Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty

Does Gary Johnson Matter?

October 16, 2012 by  

Does Gary Johnson Matter?

The Republican Party is worried that Libertarian Presidential candidate Gary Johnson could take a substantial toll on the election outcome, so an all-out assault has been launched against the candidate.

As pundits note that Mitt Romney has taken a more moderate stance on many issues in recent weeks and President Barack Obama’s policies have turned voters concerned with civil liberties away from the Democratic ticket, there is buzz that Johnson may have a heavy impact on the outcome of an already competitive election.

According to The New York Times, Republican operatives in a handful of the 48 States where Johnson is on the Presidential ballot have been working to ensure that the Libertarian will be an option for as few voters as possible.

Johnson has been denied the opportunity to debate alongside Romney and Obama, but says he offers voters something that the two major-party candidates do not: a different path for America. For that reason, Johnson told The Times that he represents Perrier in a Presidential race between Coke and Pepsi.

Addressing Republicans who begrudgingly support Romney despite his moderate political views, Johnson asked in a recent campaign speech, “What is more of a wasted vote than voting for somebody that you don’t believe in?”

The Libertarian has offered harsh critiques of both Obama and Romney. In a recent interview with Salon, he took an opportunity to tell potential voters what he would say if allowed to join the debate stage tonight with the two-party candidates:

Well, I would not bomb Iran. I would get out of Afghanistan tomorrow, bring the troops home. I believe that marriage equality is a constitutionally guaranteed right. I would end the drug wars. I would advocate legalizing marijuana now. I would have never signed the Patriot Act. I would have never signed the National Defense Authorization Act allowing for arrests and detainment of you and me as U.S. citizens without being charged. I believe we need to balance the federal budget now and that means a $1.4 trillion reduction in federal spending now. When it comes to jobs, I’m advocating eliminating income tax, corporate tax, abolishing the IRS, and replacing all of that with one federal consumption tax. In this case, I am embracing the FairTax. I think that that’s really the answer when it comes to American jobs. In a zero corporate tax rate environment, if the private sector doesn’t create tens of millions of jobs, then I don’t know what it takes to create tens of millions of jobs.

Sam Rolley

Staff writer Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After learning about many of the biases present in most modern newsrooms, Rolley became determined to find a position in journalism that would allow him to combat the unsavory image that the news industry has gained. He is dedicated to seeking the truth and exposing the lies disseminated by the mainstream media at the behest of their corporate masters, special interest groups and information gatekeepers.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Does Gary Johnson Matter?”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at

  • DaveH

    What people should know about the Fair Tax:

    Trojan Horse for a combination of an Income Tax and a Sales Tax like they have in Europe?

    • DaveH
    • Incredulous1

      Repeal the 16th Amendment BEFORE and sales tax is added. No repeal – no new tax.

    • GALT

      Way to go Gary…….completely foolish as to the solution, because is won’t happen…
      corporate america and corporations are THE PROBLEM……..if they had any chance of
      being the solution, you would already be in “paradise”……..and they already own

      ” I think that that’s really the answer when it comes to American jobs. In a zero corporate tax rate environment, if the private sector doesn’t create tens of millions of jobs, then I don’t know what it takes to create tens of millions of jobs.”

      You are absolutely correct Gary……you don’t KNOW……and fortunately we will NOT
      have to worry because we will not have to pay the price for your ignorance…….you
      would grind the “engine of the world” to a screeching halt…….in short order…..

      As for your other idea’s, this is simple “maturity”……and while this is fairly obvious,
      when you are dealing with those who are essentially powerless…….the ‘victims’ tend
      to exercise their frustration….. by abusing what little power they do have…..upon those
      that have even less…….but thanks for trying…….in the future…..TRY HARDER!!!!!

  • DaveH

    But Gary Johnson is still the best choice by far.

    • Fred

      As an Obama supporter, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • z328

      Sorry….Gary Johnson is no Ross Parrot.

      • DaveH

        Thank goodness.

    • Liberty Lover

      Love Gary Johnson and Ron Paul, but I wish they would both opt to get out of the way in the face of a true crisis for lovers of liberty. There is only one pragmatic possibility of removing from the WH the most dangerous threat this country has ever faced, and that’s the election of a flawed Mitt Romney.

      • Nancy in Nebraska

        If you ARE a liberty lover, romney is NOT the choice for you!!! Don’t get fooled again!!!

      • Liberty Lover

        There are only two alternatives within the realm of possibility, so obviously naive Nancy in Nebraska prefers Obama. I only hope we can survive the “principled” fools in this world.

        • Smoovious Laxness

          You seriously have a lot of nerve calling yourself “Liberty Lover”…

          – Smoov

      • DaveH

        Liberty Lover (misnamed) says — “There are only two alternatives within the realm of possibility, so obviously naive Nancy in Nebraska prefers Obama”.
        Nancy is naive? Hardly, LL, it is you who refuses to use your brain. There will always be the lesser of two evils until ignorant people like yourself start facing the fact that we can’t hope for a Smaller Government until we start voting for people who actually want to shrink it.

  • DaveH

    Gary Johnson has two words for Ron Paul:

  • Harold Olsen

    Two or three weeks ago I visited the Libertarian website to see who they are running this year. I sure as hell won’t vote for Obama and as far as I’m concerned, Romney is an Obama clone. I see very little difference in them. I wish Romney would give me a reason to vote for him. But, every time he takes a stand on something, someone is offended by what he has said and he wimps out and apologizes, indicating to me that he is not the conservative that he pretends to be. True conservatives say what they mean and mean what they say and do not apologize because some whining crybaby gets offended. I haven’t really taken a look at Johnson but I did sign the petition they are circulating to include him in the debates. Out of fairness, I think he and some of the other lesser candidates should be allowed to participate. According to the Libertarian website, there are five Republican states that will go with Johnson. True or false? If so, he could be a spoiler this time. Four years ago I decided I would vote for Bob Barr unless he said or did something stupid. When he indicated he wanted Ron Paul as his running mate, that ended my decision to vote for him. I consider Ron Paul to be a nut job and could never vote for him. I agree with the opinion that he’d be worse than Obama.

    • RevNowWhileWeCan

      Harold Olsen says, “I consider Ron Paul to be a nut job and could never vote for him.”
      Instead of reciting your favorite pundit’s description of Ron Paul, could you please explain what it is that makes him “a nut job”?

    • Vicki

      Harold Olsen writes:
      “. I consider Ron Paul to be a nut job and could never vote for him. ”

      Yet seems to be willing to vote for Gary Johnson. How is Gary Johnsons policies different from Ron Paul? They are both Libertarian even though Ron Paul was working from inside the Republican party.

      • Scott in SC

        Just to clarify, Gary Johnson is/was a Republican. He served both terms as governor as a Republican, and he was the first GOP candidate to announce he was seeking the nomination. Of course the Party leaders had already decided who was going to get the nomination so they did their best to get him out, who needs someone with a proven record and solid ideas to screw their plans up.

      • Kate 8

        Vicki – After doing some looking around, it appears that the Libertarian party is also owned by the corporate elite. I was very disheartened to learn this, and DaveH immediately attempted to discredit the info, but I’m not convinced.

        I did a search on Peter Thiel, the founder of the party, and he is a globalist elite.

        Think about it. These guys have covered every possible eventuality. They know that people are fed up with the system, and are looking for other options. They have co-opted every movement of the people. The Libertarian party has risen to prominence, and yet they are allowed to exist, when people of less prominence and influence who attempt to stand up for liberty are taken out for less.

