Dead Post: Read The Disclaimer
Submitted by xRegardsx on Mon, 09/03/2012 - 17:07DISCLAIMER: This post was written to finally get someone to give me proof that people would keep speaking of but would never provide to back up what they said. Some arrogance thrown in for the sake of getting a response. Thanks to those that sent me the wenzel interview. Libertarian or not though, he's still a good candidate rather than "evil" one.
I'm really tired of all the Gary Johnson hate... along with being called a "GJ Fanboy" when anyone that knows me would call me a "Paul Fanboy" instead (Exhibit A: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.840325873507.22169...)
All I keep hearing over and over again are conspiracy theories of how he's a puppet for the CFR with no conclusive evidence to back it up AND claims that he doesn't even understand what libertarianism is.
A "fanboy" is someone that takes loyalty to someone or thing over integrity and is willing to look the other way in order to keep supporting something. I'm not a fanboy of anything. Integrity IS loyalty.
If I can't invalidate evidence that you offer... then I'll have to admit I'm wrong... I'd rather be wrong and then right than think I'm right when I'm wrong. Close-mindedness and the vast majority of people who attempt to discredit before ever considering what the other says... let alone trying to understand... is my biggest pet peeve... so why would I intentionally try to be a hypocrite?
...so after all the claims without a SINGLE example of evidence...
...are you going to be the one that proves he's not a libertarian?
P.S. If I invalidate your evidence and you ignore it, you've just shown that you're the "fanboy" of someone and not me.
I challenge you to finally offer me the proof that GJ isn't a libertarian because after I'm done pulling it apart... it will be apparent that you didn't have any real evidence from the start. I challenge you to do what you cannot.
- Login to post comments
You perhaps have the advantage of understanding
exactly what Johnson means about supporting humanitarian wars. With money from his own pocket? With a fund raiser? With tax money? Or with emotional support for someone like a Ross Perot who did personally organize and fund a rescue mission in Iran?
If he's talking about private individuals freelancing humanitarian war actions, that would be tricky to not get the U.S. involved and responsible, but I don't see that folks should be barred. The rescue flotilla for the Palestinians for instance seems perfectly justified and the government certainly should not involve itself.
"Hey soldier, do you know who
"Hey soldier, do you know who is in command here?"
http://youtu.be/AeDq_tCCj3o
"Liberty, once lost, is lost forever" -John Adams
It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown
screw this scumbag...
Doug Turner was Gary's general consultant, state director, and Campaign Manager for both his 1994 and 1998 election. Doug Turner is a member of the CFR and is listed as such on their website. He is currently listed on the "Leadership and Staff" page. This is Gary Johnson's closest adviser. Its reasonable to assume he would be in the same capacity during a Johnson for President campaign. That is just a little too close for my comfort. At the very least Gary Johnson is under the influence of the CFR.
Genuine Conservatives do not dance with the CFR and so until further notice I continue to have serious questions about Governor Gary Johnson as he prepares his likely bid for President of the United States.
cfr = nwo = gary johnson = nuff said!
its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
Defeat CORKER! Bailed out the banks. In training to steal more.
Defeat ALEXANDER! Career traitor! Handsomely rich in a poor Nation.
Didn't Doug Turner
join the CFR in 2006 long after Johnson was out of office? So Ron Paul is a thief because Jesse Benton bought a mansion with our money? Or he is a sell out cause Benton now works for the establishment. Or he is a Bilderberg member because Peter Theil was at Bilderberg 2012. We all know Ron Paul is non of these so either come with direct connection that GJ is influenced by the CFR or just shut up. And if he was a CFR puppet then why hasn't he raised 111 million like Obama did last month?
Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our Liberty. -Thomas Jefferson
"That is just a little too
"That is just a little too close for my comfort. At the very least Gary Johnson is under the influence of the CFR."
You mentioning your distrust from your self-proclaimed assumptions. And no, under the influence of a man part of the CFR, not all of those part of the CFR.
"cfr = nwo = gary johnson = nuff said!"
Then taking that distrust on assumption of theory and claiming that Gary Johnson is as bad as the NWO and that's a fact.
Theory + Assumptions = NOT Facts
Sorry
Feel free to let your fear control your choices. That's your choice after all ;P
Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally
I know I might seem stupid
but what is the cfr?
Google Council On Foreign Relations,
a very influential Globalist Elite front.
