement officers statewide in basic terrorism concepts and procedures in developing useful counter-terrorism intelligence. Another focus of this unit will be on
    identifying sources of drug funds and repositories for drug proceeds. It is believed that drug monies are being utilized to fund terrorist organizations. A system will be implemented for gatheri
    ng and storing counter-terrorism intelligence that has a nexus to an ongoing criminal investigation or is the predicate that a probable cause situation has happened or will be developing. The system will also be used for New Mexico Homeland Security receiving and evaluating counter-terrorism intelligence related report and disseminating the data received to all levels of government. “

  22. Robert capozzi

    Langa, a Yes person agrees with a boss or someone else always as a means to curry favor with him or her.

    Many/most GJ supporters — being adults — recognize that no 2 people are going to agree on EVERYTHING. Heck, even Rorhbardians recognize this…many of them are pro life, while he was an extremist on the issue.

  23. langa

    Sure, RC, everyone (including Johnson) is entitled to be wrong occasionally. That’s why I didn’t criticize him much in 2012, despite his “Fair” Tax nonsense and his “humanitarian war” nonsense. Because, in spite of those things, he still ran on a reasonably libertarian platform, and even on the issues where he deviated, he at least tried to provide libertarian justifications for doing so.

    But the Gary Johnson of 2016 is an entirely different animal. Not only has he failed to correct his old mistakes, he has added new ones that are even more egregiously non-libertarian, and this time, as I mentioned above, he has dropped all pretense of even pretending that these positions are based on libertarian principles. He is just blatantly pandering, and yet, his supporters don’t seem to mind at all.

    The inescapable conclusion is that they are supporting him for reasons that have nothing to do with advancing libertarianism. Otherwise, they would try to get him to abandon these blatant deviations, and threaten to withdraw their support from him if he refuses to do so, rather going out of their way to ignore (or even defend) his authoritarian stands.

  24. robert capozzi

    Langa, a different movie’s being watched. When he spoke of burqa banning, there was such a firestorm, he walked that one back.

    Based on what I’ve seen, if he gets the nomination, I will take the time to vote for him, as he’s a lessarchist and not an extremist. I’m sure others who will vote for him have their reasons, and I’m sure there will be many. For those are NAPsters, they might still feel he doesn’t deviate “too much.”

    But you’ll have to ask them.

  25. George Dance

    Andy: Sorry I didn’t reply earlier. I was conflicted: (1) I don’t want to turn this thread away from the the topic (Johnson) to discussing Barr, but (2) I don’t want to ignore your comments, either. So I finally decided to write one quick reply, to both (with links to more), and that will be the end here:

    “The Sunset Clause that Barr inserted into the Patriot Act did not sunset the entire act, just parts of it.” True. The only parts sunsetted were those parts that expired last year (and were promptly re-passed in the “USA Freedom Act”). Here’s the link:
    “Ron Paul’s former aide reveals: ‘We needed’ Barr to vote for the Patriot Act: https://www.nolanchart.com/article3876-ron-pauls-former-aide-reveals-we-needed-barr-to-vote-for-the-patriot-act-html
    I still believe that, in 2002 when civil liberties were on the ropes, it was the best a libertarian could have accomplished. (Yes, Ron Paul opposed the entire Act, but his blanket opposition accomplished nothing.)

    “How about Congressman Barr’s vote for the Lautenberg Amendment (a gun control law)?”
    This is already too long, so I’ll just give links. Here’s the full 2-part story of the Lautenberg amendment and Barr’s vote:
    Bob Barr and the Gun Ban (I): https://www.nolanchart.com/article4582-bob-barr-and-the-gun-ban-i-html
    Bob Barr and the Gun Ban (II): https://www.nolanchart.com/article4583-bob-barr-and-the-gun-ban-ii-html
    and one more, on Barr’s voting record in Congress (tracked by Gun Owners of America):
    Bob Barr’s Gun Record: https://www.nolanchart.com/article4437-bob-barrs-gun-record-html

  26. George Phillies

    “Langa, a different movie’s being watched. When he spoke of burqa banning, there was such a firestorm, he walked that one back.”

    He noted that the people who will nominate him get upset. But where will he be two days after, God forbid, he hypothetically gets the nomination?

  27. Thomas L. Knapp

    George,

    Interesting that you should use the “two days” marker. IIRC, that’s the number of days after getting the LP’s 2008 nomination, before which he apologized to the LP for authoring DOMA, that he turned around on Fox and said that actually DOMA was very libertarian because “states rights are the essence of libertarianism.”

    I don’t think we’ll see reversals of that sort from Johnson if he’s the nominee, for the simple reason that apart from the burqa thing, which he walked back a little bit (he kept up the “sharia law” obsession, at least for awhile), he mostly doesn’t apologize for anything he does. He just lies about it and hopes nobody checks. There’s a degree to which that strategy works among Libertarians, a high percentage of whom are, for some reason, wired to see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear instead of looking and listening to what is actually there. We’ll find out in Orlando whether or not that percentage exceeds 50%.

    The worst outcome is not that Johnson gets nominated. The worst outcome is that Johnson is nominated and then manages to get into a debate with his major party opponents. The way he has started coming apart at the seams, ranting like Mussolini and yelling “that’s a lie!” whenever confronted with his record at LP events, and seemingly getting away with it, he may convince himself that he can get away with that shit in the big leagues too. He can’t. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton would give him a bare-bottom spanking and send him crawling off the stage with his pants wadded around his ankles and snot bubbles coming out of his nose. Gary Johnson in a hardball major party debate would set the LP back 22 years (to the era prior to Harry Browne’s campaigns).

  28. George Dance

    Gene Berkman: “Investigating whether funds from drug dealing are being used to promote terrorism is different from promoting drug prohibition in general.”

    George Phillies: “Stepping up drug law enforcement is stepping up drug law enforcement, whether you approve of the pretext or not.”

    Translation:
    “A and B are not the same thing.”
    “Sure they are, if we call them both C.”

  29. Thomas L. Knapp

    —-
    Translation:
    “A and B are not the same thing.”
    “Sure they are, if we call them both C.”
    —–

    Translation of translation: “Fuck the facts, go Gary.”

  30. Robert capozzi

    Gp: But where will [GJ] be two days after, God forbid, he hypothetically gets the nomination?

    Me: Most people make adjustments as a situation unfolds. Hopefully he improves as a candidate.

  31. Mike F

    Gary Johnson was involved with 2 Penny Stock SCAMS. Medican MDCN, and Cannabis Sativa CBDS. They stole $Millions & $Millions from investors. Johnson should be in jail, not pretending to run for president.

  32. Andy

    I am not really on the Johnson bandwagon, but do you have evidence that those penny stocks were scams?

    Just because there were people who lost money, it does not automatically mean those things were scams.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.