        Sadly, it’s looking like we’ve been duped yet again. I wish it weren’t so, and they make a nice show of making it appear to be legit. I fear, though, that its main purpose may be to draw out dissenters.

        Call me conspiracy theorist. Why not. Everyone else does. But I refuse to be controlled by rhetoric and put downs. I want the truth, and nothing less, no matter how much I may resist it.

        Believe me, I want for this not to be true. I find the Libertarian platform much more appealing that the status quo, and I like what Ron Paul and Gary Johnson appear to stand for. But these elite are extremely powerful, taking out whomever they decide is a threat on a near daily basis. They are willing to kill thousands…millions… if it means getting what they want. No one rises to any kind of prominence without their allowing it. We cannot dismiss this fact.

        I expect DaveH will slam me for this. So be it. But unless and until we expose every dirty little facet of this monstrous plan by the elite, we’ll continue to fall into their traps.

      • DaveH

        Kate 8, what state do you live in?

      • DaveH

        “Kate 8″ says — “I did a search on Peter Thiel, the founder of the party, and he is a globalist elite”.
        The Libertarian Party was founded by David Nolan. So, whoever you really are, how do you expect people to believe a word you say when you lie like that?

      • Kate 8

        DaveH – Geeze. I must be psychic. I fully expected you to attack me.

        So, Thiel founded PayPal, not the L party. However, he is a major Libertarian leader/bankroller, and pals around with Rand Paul. He is one of the openly gay global elite and is funding the floating cities off the CA coast where they plan to control the masses.

        This is a different article from yesterday.,21205/

        There is lots more. Did you actually do a search? Or are you determined to be right because you want to believe.

        You know as well as I that no major organization will be allowed to exist beyond the control of the elite.

        Go ahead and cling to your beliefs, Dave, but beliefs are only beliefs and mean nothing. I want the truth. And I can connect dots, too.

        If you can prove that this is not so, please do. Nothing would make me happier.

      • vicki

        Kate8. Of course the conspiracy elite would try to infiltrate any possible opposition. What we look for is their ACTIONS not just their words. Ron Paul has a 25+ year consistent PUBLIC record of constitutional support. Look deep into the record of ANY candidate. Find out what they do. Look for any tendency to vote based on political expediency vs Principle. Compare their words to their actions over time.

        And remember, just as we hope and pray that people wake up and change, politicians can wake up and become statesmen. That is why we watch their actions over time.

        We have given the Republicans a turn at the controls. Then Democrats. Now lets give the Libertarians a chance at the controls and see what their actions are.

        In the end you have to remember that only an educated and knowledgeable people can ever survive self-rule.

      • DaveH

        I doubt that is Kate8, thus the “Kate 8″. I think it’s probably Flashman or one of his Progressive cohorts.
        I’ve never known the real Kate8 to behave like that.

      • DaveH

        Note, Vicki, that she didn’t answer my simple question about what state she lives in. Did she forget?

      • Kate 8

        DaveH – Now your really hitting below the belt.

        Dave, if you’ve read my posts in the past, I’ve often stated where I live. I know that you live in AZ. And I’d like to know why you want to know. I don’t see why it matters.

        Obviously, you are one who must hold on to your beliefs for dear life, lest your world be shattered. Me, I just want the truth. If something funny is going on, I want to know. I don’t want to put my trust and faith in people who are not who they say they are. And that is just about everyone.

        Like I said, it doesn’t matter what any of us believe. It only matters what’s true.

        Sure, Ron Paul has a stellar record. I’ve also expressed concern in the past about why he’s been allowed to stand up the way he has. Of course, he’s gotten nowhere, as he’s been pretty much a cry in the wilderness in Congress. He’s introduced a lot of really good bills, but they are almost always DOA. It’s not like he could ever clean up DC.

        Gary Johnson is a former Republican. But the elite aren’t about to allow someone who is actually out to deter them from getting into office, or even having much influence.

        Peter Thiel, a Libertarian leader and bankroller… is also connected with Stratfor. And I’m sure there are many party bigwigs who are also global heavy hitters. You are really naive if you think this party is above being infiltrated and co-opted.

        These floating cities where the elite plan to set up shop… they are offshore to avoid paying any taxes or adhering to regulations. And they plan to levy lots of taxes on the hapless masses….us….just because they can. And all of this…using the Libertarian banner.

        You disappoint me, DaveH. I guess no one is allowed to raise questions or express concern about people’s heros. Just look at all of the Obots. If you aren’t willing to look into this to determine the facts for yourself, then you are not the sensible, rational person I thought you were. You are no different from any party hack. If you want the truth, you can’t go to those promoting the party. You have to see what’s going on around them.

        If you can convince me this party is above board, I’d be thrilled. But for now, I have reservations. I don’t subscribe to blind trust.

        Go ahead and keep on slamming and maligning my name. You like to do that when someone brings up something you don’t like. But I stand by my policy not to trust anyone in business or politics, until they prove themselves to be clean. That leaves out almost everyone.

      • DaveH

        Who do you think you’re kidding Phony Kate 8 (probably the sick multiple personality Flashman)?
        In that entire diatribe you didn’t once answer my question. The real Kate8 would have not hesitated.

      • Vicki

        DaveH says:
        “I doubt that is Kate8,”

        You are right. I missed the (space) in the name. Also re-reading the post does not have the proper flavor of the writings of Kate8. Alas one of the little problems with anonymity is that someone could easilly spoof any of our names to confuse the reader.

        On the other hand, just as we mention here about actions you can look at the writings and see if they are likely the person we have come to know.

      • Carl manning – Sic Semper Tyrannis

        They haven’t co-opted the Constitution Party yet for all its worth.

      • Kate8

        Vicki – As for the space, I have to retype my info after clearing my history and cookies, and I inadvertently did it. Now it’s fixed.

        Just what is it I said that was so bad? I question everything. You all know this. If I learn something that doesn’t sit right, I ask questions. I ferret out more info. I would think that this would be the sensible thing to do.

        People cling to their ideologies, no matter what they are. I have given mine up, because belief is useless. All that matters is what’s true, and we never learn that as long as we hold on to sacred cows.

        I’m sorry for ruffling you guys’ feathers. But I stand by my quest for truth, no matter how much it may disappoint me. I’d rather make choices from a place of proper information than because of something I want to believe.

    • Butch

      Only an idiot would call Dr. Paul a “nut job”. The nut job is the person who thinks that governing by the Constitution is crazy. Dr. Paul predicted a false flag attack used to launch wars and steal rights(9-11), he predicted the Housing Bubble, he predicted the financial meltdown, he predicted that Obumma would NOT end the wars, he stands for sound currency, EQUAL rights for all, not for special interest groups, and he has never voted for a pay increase for himself or participated in the lucrative pension plan that Congress voted for themselves. He also pays for his own security and health care. He returns money to his district EVERY fiscal year and has never voted for unConstitutional laws or for tax increases. Harold sounded intelligent until he threw himself under the bus by brazenly showing how stupid he really is. Notice he couldn’t name a SINGLE reason why he views Dr. Paul this way???

