20 votes

Gary Johnson or Mitt Romney?

Ron, I understand why you and Rand are doing this: to reform the GOP and give your son a place of power within it, but I fear the GOP is beyond hope as long as Southern Evangelicals dominate it.

For me the better message to send America is a rejection of the Duopoly. Let's get Gary Johnson to 15% in national polls in order to qualify him for the presidential debates. Down with Obamney! Go Gary Johnson!



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

whatever

whatever

A nation of sheep breeds a government of wolves.

If Republicans

say they need to infiltrate Ron Paul type communities and it works then Ron Paul communities know what they are dealing with. Don't you all think?

Today is a good day, make money....
Let it burn before concession:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmUZ6nCFNoU
Use encryption...and More why?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suqhj4Ociqk
Https remember the days when you were free...It was beautiful!

It is assanine to assume

an R obomny will do it at a slower rate and keep in ming he could have a longer time. 8yrs not 4 ! Voting Romney is caving to the establishment Rs and could bring us back to square 1. They lie cheat, ignore, and we reward them by giving them Romney????? Hell no !

once again......

Do you really think Rand is a traitor rat fink who just stabbed his father in the back OR do you think he is one of us and is holding his nose and playing politics in order to keep up the good fight from WITHIN the party? I for one believe the latter. YES it is playing politics and politics stink but what better option do we have to change the party?

Be smart and carry on the fight. WE ARE IN THIS TO CHANGE THE PARTY TO OUR IDEALS. Put them in power, keep the pressure on, and support Rand IMHO

A nation of sheep breeds a government of wolves.

No, Ron and Ran are

No, Ron and Ran are orchestrating this specifically to improve Rand's chance of becoming President.

Personal gain in trade for selling out everyone who supported the Pauls.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

Save it

for Facebook groovy

Today is a good day, make money....
Let it burn before concession:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmUZ6nCFNoU
Use encryption...and More why?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suqhj4Ociqk
Https remember the days when you were free...It was beautiful!

If there is no Paul on the ticket

I'll continue my decades-long pattern of voting for the Libertarian nominee. I feel much better about voting for Johnson than I did Bob Barr.

New Hampshire and Ecuador.

Neither

I became a member of DP to support one guy and his ideas not anyone else. I find it dumb to promote other candidates when I clearly support Dr. Paul. If he looses the nomination then I will decide then. But until then No-one but RP will get my vote.

RON PAUL. ONLY RON PAUL. SILLY QUESTION.

RON PAUL R[3]VOLUTION 2012!

Wisdom Strategies

Ron Paul 2012's Last Hope For Victory Now

"I can accept failure but I can't accept not trying." -Michael Jordan
We still have some ammunition folks! Let's get this ball rolling now. A dollar collapse under Obama or Romney probably equals martial law. Call me crazy but I say we shouldn't risk that! We have one path left to the nomination and it's currently not being pursued! Bump for action. Please leave names of SuperPACs for us all to contact and direct to this page. If we don't try this then we failed to try everything. We have zero reason to keep any dry powder? Fire at will! Fire damn it!
http://www.dailypaul.com/237643/should-a-liberty-pac-do-a-de...

We might

just see you on the news doing things you shouldn't be doing. Don't let them get to your deepest thoughts. Let them scramble in a peaceful way! That's all I have to say to you. Bring Peace or you bring nothing.

Today is a good day, make money....
Let it burn before concession:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmUZ6nCFNoU
Use encryption...and More why?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suqhj4Ociqk
Https remember the days when you were free...It was beautiful!

Ron Paul for President's picture

Before you vote for Gary Johnson, listen to the

interview with Robert Wenzel. If you are a libertarian, you will be sadly disappointed by his own words.

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/06/how-libertarian...

Only if

You confuse and conflate libertarianism with anarchist economics.

Libertarianism is about personal liberty and small government.

Let the economists obsess over economic policy.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

Non-Aggression Principle

Libertarianism is about the Non-Aggression Principle.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

How does it protect lives and

How does it protect lives and property without aggression?

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

You call yourself a libertarian?

You call yourself a libertarian, yet you don't even understand the Non-Aggression Principle.

The initiation of force is always wrong, the only justified use of force is defensive.

You have the right to do whatever you want so long as you do not initiate aggression against someone else, and you have the right to defend yourself against aggression by others.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

That goes against Austrian School

Because in Austrian School, you would outsource your defense, and that means that it's not defense at all. You are paying someone to come to your aid or hoping they will voluntarily. But that would be aggression by your standards. OR, you agree with Johnson. Which is it?

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

What you just said makes absolutely no sense.

Paying a defense company for their services is completely voluntary, just like paying a doctor, plumber, or mechanic for their services.

No one is forcing you to do business with them, if you don't want the service you don't pay for it.

It's no more aggressive than buying a soda at a convenience store.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

You want it both ways.