Who is Roger Stone?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Y1egV2Q2FE
[www.Still2012.com: It turns out, that the "GOP Hitman", Roger Stone, has been the driving force behind Gary Johnson's campaign. This flies in the face of the basic Libertarian concept of the elimination of "force and fraud" in the conduct of human affairs. Roger Stone is the epitome of the usage of force and fraud on the American body politic. ........... In response to a commenter below who believes the Fed -- along with Johnson -- is a public entity. Let's hear from former Fed Chair, Alan Greenspan @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol3mEe8TH7w]
c'mon.. proving a negative
logic 101.. google it.. you're not that bad, are you
In practice proving a
In practice proving a negative can pose difficulties, but a proof of a negative can still be logically sound.
"Not a libertarian" = doesn't
"Not a libertarian" = doesn't meet the criteria to be considered a libertarian = how his CURRENT actions, words, and policies don't follow a libertarian principle
Those ALL being the same... i'm pretty sure it's possible.
But thanks for playing.
Use your brain before speaking... don't need google for that, do you?
Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally
wow
So you can't prove you don't have a vagina?
NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.
Atheists always jump at a
Atheists always jump at a chance to use "can't prove a negative" whenever they see the chance for it... even when it's not true.
They use the fact that you can't prove something to them as conclusive evidence to believe the opposite. It's a fallacy.
I'm agnostic and would love there to be an afterlife... just so every atheist can feel dumb as hell for CLAIMING god didn't exist when he might have.
Imagine thousands of years ago... he would be this guy.
"You can't prove the sun doesn't revolve around us... so therefore it does!"
Going to his grave making a claim his whole life... just to STILL possibly be wrong.
-__- idiots
Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally
Some people consider
Some people consider anarchism the true form of libertarianism. By which, Johnson fails.
Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:
Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...
Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a
By that standard...
so does Ron Paul.
True. But Ron Paul has always
True. But Ron Paul has always said that he is a conservative, not a libertarian.
Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:
Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...
Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a
Oh... you mean to say that he
Oh... you mean to say that he ran on the LP ticket, but not as a real libertarian???
OH THE HORROR!!!?!
Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally
Beyond his words, any actions
Beyond his words, any actions proving his not Obama 2.0? I mean look at 2008, Obama looked pretty Libertarian those days.
When I heard about Ron Paul in 2007 took me 20 minutes to respect him, trust him and become his supporter forever, his record of integrity left no room for doubts. I didn't get spammed, nobody had to force Ron Paul on me, just took me few minutes of reading.
But Gary has nothing to offer except speeches, well, guess what, I don't give a f*** abut his or anybody else empty promises.
Obama looked liberal...
Obama looked liberal... nothing else.
And Johnson has proven fiscal conservative credentials in his 8 years as governor of new mexico.
If you feel like not giving someone the benefit of the doubt when their own career shows you he's a good candidate regarding small government... that's your choice... but you might be throwing away support for potential.
"empty promise" is an assumption... and assumptions sabotage potential half the time.
Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally
How the heck did Obama look
How the heck did Obama look libertarian back in 2008?
Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:
Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...
Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a
some pros, some cons
Libertarian or not, I DO NOT believe Gary Johnson is evil.
Three candidates on ballots in 50 states.
I cannot, in good conscience, vote for Obama or Romney. So I can either write-in Ron Paul or vote Gary Johnson.
Pros/Cons
Write in Paul:
+ The GOP sees a lost vote
+ I vote for a President I truly want to see take office
- Vote potentially isn't even counted or reported
- Paul likely won't win the election
Vote Gary Johnson:
+ Rep-Dem paradigm gets shaken as a third party candidate gains traction
+ Is on every ballot and could potentially take some states
+ Libertarian principles are more accepted by general public
- Isn't Ron Paul :(
Bottom line: Paul didn't get nominated by the Republican party. Johnson will be on every ballot and really doesn't fall in the category of 'lesser of three evils'. Personally, I don't care if uber-Paul supporters write in Paul's name. I myself am an uber-Paul supporter and I am currently planning on voting for Gary Johnson.
I like your pro/con
I like your pro/con outlook... wish more people did the same instead of careless and arrogant emotional thinking... aka... the lack of critical thought.
Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally
We don't need to prove it.