      • 57girl

        I’ve noticed how those that call Ron Paul names like ‘nut job’ do nothing but call him names. None can back up their statements. And those that try to smear Ron Paul, do so in ignorance. Perhaps the most misunderstood issue Dr. Paul covers is Foreign Policy. To me, it is simply a matter of following the golden rule … the version of do unto others. I can’t imagine any American Citizen that would not be wanting vengeance on someone that might come to America and do, to us, what we do to them. By invading foreign lands, we create our own enemies. Whether the subject is Foreign Policy, the Economy, following our Constitution, etc., Ron Paul was the only Candidate that made sense on behalf of all Americans. Of course, since he was not willing to sell his soul to the NWO Elites, they had to stifle his voice. The fact that the only dirt that could be found on Dr. Paul was a false eyebrow, speaks volumes to me. Watch as Obama and Romney throw mud at each other, rather than tell us what their ‘solutions’ to our many woes are … they don’t have a platform to fall back on, so once again, we’re given a choice between two evils to lead our Nation. To hell with that… since Ron Paul is no longer on the ticket, I guess my vote will go to Gary Johnson. Still, Ron Paul will always be my number one choice. I honestly think, if given the chance, he could have saved our Nation … assuming the big boys didn’t assassinate him first.

      • DaveH

        Well put, 57girl.

  • RevNowWhileWeCan

    If anyone thinks that not compromising your values is “wasting” your vote then you yourself should not vote. The two party LIE is dead and if we, as a nation, can last four more years then the Independents will rise up in 2016. More and more people are waking up to this which is proven by the dramatic exodus from the dems/repubs to the skyrocketing number of independents. The people are seriously tired of the constant lies on both sides and the people demand and will have a REAL change in four years. I remain optimistic because good will triumph over evil. It’s time to……..Revolve Now While We Can

    • Mike

      Are you so naive that you think you can have a candidate like Johnson get elected today?
      At least RP tried from inside the Repub party. This is what Johnson should do. Every eelection we gain more ground within the party. Johnson adding his weight to the effort would pay off sooner to the benefit of the Country. It is fine to vote your conscience. It is aalso fine to use a longer term strategy to walk us back to the Constitution. Alot of people have allowed things to get this bad. Myself included. I intend to help move it back in the right direction without being illogical in thinking we can instantly get there by pouting and voting for a 3rd party when the ramifications are clear.

      • Scott in SC

        Just to clarify, Gary Johnson is/was a Republican. He served both terms as governor as a Republican, and he was the first GOP candidate to announce he was seeking the nomination. Of course the Party leaders had already decided who was going to get the nomination so they did their best to get him out, who needs someone with a proven record and solid ideas to screw their plans up.

      • DaveH

        Mike says — “Are you so naive that you think you can have a candidate like Johnson get elected today?”.
        Are you so naive, Mike, that you think voting for the lesser of two evils will get you something good? Or that voting for Big Government advocates will result in less Government?

        Mike says — “At least RP tried from inside the Repub party”.
        And you see where that has gotten the people. The Republican Party has too many flaws and too many self-serving Politicians to ever be repaired. The Libertarian Party on the other hand adheres to the Principles of Freedom.
        Would you keep repairing an old obsolete junker, Mike, or buy the new Technically Superior version instead?

        Mike says — “I intend to help move it back in the right direction without being illogical in thinking we can instantly get there by pouting and voting for a 3rd party”.
        By voting for Principled Candidates in the Libertarian Party we will indeed be building for the future whether they win or not by making an increasing number of people aware of their Principles of Freedom. That would get us to Constitutional awareness and knowledge of Principles of Freedom far faster than clinging to the worn-out Republican Party which incidentally was born in Mercantilism (Crony Capitalism) 160 years ago.

      • DaveH

        A Principled Platform:

      • RevNowWhileWeCan

        In case you weren’t paying attention, the latest power grab by the party elite at the RNC eliminated any chance of anything changing in the Republican party. The party elite has changed the rules once again so that the candidate can NEVER be chosen from the grassroots. Let that sink in for a minute and understand what that means. I’m not at all naive to the happenings in the current two party system. We played by their rules and they changed them so they couldn’t lose. Time to play a different game with new players. Honest people trying to work from within the system proved to be a grand failure and further exposed the corruption from the highest levels of the party. Either you are too naive to understand what actually happened or you’re just too lazy to investigate yourself or you are a part of the Republican conspiracy. All three excuses are inexcusable anyway.

  • http://none Claire

    Gary Johnson is the candidate for the Libertarian party- why was he not included in the presidential debate? The two parties have too much control. Communism? Dictatorship? Do these two words apply to the two-party system?

    • cbgard

      The status quo does not want the Libertarian candidate included in debates because the Libertarian candidate will get the lion’s share of applause and cheers from the audience, making the democratic and republican candidates look like the pieces of crap that they are. Ron Paul accomplished this over and over in the primary debates, as did Debra Medina when she ran for Texas governor in 2010.


      • Kate 8

        carlucci! Hey, girl!

        After what Romney did to Ron Paul and his delegates at the RNC convention, I have no use for him at all. Of course, I didn’t have any use for him before that, either.

        It seems that there was a plan for a big surprise at the convention, with Ron Paul delegates coming out as a major contendor, challenging Romney’s nomination. Word got out ahead of time (I posted it myself, thinking that if it was known it must be okay to talk about it since the word was out), and the Romney camp sent the RonPaul delegates buses on a scenic diversion, preventing them from making a stand at the convention, and changing the rules so that Romney could just throw them out.

        This was a total power grab by the RNC, and a complete disenfrancisement of the voice of the people in our primary selection. Had this info not gotten out, it well might have succeeded. But the RNC took measures to insure that Romney prevailed against the will of the people, and look what has come of it. Conservatives have absorbed the blow and are bowing to the elite’s choice of the status quo.

        Oh, there have been some lawsuits filed, and some various actions of protest. But the courts are all rigged along with the rest of the corruption, and the media ignores it, so it goes nowhere.

        Makes me sick. And here we are, doing the same old, same old, which has never gotten us anywhere but stuck on the same old road to world governance and total slavery.

      • cbgard

        Kate 8 – Hello!! I’ve missed you guys so much. I was so busy working full time for 13 months that I barely had time to breathe. Got laid off at the end of August, but wasn’t too upset about it as my mom had passed away in March and I had so much stuff piled on me to do regarding all of that.

        It’s wonderful to see so many of the “regulars” again posting on this blog. I’ll be tuning in daily to see what’s going on. : )


      • Kate 8

        carlucci – So glad to have you back. I’ll be looking forward to your sensible, rational and intelligent input… Something sorely lacking around here, with a few exceptions. You know who I’m talking about.

        Sorry to hear about your mom. You have my condolences.

  • Smoovious Laxness

    “What is more of a wasted vote than voting for somebody that you don’t believe in?”

    Could not have said it better myself.

    – Smoov

    • Fred

      We Obama supporters love you libertarians!! Thank you!

      • DaveH

        Really, Fred? And here I thought that the only thing Obama supporters loved was other peoples’ money.

      • Kate 8

        Fred – I wouldn’t get to cocky. Obama supporters aren’t as many as they’d like us to believe. You consist mostly of the ignorant, uninformed, deluded, incompetent, dead and fictitious.

        I know lots of people who voted for Obama last time who now can’t stand him. And there are lots of conservatives who dislike Romney. Just where will these alienated voters from both sides turn? To the alternate guy…

        If the votes are tallied aright (and that is a big IF), you could get a big surprise.

        BTW, it seems that even Oprah has decided not to vote for Obama, and she played a big part in getting him elected.


    When will you Republicans realise that the Libertarian view and policy is the real solution to your problems? A consumption tax like we have in Australia will make sure even the multitude who are poor will have to pay tax on all their expenditure. Imagine a Nil corporate tax rate? Imagine the USA becoming the next Switzerland type tax haven with money pouring in from everywhere to avoid corporate tax?

