13 votes

Gary Johnson attacks Ron Paul on earmarks as his campaign is dying. Thanks Gary for your support, jerk.

Gary just lost my support.

Notice how he only takes a shot at Ron, making drugs the only thing he agrees with ron on but makes extremely passive statements about Romney and Gingrich.

Former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson, uninvited to 11 of 13 televised debates, says his campaign for president is dying.

He described himself as underexposed and mistreated, and said he probably cannot continue in the race much longer.

"There are five debates prior to the New Hampshire primary (on Jan. 10). If I'm shut out of all five, I don't see that I stand a chance in New Hampshire," Johnson said Friday in a wide-ranging, 50-minute interview. ...

Johnson is also tough on Gingrich, Romney and U.S. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas.

Of Romney he says: "I can't tell you where he stands on any issues at all."

On Gingrich: "I don't think he talks in specifics."

Johnson says Paul may come closest to his own views on certain issues, such as drug legalization. But Johnson says Paul acts in ways that he never could.

"He sticks his earmarks (spending projects) in the budget, but then votes against it. I can't do that. I can't play that kind of game," Johnson said. ...

New Mexico will have an open U.S. Senate seat in 2012 with the retirement of Democrat Jeff Bingaman. But Johnson said he would not jump into that race if his presidential campaign ends.

"I'm not interested in the Senate," he said.

More : http://www.lcsun-news.com/las_cruces-news/ci_19367561

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Gary Johnson

Johnson is wrong on immigration, but what is "Neo-Libertarianism" and how is it different from libertarianism?

Gary Johnson

I like some of what he has to say, but I disagree with him pretty strongly on immigration and life. Dr Paul has these issues exactly right.

It's natural that he would go after Dr Paul though, that's the only voter base he has even a chance of pulling in. And as I've said from the beginning, I can't fathom one reason why I would choose to vote for Gary Johnson over Ron Paul.

Gary Johnson had already lost my support...

... now or in the future based on his "open border" Neo-Libertarianism.

The Virtual Conspiracy



Looking too far

You are looking too far into this. It was just a quick statement he made about Paul. A brief point of disagreement. That's it. Politically, sure it looks bad.

But he's going to endorse Paul when he drops out, so it really doesn't matter. You do remember he answered the Vice President question with "Ron Paul" very sincerely in one of the debates, right?

I agree,

providing he doesn't become the Libertarian Party's nominee. In that case, if Ron Paul does not capture the GOP nomination, you might see him supporting Johnson (although Johnson's pro-choice stance on abortion might preclude it).

New Hampshire and Ecuador.

"I'm not interested in the Senate"

Ten bucks says he runs for the open senate seat in 2012.

If he wins, we shall see if he sticks to his guns on this one.

For the life of me, I can't figure out how the status quo, much less GJ, can criticize Paul on this.

Paul has constituents that elect him.

What is so wrong with saying, "I disagree with how this system works. I understand that we are currently stuck with this system. As your representative, I will grant your request for an earmark, but do not expect me to advocate, support, or vote for your earmark because it is against my principles. You have just as much right to try and retrieve the tax dollars that are confiscated from this district as anyone else, but after submitting an earmark that principle ends and another begins, and I must follow my principles. Do you understand that?"

Earmarks aren't some much

Earmarks aren't some much about getting money back for his constituents. Listen to his house floor speach lecturing congress on how it is their RESPONSIBILITY to have earmarks on the money in the bills. That way it is allocated for specific things instead of letting the executive branch spend it the way it sees fit.

The buildup about earmarks seem more of a neocon effort to divert and distract the "Tea Party" to foolish things.

That is another good point where Paul ...

distriguishes where one principle begins and where another ends.

If there was only one principle involved then according to the logic you stated, not only should there be earmarks, but Paul should also vote for the earmarks.

But there are still two principles involved using your argument.

1. The power to appropriate resides in the House of Representatives. This is the constitutional principle.
2. Debt is immoral and an unbalanced budget shall not have my approval.

Therefore, I shall do my duty as an appropriator, but after I submit my earmark, I shall fight against and vote against an expenditure that will require borrowing.