We don't need to prove it. Gary proved it all by himself in this interview. If you have not listened to the whole thing, it may be eyeopening for you. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTch7InkZjo&feature=youtu.be
Ron Paul 2012 - It's Almost Here!
duplicate
Is there a way to delete your own duplicate posts?
He couldn't name a single libertarian author
And has no idea how the business cycle works. He supports "humanitarian" interventionist warfare. This guy can't hold a candle to RP. Makes me think he joined the LP just to get on the ballot, not because he actually endorses libertarian principles.
Definitions
I joined the LP in 1980. I have voted for every presidential LP candidate ever since (because I have never liked any Reps or Dems). I regret my Barr vote in 2008, but I couldn't bring myself to vote for McCain or Obama. Just like I can't bring myself to vote for Romney or Obama.
I voted for Paul in '88. He is actually the candidate I worked hardest for , by quitting my job in the summer of '88 and knocking on literally 1000 doors handing out home-made fliers, explaining who Paul was, and what the LP stood for. Trust me, it wasn't easy in '88 and I got a lot of rejection. Doors slammed in my face. Maybe I touched some people though, because that was Iowa and look how they came through for Paul almost 25 years later.
My point is, I have not read those books either. I worked with the founders of FIJA in those very early days, and founded a personal rights coalition myself. Traveled around a lot, doing speaking engagements for the coalition.
But because I have not read those books, I am not a Libertarian (or libertarian?). There is no longer a place for me in the movement, after 30+ years of hard work? I will not be viable until I read those books? Where were a lot of you in 1988? Voting for Bush? Dukakis?? Playing in the sandbox? Having your diapers changed? Not born yet?
My point is, I will see only 3 candidates on my ballot in November. Write ins are not allowed. I have a big problem with Robama. I don't agree with Johnson 100% but he is far closer to my views than the other two. So, like usual, Plan B - LP.
I also think I have looked a lot closer at Johnson than some of you have. I see a lot of labeling based on vague innuendo and "other people's words". We need a voice for the issues that Paul and Johnson (and us) agree on.
We stand together or we fall apart.
Why does someone need to be a
Why does someone need to be a philosophical or economic expert when it comes to libertarianism?
Non aggression principle allows the self defense of self, loved ones, and property. If someone we trade with is attacked that can't defend themselves... isn't that also an attack on our prosperity?
Wasn't the main goals of constitutional war to be not be endless and bankrupting through having a specific goal, going in, and getting out?
He can't hold a candle to RP... but who are you going to vote for?
I'd rather the person that has libertarian policies than someone that claims to have libertarian principles but does the exact opposite.
Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally
Because the president has power over Fed Gov finances
Someone who lacks a deep understanding of economics has no business in the white house because such a person won't understand why never ending budget deficits will destroy our country. A president learned in economics would see through the idiotic keynesian arguments to "spend the country out of the recession" and veto every single unbalanced budget. And he would reject interventionist warfare due to the astronomical cost in lives and treasure to the country. Such a president would never ever send his country into war unless it was in defense according to the strict definition of defense.
A big part of the reason our country is bankrupt is due to the wild, out control interventionist foreign policy over the last 6 to 10 decades. It was not for our national security as we were told, it has destroyed our national security, because a bankrupt country is a weak and vulnerable country. To me, this is a total no-brainer.
Unless Ron Paul is able to get on the ballot somehow, I intend to withdraw my support from any candidate this time around. For one thing, the system is rigged -- we've seen this fact up close over and over again...my vote would probably be flipped in the diebold machine to romney. For another thing, the lesser of evils argument is so old and used up I want to puke every time I hear it. But most of all, because the establishment is terrified of an extremely low voter turn out...it takes away their legitimacy and lets them know that people are awakening to the fact that it doesn't matter who they vote for, that they know the whole system is corrupt to the core.
http://www.dailypaul.com/2531
http://www.dailypaul.com/253173/what-makes-your-general-elec...
Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally
Gary Johnson isn't a
Gary Johnson isn't a keynesian.
He left New Mexico with a billion dollar surplus while unknowingly acting like an austrian.
It was unknowingly, because it just made sense.
Critical Thinking > Emotional Thinking > Pseudo-Intellectuals that Saturate DP
Utilitarianism > Consequentialism > Deontology > Egocentrism
Making people feel "troll'd" with the truth > being an intentional troll > acting like one naturally