    Romney may have hoodwinked your nomination selectors over the wisest man you rejected Dr Ron Paul, he wont be able to hoodwink the public as easily and thats Why Obama will win again because the public know wghat they will be getting and trust him, but no one really knows what Romney really stands for anymore. Gees he wont even appear on the David Letterman Show…

    Let me reiterate what I said in another post…

    It’s not as if Republicans haven’t offered this before,” he said. “But we think the best way to raise revenues is to grow the economy.” …….

    Here we go Ryan talking like a real socialist wanting to increase taxes by giving discounts on taxes to help grow the economy.

    The Republicans are no better than the Democrats and wanting to continue socialist rule both in USA [& Australia]. Socialistic rule is where the a future Republican government claims it can control the economy better “to grow the economy” better than the Democrats and in such a way as to control businesses to make enough increase profits to be able to take [steal] a cut from those that are successful to continue to pay for social services and government workers who otherwise would not be able to earn a living.

    The Republicans claim they can manage the economy so that their controlled businesses under their rule will employ more people and show how much better the Republicans will be compared to the Democrats. As I see it not much will change under the republicans…just a different socialistic dictator.

    The social services and government policing workers even if less in numbers will continue to ensure that businesses dont get away from paying their cut all the while the government and Congress like to make it look like that businesses are in being favours with lower taxes..


    I’m surprised people still want to operate under such successive suppressive SOCIALISTIC regimes, yet businesses, corporations and their workers continue to do so…working hard and paying up to their rulers. We have all been hoodwinked thinking we have democracy and freedom. What a laugh.

    The Democratic government and the ROMNEY/RYAN Republicans are treating us as if we ARE THEIR BUSINESSES,



    The Republicans have the same attitude that they know better, that they can fix the high unemployment problem by creating higher government unemployment in the short term, by cutting the tax rate to increase revenues overall and by telling the Federal Reserve to stop supporting the economy artificially?

    Will the Republicans have the power to control the Federal Reserve because in Australia our government has no control, except anything our government does fiscally triggers a change in monetary policy to counteract any inflationary fiscal stimuli.

    How will the Republicans control, encourage and cargole sufficient growth in the economy so quickly to ensure the 100,000′s of sacked government workers from government funded organisations who whose funds will be withdrawn will be re-employed by the business world to ensure total unemployment will not rise but be reduced during the next 4 years?

    How will the Republicans grow the economy in a negative growth world? How will the Republicans reduce Federal debts in a no growth world economy and stop borrowing from the Asian nations? How will the Republican explain their magic formular to achieve all these programs to grow the economy while deflating the economy at the same time by reduced speding, lower taxes and stopping the Federal Reserve supporting and inflating the economy which is really what is happening now?

    Why not the ROMNEY/RYAN team tell its supporters and voters the truth and tell them it will take 20 years of financial and asset deflationary pain to possibly reduce government debt? Why wont the Republican tell it as it is…that many of its supporters will lose money, income and asset values under their deflationary policy offerings? Why not just tell the TRUTH?

    Dr Ron Paul told everyone the truth but you rejected him and now your worried about the competition from Libertarian Gary Johnson? You want to jerrymander / fix the result by having a monopoly election candidate without Gary Johnson? Do you realise what you are suggesting?

    • Smoovious Laxness

      …and then you also have the Evangelicals who want to use government to legislate their flavor of morality on the people as well, not content with doing it through their churches where it belongs…

      – Smoov

      • Gary L

        Maybe they want the government to stop legislating its flavor of morality.
        maybe church is a good place for morality to start but it belongs out in society.

        • Smoovious Laxness

          If by “belongs out in society” you mean the followers of said religion, living up to and adhering to the moral code that particular religion subscribes to, then yes, I would agree…

          but… we all know how rarely that happens, with the majority of those claiming to be of one religion or another, just paying lip-service to it…

          When it comes to imposing their particular morality on the country as a whole through government and legislation, however, then no. It doesn’t belong there. We are not a theocracy.

          You can follow whatever moral code you wish to follow, for yourself… that is the right guaranteed you by the US Constitution, but that right ends when it comes to forcing that on other people, interfering with their own right to follow whatever moral code they wish to follow.

          As long as your right to do and live however you want, doesn’t interfere with the right of someone else to do and live however they want.

          That’s freedom and liberty.

          That’s what being a Libertarian is about.

          – Smoov

    • Brian

      That was spot on!!! I truly wish people would stop being sheeple and think for themselves.

    • Mike

      They sure are long-winded down under……

      • DaveH

        Maybe, but over the years Gilly has shown a real inclination to learn and transcend his past Liberal Brainwashing. I appreciate that and wish more people would be so open-minded.

    • Sol of Texas

      Gilly — I reckon you pretty much get it, cobber!

  • Dawg

    It looks like the “Dumbing Down of America” plan is near compltion.

  • Dawg

    I mean completion. Darn it.

    • Deerinwater

      LOL! ~ hahaheheh ~ yep ~ seems like.

  • Joe

    The debt-driven, two-party system is what needs to go in addition to the endless wars and the inflated currency. Gary Johnson matters a lot. America can never repair unless new ideas and solutions are brought into the political system. Let in some fresh air! There’s nothing but deadly air left to breathe in the two-party system killing and bankrupting the world.

  • http://none David Sanders

    I find it difficult at this stage in the game that there are those in this beautiful country of ours, with all the freedoms and opportunities we have; to have any doubt that we are going down the tubes with the present administration ! Any vote for a third party candidate will be a vote for Obama. Any animosity you may have for Romney or the Republican party must be set aside until a future election or you may never have a future election. Spiteful or self centered voting should go out the window when yours and mine country is at stake. Wake up and smell the roses or after November 6th 2012 we may not be able to afford the roses !
    Dave Sanders

    • DaveH

      David says — “Any vote for a third party candidate will be a vote for Obama”.
      And your proof for that is where, David?
      In at least two states where such polling has been conducted, Gary Johnson pulls more votes from Obama than from Romney:

      So there is absolutely no good reason to throw away your vote on a known Big Government advocate like Romney when you can do the right thing and vote for a Candidate who understands the concepts of Freedom and promises to shrink Big Government dramatically.
      Whether Gary wins or not is beside the point. The more votes he gets, the more the ignorant voters will look into what he stands for and hopefully learn more about the concepts of Freedom that once made our country great.

  • Paul

    It is said that Obama is getting the “moron” vote. Obviously the emotional and uninformed vote. The same can be said for the Libertarian vote. Anyone who thinks that Obama and Romney are the same are morons who have not studied the issues and have voices in their head “whispering conspiracy” I rate Libertarians right up there with the “truthers” . Hey wait a minute, many libertarians are “truthers.” The democrats have Al Franken as their poster child for idiocy. The Libertarians have Ron Paul. Both are delusional. Hey, repeat after me. A vote for Johnson is a vote for Obama. Get it? Speaking of the dumbing down of America,…have you talked to a Libertarian lately? Third parties have never won and this race is no exception. Third parties always felt that they had the truth. Third parties get the wrong guy elected. Remember when Wilson won? Roosevelt’s “Progressive” party split the Republicans and we got the progressive Woodrow Wilson. Ross Perot gave us Bill Clinton and now he won’t go away. If the libertarians give their vote to Johnson look for a repeat. The nation will never survive another four years of Obama. So if you think you are so much smarter than history or the rest of this country, than cast your vote and watch the country go to hell. To me it is obvious that Obama supporters aren’t the only morons. Finally, repeat after me. “Romney is a conservative he is not Obama”.