Answer Completed

Thanks. That was a good explanation. It looks like we have the complete answer now.

Let's assume that ...

the earmark was part of a package that included a balanced budget.

Here Paul would not be limited by his principles, unlike GJ and other Libertarians. They would rather remove the hand than be fed.

Paul would obviously vote for a balanced budget and he would clearly state that this would be the dominant principle that would dictate his support however ....

1. What if the bill included appropriations that were not constitutional such as welfare expenditures?
2. What if the bill contained expenditures that allowed for the enforcement of the Patriot Act?
3. What if the bill contained language that funded the crackdown on counterfeiters and put stiffer criminal penalties on people that tried to pass gold coins off as legal tender?

Paul has stated his axiom about incrementalism and to him, balancing the budget would be paramount and the other issues should be addressed at a later date and be handled in the market place of ideas and thru future elections.

GJ along with most Libertarians abhore this idea of incrementalism.

That is why they will never gain the support of a plurality much less a majority.

Why try to create enemies??

We need to be friendly to all Gary Johnson supporters and to Gary Johnson himself. He has been good to us and to Ron Paul and he has identical positions on most issues.

Stop the name calling and the division please. We need to reach out - not alienate ourselves and Ron Paul from new possible supporters and voters in general.

If anyone is in doubt how this is best done try to learn from Ron Paul himself.

not every gj skeptic's main concern is cause division

not every orderly skeptic is satisfied with his personality traits to inherit this movement


Inherit this movement????

Noone will inherit this movement. Freedom cannot be inherited.

We are all this movement. We have no leaders, no centralized administration to tell us what we should do or think.

On the other point Gary Johnson has followers that think like us, so why try to anger them by attacking their candidate? Makes no sense to me.

you really need to talk to more people outside of paul circles

go converse with the more traditional Libertarian party people a bit where ron only gets half of their support, with 1/3 of them refusing to even vote. there is a lot of expectation of gj coming over and potentially absorbing all of the paul camp. you can think the ridiculous aspect of it, but that's what they hope to achieve. you don't realize that because you simply don't talk to enough people. on that note i would suggest not presume so much..


The more libertarians the better.

Thank you...

I agree.

A little thin-skinned aren't we?

I'm actually surprised when something miniscule in the greater realm of things like this gets blown out of proportion. It's kind of an Alex Jones tactic that seems a bit trite. Johnson hadn't a chance in this race. I'm actually more aligned with Johnson's nuanced positions then Paul. I even threw some dough out his way just because I'm more interested in spreading the message of liberty then worrying about him as RP's competitor(don't worry, Ron got 10x more than Gary did from me.) That said, it is a RACE and in politics it's necessary to distinguish yourself from the other candidates, even when you mostly agree with that other candidate. Gary just repeated what Ron said himself and followed by saying he didn't agree with it. I don't find it necessary to call Johnson 'a jerk.' He'll be a good ally in the years to come. Let's avoid alienating philosophically congruent individuals.

i agree on some criticism you have on AJ

but you choose to address the most petty concerns to arise out of gary's mounting poor public relation issues with the paul camp. if one read your post, they would think this is the first time gary pulled this stunt. you miss the whole point. this is a process evaluation of leaders to carry the flag thereafter. rand paul is among a long list of competitors for this position. a smaller name may be mike lee, accompanied by many others. among these guys, who has the greatest personality potential and temperament. right now, gary is not scoring so well.

GJ's certainly no RP,

But be honest, were RP not in the race, wouldn't you be driving around with a Johnson2012 sticker on your car right now? I have yet to find a real reason to call GJ a jerk. I think it's unwarranted, and unbecoming. Of course, this is my opinion, and I could have missed something, but this is undeserved.

sorry i have this burning question that i just have to ask

why the f* do i care if somebody called gj a jerk? that person is not me. sorry for the language.

what does that have to do with the larger point that 'gj has competitors, it's not a monopoly, by pissing people off, he lowers his chance of being the successor'?

this brings up another burning question

why do people like you assume gj is going to automatically inherit this movement? really, why?

