When they came for the Jews, and Gary Johnson

Looks like he might drop out of the Republican Primary and run as a Libertarian.

http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2011/09/is-gary-jo...

But I agree we should stand up for him. The Judge does. Oh and someone here was criticizing him on NAFTA and I remember him saying that he believes in free trade but doesn't know enough about NAFTA to support or oppose it. He said he favors eliminating tariffs...so overall I think he's good on that issue.

Foreign policy, obviously not as good, but probably about the same or slightly better than Rand Paul. No nation building, no wars. I think it was a slight slip up because he was being interviewed by that neocon rag. Everyone makes mistakes once and awhile.

The majority of his positions are very good and consistent, and his tenure as New Mexico's governor was really good. He also supported ending late term abortions, government funded abortions, and he wants to overturn roe v wade. while he may be pro-choice, he is still much better than liberals who are completely pro choice and want to keep the federal government involved.

Gary Johnson is pro-choice, pro-NAFTA, supports the fair tax, and apparently supports humanitarian wars and aid to Israel. Here's quotes from an interview in Dec 2010.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/meet-gary-johnson-ron-pa...

“If there’s a clear genocide somewhere, don’t we really want to positively impact that kind of a situation?” “Isn’t that what we’re all about? Isn’t that what we’ve always been about? But just this notion of nation building—I think the current policy is making us more enemies than more friends.”

“I think that we really do have a vested interest in Israel and that we shouldn’t walk away from that interest,”

He calls for more "oversight" of the Federal Reserve. This is a far cry from a complete ending of the Federal Reserve's monopoly, which Ron Paul advocates.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SldKv_Etihw&feature=player_em...

Not providing Johnson with just enough support to wear-down out-distance and financially slow-drain the lower 2nd tier candidates, very well could turn out to be grassroots worst mistake of the 2012 campaign. If I were to guess who among Paul's supporters were voicing the most resistance toward the idea of defending GJ , my guess would be it's coming mostly from the grassroots youth majority and those who have zero to very little experience with and/or understanding of national political campaign strategy.

Let me put forth the question - In the same current situation what if Gary Johnson were instead Judge Napolitano or Rand Paul?

Right now Johnson should be the 5th place obstacle standing between the bottom tier Santorum, Huntsman, Cain, Gingrich and the top tier Paul, Bachman, Perry, Womney; with more cash on hand than the bottom tier, and for most bottom tier candidates the Cali debate would be their last stand.

Instead of tuning into the debate next week and watching RP and GJ eat up the airtime with heated gentlemanly arguments over the finer details of policy, ideology, world history, economic theory; providing viewers with more informational education than they've had since high school - instead we're going to watch a replay of 2007 with every schmuck on that stage trying to make Ron look the fool. Again I ask what if Gary Johnson were instead Judge Napolitano or Rand Paul? Would having him in the arena with Ron be a threat our goal?

Just... just double checking.

There is only one candidate UP THERE who would actually restore our republic. Anything less than that is NOT what I am after.

I do agree that everyone should have a shot BUT the politics in this day and age are NOT made to be fair. You have to FIGHT for coverage OR be one of "thier" candidates.

Ron Paul got to where he is today from his message and it waking up a group that continues to grow. If Gary is able to build something like that then GREAT for him BUT as far as this election goes. All my resources, ideas, thoughts and voice is going to go to electing Ron Paul.

Call me unfair but I don't care right now. Our country is going to shit and "playing fair" to show others how cool we are is NOT what I am after.

I want to show all these SHEEP exactly what is needed which is

BRING THE TROOPS HOME
Remove the federal governments hold over the states
the rest will fall into place.

As far as vp talk, WHO CARES right now. If we get ron paul into that pole position then the vp at that point does not matter.

Last election people kept trying to put up ANY and ALL vp ideas with ron paul. Many were saying it in hopes of getting a certain candidates supporters LIKE hucks army etc... (for those who were campaigning back in 07 remember)

If gary feels left out then he needs to do something about that whether that be his supporters or otherwise. I just do not find it beneficial to waste my efforts on another candidate when we already know how hard of a fight we currently have.

Ron Paul is the ONE candidate who can help us. That is where my efforts will be.

a johnson supporter, saying paul can't win? didn't seem like much of an 'in case they came for the jews' moment. obviously the word 'libertarian' doesn't mean anything. it doesn't even mean we unite around the same cause. the term has already shown itself to be non-binding. stop elevating that term. we're 'new' libertarians.. not the old, for temporary use before we rebrand ourselves to separate from the old quasi libertarianism totally.