    • Smoovious Laxness

      “Romney is not a conservative, and he is not Obama” <– FTFY

      Romney only looks like a conservative when compared against Obama, but when you compare him against an actual conservative he isn't even close.

      Both the Democrats and the Republicans are the problem. They both are responsible for where we are now.

      Keeping either one in power isn't going to change a damned thing.

      – Smoov

    • DaveH

      Besides your obvious bias, conjecture, and ad hominem attacks on Libertarians, Paul, can you tell us in plain English what it is that Libertarians advocate that you object to?

    • Bob Livingston

      Dear Paul,

      You are ignorant and suffering from a terminal case of cognitive dissonance.

      You write: “Anyone who thinks that Obama and Romney are the same are morons who have not studied the issues and have voices in their head “whispering conspiracy” I rate Libertarians right up there with the ‘truthers’.” First of all, I must ask exactly which Mitt you are talking about? Secondly, I would ask you to tell me the differences between Obama and Romney on the following: NDAA, Patriot Act, Gitmo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, drone attacks, TSA, EPA, Dept. of Ed., Dept. of Energy, abortion, individual mandates by the Federal government, gun control. Thirdly, anyone believing the official 9/11 story is a conspiracy theorist . We “truther[s]” are continuing to try an knock down the stone walls that the Bush Administration constructed on the heels of the event that sparked 11 years now of continuous war.

      You write: “The Libertarians have Ron Paul. Both are delusional.” Please explain one specific point on which Dr. Paul is “delusional,” because if he’s delusional then so were the Founders like Jefferson, Madison and Washington.

      You write: “A vote for Johnson is a vote for Obama.” No. A vote for Johnson (or any candidate) is a vote for that candidate and that candidate only. Your disapproval does not make the vote any less valid.

      You write: “Speaking of the dumbing down of America,…have you talked to a Libertarian lately?” I speak to them all the time and find them, on the whole, much more informed on the Constitution and the issues of economics and liberty than most so-called conservatives who worship at the altar of empire and Pax Americana.

      You write: “Ross Perot gave us Bill Clinton and now he won’t go away.” No George Bush “gave us Bill Clinton” after he ran away from Reagan policies.

      You write: “’Romney is a conservative he is not Obama’.” Romney is more Obama than he is a conservative.

      Best wishes,

      • cbgard

        Right on, Bob Livingston. You rock -!


      • deerinwater

        Impressive rebuttal , ~ I enjoy hearing clear statements.

        If you find it impossible to vote your convictions today, when will you?

        That Gary Johnson’s advocates that we stop doing what we have been doing if we expect any change or improvement and is met with great resistance, suggest to me that someone must be enjoying our current state of affairs.

        Now who might that be? I know who it’s not. It’s not me or my tradesman brothers and sisters. It’s not students, it’s not the unemployed or the working poor.

        It must be Drug Cartels and Cony Capitalist and all the people they have influence over.

        • Smoovious Laxness

          People just don’t like letting go of power over other people… >shrugs<

          – Smoov

      • Dan Mancuso

        Dear Bob;
        I believe you to be an inelligent and informed man, a man who is truly concerned for your country and walks the talk to rescue it from the evil cabal who is running it into the ground.
        You write; “You write: ‘ A vote for Johnson is a vote for Obama.’ No. A vote for Johnson (or any other candidate) is a vote for that candidate and that candidate only. Your disapproval does not make the vote any less valid.”
        Well sir, unlike most of your articles and comments which are clear and to the point, this comment seems somewhat ambiguous and a little evasive. I think the person you were responding to ,on this point, meant that the reality of America is, (that in spite of the fact that the libertarian ideology, for the most part, is sound and sane and in line with the Constitution), that the third party vote would split the vote and allow the evil socialists to retain power under Obama, and thinking that miraculously America would wake up to the fact, before the election, that the two party system is somewhere between a farce and an evil conspiracy and vote for a libertarian, is pie in the sky. It’s just not realistic. As much as I believe America desperately needs to see that the two party system candidates are two faces of the same coin – the same people pulling their strings – and as offensive as it is to hold ones nose and vote for the lessor of two evils, Romney, America doesn’t have the luxury – in this election – to vote for the right candidate. Yes one should be able to vote FOR a candidate of ones choice and not for a lessor evil, but the consequences are nightmarish in this instance.
        So could you please use your keen edged, argus eyed ability to address the question of vote splitting?
        Thank you.
        Dan Mancuso

  • Mike A. Bozarth

    “Any vote for a third party candidate will be a vote for Obama…” How dare you! Do you really think if Johnson was not on the ballot I would even consider voting for Romney? Absolutely not! I would leave my ballot blank before I would vote for Romney or Obama! Why do Republicans even think that by removing Johnson from state ballots we would by default then cast our votes for Romney. No one owns my vote. And I have left it blank when faced with a choice between Big Government Candidate A and Big Government Candidate B.

    • Smoovious Laxness

      They succeeded here in Michigan in getting Johnson thrown off the ballot.

      Johnson already filed the paperwork for a write-in candidacy.

      The Secretary of State dragged her feet about him getting listed on the ballot in the first place until it was too late, and now won’t even acknowledge his write-in candidacy and confirm that his write-ins will be counted.

      Just another example of corruption by the establishment, robbing us of our choices.

      If you need instructions on how write-ins are done here, I’ll add a link. You need to write in both Gary Johnson and James P. Gray in the unmarked write-in box.

      – Smoov

  • Liberterian

    The Republicans like the Democrates are like sam the scam, they didn’t pick a worthwhile candidate so now they try to dirty a real one. Shifty eyed Romney, speaking out of both sides of his mouth, and I won’t act Obama.

  • Mike A. Bozarth

    My last comment was directed towards David. As for Paul, your Republican bigotry is seeping through. “Third party candidates have never won…” Ever hear of Lincoln or TR?
    As a three-time elected Libertarian I challenge your ignorant statement. As for the “emotional and uninformed part” I’m a college grad who publishes a newspaper. 44 years of patriotic activism should count for something…

    Every election the Democrats and Republicans try to come up reasons to keep us from voting for anyone else. I’m used to it. But I resent the Republicans using their lawyers to prevent people from having a right to vote for who they choose. That fine Republican move will cost you down-ticket votes you might have received had you played fair…

  • Joan Hudson Brown

    I am sure that Gary Johnson would be a great candidate but if we don’t vote for
    Mitt Romney, we will face another 4 years with the worst President ever, Barack
    Obama. Mr. Johnson will split the Republican vote and I am certain the Democrats
    are rejoicing about this. We must support Mitt Romney and ask Mitt to consider
    Gary Johnson for an important position in Washington if Romney wins. Mr. Johnson
    could then push his Libertarian ideas to influence decisions within the Republican

    • orples

      …..That was what everyone thought when they voted for Obama, not wanting McCain to win. Look at what we got.

      Unless we vote for Gary Johnson, we’re in for more of the same ole, same ole, leading us into, first, the North American Union, then, the New World Order. Google Agenda 21. Are you aware that our troops are sporting the UN insignia on their uniforms already? Why do you think nothing is being done about illegal immigration?