"be honest, were RP not in the race, wouldn't you be driving around with a Johnson2012 sticker on your car right now?"

um, no? maybe rand paul 2012? mike lee? strictly knowledge-based, tom woods? you can't really say gj has much name recognition advantage over tom woods. 2% tops? gj doesn't have as many bargaining chips as you would like to think.

you don't have to care...

like i said, it's just my opinion. And last I checked Rand, Tom Woods, Judge Napolitano, and Mike Lee aren't in the race. So again, considering the actual field of candidates, were RP NOT in the race, you wouldn't support Johnson's candidacy over Newt, Mittens, both (p)Rick's, etc? I know I would, and I have a sneaking suspicion that most RP supporters would as well. He'd instantly get 8% in polling and would be much more relevant. This is pure conjecture mind you. Now, I have no desire to make Johnson or anyone else a 'successor' of the grassroots liberty movement. For one, it sounds a little oxy-moronic. Second, I feel all of the forementioned names, along with folks like Jason Chaffetz, Adam Kokesh, BJ Lawson,John Dennis etc etc are all motivators for the movement, and in that future election if one or many of them run for office I'll do my homework and support the one that I like best. Just sayin'....jeepers.

it was very, very public recognition among paul camp that

if ron didn't run, rand would. that means gj would be running against rand now. one would almost get the sensation of rand announcing candidacy any moment, until ron announced. quite frankly, there were even some disappointments around here. did you hmm.. miss all that. where were you?

seriously, johnson is starting to remind me of a lighter version of Bob Barr.. another case of bruised ego because ron endorsed all 4 candidates, not just Bob. Libertarian party and their nominees..

I applaud Johnson for being honest...

Gary could play the "I support Ron entirely" game, or he can be honest on where he disagrees with Ron. In my opinion, this shows that he does not pander.

Remember that Johnson, at one of the debates, openly said that he supported Paul and would run as his VP if he had the chance. To the contrary, at the same debate, Paul did not give Gary the same credit. And I never heard people saying that Paul was messed up or egotistical for not returning the endorsement to his closest libertarian ally on stage (Gary).

Johnson is a libertarian ally who seems to have the capacity to think for himself. I applaud that. Cut him some slack. The guy's been mercilessly excluded from the debates (worse than Paul was back in '07), and I seldom (if ever) hear people pointing the extreme media bias he's faced.

So chill out with this thread. Johnson is being honest, I applaud that, and I wouldn't say its coming from a place of egotism...

Take the Red Pill at www.redpillphilosophy.com New Videos, Articles, and More!

you have a strange sense of 'honesty'

he is speculating ron paul is playing politics with earmarks. that's his opinion, not based on facts. he doesn't know. i know you don't like being called stupid, i don't know if you are stupid, but i called you stupid, because i am honest. you have a strange sense of 'honesty'.

I was very impressed with Gary Johnson when I first discovered

him. He seemed to be Ron Paul's successor. He has been somewhat of a disappointment I must say. He isn't playing his cards very intelligently. Someone who should be a shoe-in for a position in a Paul administration and a future presidential candidate should be a little more supportive of Dr. Paul.

well two things i get from this

gary johnson has ego, a lot more than ron paul.

two he doesn't have the maturity. he knew he would turn people off by this stunt, but his emotion got the better of him, and he couldn't hold himself back.

ego and immaturity. not very good character additions to the 'next gen' of liberty spreader.

give me a break

So Gary said he can't play that kind of game. So what?

He's not running for congressman.

He didn't say that Ron is wrong he just said he can't do what Ron does.


might i remind you all that Johnson ENDORSED Ron in 08 and picked him on stage as his potential VP at the debate, giving cred to Ron?

Chill OUT

Registration for Republican Bomb, 12-11-11 to 1-12-12! Pledge now at http://RonPaulResupply.com

MP3s on YouTube drives 100000+ hits for Ron Paul !! :


Who started this earmark trip?

It seems as part of the 2010 elections, this earmark issue was a mantra to many of the "Tea Party" candidates. They were making promise of no more earmarks.

It seems like a ploy to undermine and divert the "Tea Party".

Does anyone have any idea how this started and from who?

well its good to know

he can be ruled out as a potential VP candidate... makes things easier