You're saying that it's perfectly valid to outsource defense, such that the people who are defending you are perfectly morally fine. But if Gary Johnson were to send military volunteers to save the lives of innocents in Africa, for instance, who are being killed by a mad man, that is NOT fine.

ACTUAL libertarianism holds that the purpose of government is to protect lives and property.

The "best" argument that you would have is that not all humans count, that if they're over the border, well, then they have no protections and we shouldn't volunteer to assist them in any way.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

You are a socialist and you don't even realize it.

That government provided military you like so much, is funded by theft.

In order for you to enjoy the "protection" of it, government has to steal from everyone else.

In a free market, we can choose to pay for our own services, or not pay for one at all.

In your system you have to coerce others to pay for it.

A defense company would be subject to the same Non-Aggression Principle you are, you can't pay them to fight an aggressive war against others, you can only have them act in your defense.

You have no right to steal from others, and you have no right have a government steal from others on your behalf.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Thanks for walking right into

Thanks for walking right into that.

Who, exactly, enforces the non-aggression principle? There is no government, no public police force.

If I use my team of thugs against you, what are you going to do about it? And assuming my thugs are better equipped and trained than your thugs, you're pretty much screwed, aren't you?

Welcome to Somalia, your perfect world. i have the right to steal from you because my thugs are better than your thug and there's nothing you can do.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

No State doesn't mean no police.

You obviously haven't read any of Murray Rothbard's writings.

The market would provide companies that provide policing services.

Somalia is not an anarcho-capitalist society.

Why dont you actually do some reading. Here is an informative article by Bob Murphy on this subject: http://mises.org/daily/1855

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Again....

You don't understand the real world consequence of that.

When all police and government is private, those with the most means control the game and that inherently leads to Superman Theory, which is how Somalia works. Those with the means control the meaning and the means of aggression.

Libertarianism is about minimal aggression and coersion, not zero aggression and coersion.

Consequence.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

So now you've changed the definition of NON-AGGRESSION?

You should let the rest of libertarianism know that NON-AGGRESSION, apparently now means "minimal aggression".

So now murder and theft are alright some of the time?

Does that apply to everyone, or does your beloved State get a monopoly on that?

Also, I've given you reading material on your tired old Somalia objection, you should read it.

If you don't even comprehend the Non-Aggrression Principle, then its not worth my time to educate you about stateless society.

You need to understand Non-aggression first, and you can't even grasp that.

And whether you think a stateless society would work or not, is beside the point.

You are arguing that voluntarists/anarchocapitalists are not libertarians, this is false.

Anarcho-libertarians take the Non-Aggression Principle to its logical end.

They clearly believe in the Non-Aggression Principle.

The only qualifier for being a libertarian is belief in the Non-Aggression Principle, they obviously qualify.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

You're free to call yourself

You're free to call yourself that, but an anarchist is an anarchist and that's why there's a different word for it.

And it is by no means a qualifier that people believe 100% in "non-aggression", because that would excluse consequential libertarians, or what we call "sane people".

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

Anarchist and libertarian are not mutually exclusive.

that's like saying you can't have a vanilla ice cream cone, only an ice cream cone, or you can't have a blue car, only a car.

Anarcho-libertarianism is a flavor of libertarianism, just like minarhcist libertarians.

The only qualification to be a libertarian is beleif in the non-aggression principle, if you believe in the non-aggression principle, you are a libertarian.

Libertarian does not someone mean who believes in limited government, it means someone who believes in the Non-Aggression Principle.

You have to pledge to the Non-Aggression Principle in order to join the libertarian party, that is what it is all about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_pledge

Haha, oh yes consequentialism, where if more people benefit from violence than those harmed, then the violence is alright.

What if someone is gang raped by 5 people, those 5 people "benefited" from the rape and only 1 person was harmed, is it then justified?

The answer is obviously no, but if you take consequentialism to its logically absurd end, it would suggest it was justified.

Or how about 5 people gang up on 1 person, and steal their TV. These people together will get 5 times the benefit, that the rightful owner would on his own, is this justified?

Of course not, consequentialism is just an open door to socialism.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

double post

double post

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

thats not aggression

for your own sake, you should stop talking about AE as if you know it. just my 2 cents.

EDIT: http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Principle_of_non-aggression

the easiest way to get something done isnt to change the behavior; its to change the meaning of existing behavior. like a cut isnt a cut, torture isnt torture, its enhanced interrogation. war isnt war, its kinetic military action. declaring war now appare

Thanks for proving my point

Thanks for proving my point that libertarianism doesn't require being a peacenik.

You guys just have no idea when you're massively outgunned intellectually, do you? Pathetic.

Austrian Paulbots are so intellectually deficient, you can't even see the hypocrisies and inconsistencies in your adopted belief system. You know, the one you had to read about it a book.

You're no better than Scientologists.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

Neither is saving lives from aggression.

Libertarianism is about protecting lives an property as the primary role of government.

Was von Mises against our intervention in Germany during WWII? Or did he believe that it was Germany's right to genocide?

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"