      Romney and Obama are both going in the same direction, even though they make be taking different paths to get there. Gary Johnson is not on that band wagon. My vote will go to Gary Johnson. I only wish that everyone that is fed up with standing by and watching our Nation being robbed of her Sovereign Identity would take the leap and vote 3rd party. We just might win. We would at the very least send a powerful message to the powers that be, that we’re fed up as a Nation. A vote for Obama or Romney is a vote for the SOS that has brought us to our current point of dismay. Do we really want to keep that ball bouncing?

      The two party system is a diversion to keep us divided as a Nation. Ditto for race, religion, abortion, gay marriage, etc. If we were given the transparency we were promised under the Obama Administration (remember his 2008 Campaign speeches ?), we’d know what our Government was up to. Better yet, we’d know what the Federal Reserve is up to. The political Candidates we’re given to ‘choose’ from (which are heavily promoted by the rich and powerful) and the bankers, are all in bed together.

      Also, please keep in mind that a whole lot of Democrats switched sides to back Ron Paul once they heard him speak. That was one reason the RNC shut down their own convention, in Nevada, in 2008… Ron Paul was stealing delegates from both Obama and McCain. There is no reason that Gary Johnson can’t pull in a good number of Democrats as well. Freedom is freedom, and I can’t imagine that the Democrats that actually want to restore America would chose Obama over Johnson.

      To hell with voting for the lesser of two evils. Vote for the Candidate most likely to restore our Constitution.

      Gary Johnson . 2012

      • DaveH

        Good post, orples.

    • TML

      Joan Hudson Brown says, “if we don’t vote for Mitt Romney, we will face another 4 years with the worst President ever, Barack Obama. Mr. Johnson will split the Republican vote and I am certain the Democrats are rejoicing about this. ”

      Considering that Johnson’s political positions surround bringing our troops home, marriage equality, ending the drug war, and racial equality, I’m sure he would split the vote of Democrats as well. Not to mention things like the Federal Reserve and IRS, and taking a hardline stance against things like the Patriot Act and NDAA.

      The idea that Johnson would split the Republican vote and result in the re-election is saidw without considering these other factors which didn’t exist in the much touted Ross Perot election – thus such statements are a talking point lie that doesn’t stand to reason.

  • Raymond Carl Hardie

    Upon reading the post’s on this article it becomes apparent that Mr.Rolly has hit a nerve in the political psyche of the readers. After reading most of these comments it is apparent that the only common thread is dissent! I am saddened by the fact that we are a people so divided, we should ask ourselves why? The knowledge disseminated throughout many of these posts is vast and informative, but far too often it is given as malicious and vengeful diatribe. If ” We the people” do not find some common ground, our freedoms, our Nation, will be lost in every sense of the word, economically, politically, and militarily. It is true that many have spoken about what they refer to as religious interference, but we must not undermine the First Amendment, yes many different beliefs get over zealous in their views, and just as they have the freedom to share their beliefs, you and I have the freedom to listen or to not listen, but once we try to hinder or legislate away any article of the ” Bill of Rights “, then the door is open for new and hindering legislation for any and all of the articles in the ” Bill of Rights “, already we see the shift of government in using dialectical materialism ideas for restricting the guarantees of our ” Bill of Rights “, and politicians with an elitist view must be ever so happy to see division about any thing that they can use as a guise for drawing public support in making laws that take the power of the people through the Constitution, and give that power to the central government. The right to bear arms, the freedom of assembly, the freedom of the press, the right to be secure in my property and person without seizure or searches unless upon probable cause, the right to worship and be free in the religious beliefs I hold paramount and compelling, these are wonderful freedoms and I do not want any form of government controlling them or us! I personally want any candidate for any office that will stand for, live by, and vote according to the Constitution even if that person appears to be what others call a nut, right wing zealot, or unelectable. Anything can be possible if we stand together for something good, but as long as preconceived ideas which have been dispersed by the media and those special interest lobbies which use manipulative advertising to undermine our unity and supplant the ideas that anything outside the already established political structure status-quo is futile and counter productive in electing someone to office! One of these posts mentioned Teddy Roosevelt, and I thought how appropriate, Teddy ran on a party whose name was ” The Bull Moose Party” and yes he did win. Whether it is Libertarian, Tea, or Paul Birch, I don’t care, I just want to hear what they represent and what their candidates believe and support, and I will vote for whoever and whatever party upholds the Constitution, and for your own freedom everyone should do the same.

  • TML

    For those interested, there will be held a 3rd Party debate between the other 4… yes four… candidates for President which will be on the ballots of most states representing the Libertarian, Green, Constitution, and Justice Parties.

  • tncdel

    Unless you’re an illegal alien, or a big fan of them, and also want to help Obama to a 2nd term, here’s why you should waste your vote to help Obama voting for Johnson:

  • DaveH

    Sam Rolley,
    Why aren’t you in the contributor’s lists so I can easily read your articles? I think you are spot on most of the time.

  • Rocketman

    Kate 8: Peter Thiel was NEVER a founder of the party. He and I are both libertarians only he is a billionaire. Global Elite? Yes he’s rich but that doesn’t mean that he’s a tri-laterist. In fact, what I’ve heard about him is that he is a very down to earth guy that believes in more personal freedom for everyone. You need to do some research before you start spouting off like that.

  • Motov

    Ever since the 1960′s the crap from DC has been accelerating,..The LBJ administration allowed Congress to dip into the Social Security funds by simply moving it into the general funds. They also started the Viet Nam war. People were fed up with the Democrats.
    So we elected Nixon, twice. Nixon had a problem with Watergate, and resigned, Leaving Ford. People weren’t happy with the Republicans, So we then elected Jimmy Carter, another Democrat, lasted just one term as he proved he was not a good choice.. Then came Reagan who was popular but had one of the most corrupt administration ever seen.
    Shrub #1 rode on Reagan’s popularity to one term,
    When people did not like reading his lips, They voted in the Twin Clinton’s for 8 years, They did goofy things like Nafta, and Monica, Then tried to pawn off Gore on us. Shrub #2 said Florida was his state, and promptly went to war with the mid east.
    Then Oh-Blah-blah came to town promising change (not for the better).

    Every time we switch the parties in office, the bull crap gets deeper.
    This is why I am going to vote Libertarian, For decades Both parties had chance after chance to fix the system but always manage to make it even worse. By looking at the past we see that, So WHY CHOOSE THE LESSER OF 2 EVILS?
    It’ll continue to get worse unless WE stop voting for the 2 parties and try a third.
    This election We can take back the country by not voting either one of the 2 parties.
    But every cycle we hear these are the only winnable candidates, which is a cop out excuse. If we all wake up and realize this is politics, politicians cannot tell the truth.
    AND vote for the guy who doesn’t have gazillion$$$$$ to spend on a campaign.
    We might send some real shock waves that money doesn’t buy power
    Unfortunately, People are too insecure to vote for something different.
    Try another party, the ones in power from our past and present hasn’t worked, and never will work for us.

  • ROGER, Irish-Canadian LIBERTARIAN

    I notice he DIDN’T say he would RESCIND the Patriot Act and the NDAA. Could that be important? If he was a Canadian Libertarian, I wouln’t vote for him, just because of that “oversight” UNLESS he DID say, upon questioning, that he would rescind both.

    • TML

      I noticed that too, but the fact is, the Constitution does not give the occupant of that office the authority to “eliminate” a law that has been passed by Congress. The process for repealing a law has to begin in Congress, the same way it was passed. However, saying he would never have signed those acts is about invoking his veto power. doing so would cause such legislation to require a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate to override a Presidential veto of legislation. (Sadly, knowing the number of votes, these acts may have gone through despite a veto – Thanks Congress)

      However, a good question would be, would he use his presidential influence to try repealing the acts.

    • DaveH
  • Incredulous1

    I read a few comments – not enough time to read all … I work. Maybe someone has already said this but as a matter of practicality, I will vote Johnson because I live in a solid red state (always thought the LSM did that on purpose – Repub.s = red, Demo.s = blue … ought to be other way around.) Anyway, BHO has got to go. I would vote R&R if I lived in a swing state.

  • Dan Mancuso

    This was a very interesting article that raises two profound questions for me. Vote-splitting and government sanctioned homosexual ‘marriage’.
    I very much enjoyed Ron Paul’s book, ” THE REVOLUTION; a Manifesto”. It contained new (to me) insights the other two parties refuse to even to discuss. It seemed the obvious choice in a ‘Two Party System’, (TPS). Logic, reason, fact!
    So, the fact is that having a third viable candidate/political philosophy in the TPS means that votes will be taken from at least one of the two parties and change the outcome. Reason shows us that Obama and the Socialists have to go – or kiss America goodby. Logically the only realistic alternative to the Democrats is the Republicans (put aside for now that they are two faces of the same coin) and since this will be such a close race, anyone else entering the race – with sound fiscal policy not withstanding – WILL split the vote, and bang! Obama in for another four years (and then SCOTUS… etc.). I think it is unrealistic to think that America will wake up to the scam of the TPS in the next three weeks or so and a majority, vote in the Libertarian party. More’s the pity. So can some one please explain to me so that I can understand why the issue of vote splitting and it’s ugly outcome has not been legitimately addressed – I have read many psuedo answers on this and other conservative sites – but never one that satisfied. The Pauls and Mr Johnston, et al, being a Democratic conspiracy to obfuscate and divide is a possibility but highly improbable.
    I understand the philosophy behind the Libertarian ideology about ‘leave me be to do my own thing as long as I’m not hurting anyone or breaking the law’ and agree with it. However, the fact is homosexuality is wrong. Period. It goes against the law of God. It goes against the law of nature. It has been against the laws of man – for the most part – throughout history. There is not one bit of valid or legitimate evidence or fact that shows that homosexuality is any thing but wrong. Period. Although I must add that, what ever consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes is their own business – as long as they are willing to suffer the consequences of their choices. But that’s as far as that goes. The statement, “I believe that marriage equality is a guaranteed constitutional right”, from the article, assigned to Mr. Johnston, is problematic. Where in the Constitution is there any mention of homosexuals? The phrase “Marriage Equality” is ambiguous and just more weasel words, much like ‘sexual orientation’, ‘Affirmative Action’, etc. Again, can a Libertarian please explain to me why supporting homosexual ‘marriage’ is a part of your political philosophy? It seems completely incongruous with the rest of your sound and sane ideology.

    • orples

      Homosexual marriage should not be a topic for the Federal Government to concern itself with. While I’m 100% homosexual, I find it hard to understand how a man is attracted to another man, or a woman to a woman. Still, in order to enjoy the right to make my own choices, it seems only fair that others (with different points of views, than mine) should have the same rights in their own lives— it’s what freedom of choice is all about. What two consenting adults do behind closed doors in the privacy of their bedroom is nobody’s business, but their own.

      • Dan Mancuso

        To Orples;
        I don’t know if you are confused or if I am because your second sentence didn’t make any sense to me. You say you are 100% homosexual but that you don’t understand how the same sexes can be attracted to each other. Huh?
        I agree the state has invaded too many areas of our lives and has no business in the bedrooms of consenting adults, but, this sound reasoning does not apply to homosexual ‘marriage’ sanctioned by the state, because of the destructive nature of it (see my reply to Dave H). Even though it is a fact that homosexuality is wrong and there is no evidence otherwise, what you choose to do in public and in private are two different things.
        I agree freedom of choice is a two way street, kind of like how difficult that 1st Ammendment can be sometimes, but the reality is there are limits to everything! Our right to choose ends when it becomes destructive to someone else.
        My question was “Can a libertarian please explain to me why supporting homosexual ‘marriage’ is a part of your political philosophy?”

      • orples

        I could not leave a reply relative to Dan’s reply to my original statement. I meant to say I am 100% Heterosexual. My mistake. Thank you Dan for calling me on my error. I have to admit … I feel like a moron. LOL.

    • DaveH

      Dan says — “However, the fact is homosexuality is wrong”.
      No Dan, that’s not a fact. It is just your opinion.
      But the Libertarian stance on Homosexuality can be explained by our main creed — That we have the natural right to control our own bodies and our own property as long as we don’t physically trespass on the bodies and property of other people. We don’t endorse homosexuality. We just don’t believe it is any business of Government.
      By that same token, we also do not believe it is any business of Government to give Homosexuals special protections that the rest of us don’t have (such as so-called “hate” crimes).

      • Dan Mancuso

        To Dave H;
        Yes what I said about homosexuality being wrong is my opinion – BUT – it is one based on fact, three unassailable and inarguable facts. The Bible – Gods Law, Science – the laws of nature, and history. So what you said about my opinion, that homosexuality is wrong, is also an opinion. What you didn’t provide however, is any evidence to the contrary. To quote my ‘opinion’; “There is not one bit of valid or legitmate evidence or fact that homosexuality is anything but wrong”. If you cannot provide that evidence then the fact that homosexuality is wrong remains a fact. Period. Just because way too many people have been programmed to be moral relativists, instead of having moral agency, does not make my opinion based on fact, wrong!
        My point was, why does your ‘creed’ support “Marrige Equality” – read homosexual ‘marriage’ sanctioned by the state? Does the right to control your own body include murdering unborn babies? Does that right include the right to destroy the traditional structure of marriage – one man, one woman, raising children and instilling moral agency in them. Because, one plank in the destructiveness of socialism is homosexual marriage, sanctioned by the state. It is designed to destroy the family structure and moral agency, allow the state to intercede and raise the children, programming them with their own statist dogma and make everyone dependent on the state. Ergo, homosexual ‘marriage’, sanctioned by the state is destructive to other people. There is more than enough evidence on this site alone to clearly show the destructive nature of homosexual ‘marriage’, sanctioned by the state, and how it can lead to “…trespass on the bodies and property of other people”. So, if you have evidence to the contrary, show it! Or admit that homosexuality and homosexual ‘marriage’, sanctioned by the state is wrong Period!
        And explain to me why Mr. Johnson said, “I believe that marriage equality (read – homosexual ‘marriage’ sanctioned by the state) is a constitutinally guaranteed right”
        And, since you have put yourself forward as a representative of Libertarianism, what about splitting the vote and it’s ramifications in this election?
        Thank you
        Dan Mancuso

      • Jazzabelle


        I don’t speak for libertarians, but I may be able to answer one of your questions. The Constitution guarantees that adults of consenting age (18) can enter contracts which the government has the obligation to enforce (in a lawsuit situation). Marriage is a contract. So, while the Constitution doesn’t specifically mention marriage, it does demand that adults who enter contracts have the right to use the courts to enforce their contracts. That means that the government has an obligation to recognize the legal legitimacy of private contracts, including marriage. (None of this means, of course, that the government is obligated to issue marriage licenses to anyone in particular. That’s a whole different ballgame there. Personally, I’d like to see the government get out of the marriage-licencing business altogether.)

        As for homosexuality being morally wrong, I think you’re right, but government is an inappropriate tool to use to force people to be morally right. The reason the government has tried so hard to destroy marriage and other private social institutions is because government knows these institutions make the people powerful; these institutions are far more powerful than the government could ever be. Therefore, I would suggest that if you want to discourage homosexual marriage and behavior, forget about using the government’s power and use your own. Refuse to patronize businesses run by homosexuals. There’s no law that says you have to do business with them. (Depending on where you live, of course, you might not want to advertise that this is what you’re doing, because some homosexuals seem to think they DO have a right to your business and they sue people over stuff like this.) Also, strengthen your private institutions in your local area. Volunteer your time, donate money, buy local, join a church even if you don’t believe in God, and counsel people who are stuggling with their sexual identity. Be a beacon of traditionalism in your community. Let people know by your presence that there IS a moral majority and you are part of it. Changing the culture is more powerful than changing Washington.

      • Deerinwater

        April 29, 2012
        According to columnist Rex Huppke, there was a recent death that you might have missed. It wasn’t an actor, musician or famous politician, but facts.

        In a piece for the Chicago Tribune, Huppke says facts – things we know to be true – are now dead.

        Huppke says the final blow came on Wednesday, April 18, when Republican Rep. Allen West of Florida declared that about 80 members of the Democratic Party in Congress are members of the Communist Party.

        1. an event or thing known to have happened or existed
        2. a truth verifiable from experience or observation
        3. a piece of information get me all the facts of this case
        4. (Law) Law (often plural) an actual event, happening, etc., as distinguished from its legal consequences. Questions of fact are decided by the jury, questions of law by the court or judge
        5. (Philosophy) Philosophy a proposition that may be either true or false, as contrasted with an evaluative statement
        after (or before) the fact Criminal law after (or before) the commission of the offence an accessory after the fact
        as a matter of fact, in fact, in point of fact in reality or actuality
        fact of life an inescapable truth, esp an unpleasant one
        the fact of the matter the truth

        By Dr. Thomas L. Long

        The history of the collection of ancient texts held sacred by Jews, Christians, and Moslems, typically called the Bible (though what each religious tradition means by that word differs) is inextricably two histories: a history of composition and a history of interpretation. Unless a reader is the most naïve literalist who believes that God dictated the books directly to scribes who recorded them verbatim and who believes that people of faith have always interpreted the texts in exactly the same way, modern readers and scholars understand that these texts and their interpretations are the products of changing historical conditions. Because they hold these texts sacred, moreover, believers can come to a deeper appreciation of the ways in which the Bible continues to speak to people in different historical conditions. At the same time, non-believers acknowledge that the prevalence of Western monotheism, the religions of Jews, Christians, and Moslems that constitute the so-called “People of the Book,” means that the Bible is perhaps one of the most significant literary and cultural texts available for their study. Understanding the history of the Bible’s composition and transmission, on the one hand, and the history of its interpretation on the other, can enrich its reading for both believers and non-believers alike.

        The philosophical field that studies how humans interpret things is called hermeneutics. This term is also used generically to label the actual practices and processes that individuals and communities undertake in their interpretive activities. Thus we can speak of Jewish hermeneutical practices differing in some ways but similar in others to later Christian hermeneutics. “Hermeneutics” is the term applied to both the art of interpretation and theories about interpretation. Throughout this section we will look at all of the aspects involved in and summarize the complex history of scriptural hermeneutics.

        Homosexual are born Homosexuals, by Gods own design in much the same way other anomalies in nature occur and not a exclusive characteristic in humankind but is witnessed thu out the animal kingdom in degrees of 1 to 3% .

        I would suggest, ~ you relax your grip on a 3000 years old book that makes you appear lacking in the understanding of physical world that you live in today.

        It is not necessary for any of us to like or agree or support homosexual activate ~ it is real, it is a fact, it has been with mankind from the beginning it seems and is not going away simple because 97% of humans might not approve.

        Transgender is a complex subject and requires an open mind to allow information in to understand it. ~ If your bible prevents you from bringing an open mind to the discussing, this is okay, ~ as long as you don’t require or demand indulgence from other people around you while proclaiming to be a mentally healthy and stable person.

        If myself, a 64 years old heterosexual male of average intelligence that was raised Church of Christ by Christian affiliation can figure this out, ~ you should be able too as well.

        A Christian is suppose to walk by “FAITH” and not by sight.

      • Dan Mancuso

        To Deerinwinter;
        I read your very interesting comment, more than once, and I have to argue with one point very strenuously. Homosexuals are not born that way, they are probably not nurtured that way. The pro radical feminist/radical homosexual/socialist cabal, that runs things today and dictates moral values to people in this Godless modern age, use weasel words like ‘sexual orientation’, ‘diversity’, ‘gay’ etc. to dumb down and fool the population that has traded moral agency for moral relativism. God gave us free will to choose, He did not create bad things – although one wonders at things like disease carrying ticks and whatnot. Homosexuality is a CHOICE people make, a moral choice and a wrong moral choice.
        Homosexuality and other deviant behaviours like violence, only shows up in the animal kingdom under certain extenuating circumstances, like over crowding – kind of like living in an urban center. Myself, I am a creation of a Divine Being and NOT descended from apes…
        I understand the physical world quite well and reject it – which is why I chose to move to the middle of nowhere. I value the Bible as a moral guide, inspired by the Divine Being we call God.
        The fact of homosexuality and the complexities of transgenderism I acknowledge and understand – I have a problem with the fact that the state coddles and uses these poor unfortunates to further their own evil agenda – Totalitarian Global Fascism!
        The fact that 97% of normal people don’t approve of this behaviour makes it clear that it is in fact wrong and not just because they are a huge majority.
        As a weak, sinning Christian I do try to walk that path of faith and this is why I, a) speak out against the evil and the wrong and, b) try to do so in non-condemning, civilzed and intelligent ways. Love the sinner, hate the sin. I feel it is my duty as a Christian as a man and as a citizen.
        Just out of curiosity, how do you pronounce ‘hermeneutics’?

        • Smoovious Laxness

          You don’t choose who attracts or arouses you.

          I don’t care if you are heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual, it doesn’t matter.

          Attraction and arousal isn’t a choice. It is an emotional and physical response.

          For that reason alone, arguments about if it is natural or unnatural are meaningless.

          Attitudes about it being wrong, or immoral, are religious constructs born by people who had their own bias one way or the other, and impose those biases on other people through “religion”.

          It isn’t a choice, any more than you or I chose to be attracted or aroused by members of the opposite sex. I made no such choice, I simply am.

          This is the argument of people who believe they were born that way.

          Imposing whatever religious morality you wish to subscribe to, against other people who don’t subscribe to it, is exactly why religion should not have a direct influence on the laws of a government and country, that is supposed to be about liberty and freedom.

          You are free to believe it is wrong however much you want to. You are not free to punish other people over it.

          – Smoov

      • Dan Mancuso

        To Jazzabelle;
        Thank you for you heartfelt, intelligent response. The activities that you suggest one does to counter the immorality of homosexuality etc., in ones community are demanding and difficult, to say the least. Though as a Christian can one do less?
        Unfortunately, I chose to move away from the cesspool our society has become and just cannot relate to most people today, nor do I want to.
        My best friend these days is an honest, intelligent, loyal, companion who shows me unconditional love and affection – a twelve year old working Border Collie cross named Spike. For all the richness this ‘dumb beast’ has brought into my life, I can’t help thinking this was a reward from God for some good thing I may have done.
        I will certainly take your words to heart…

      • Dan Mancuso

        To Smoovious Laxness;
        I hear what you are saying and I understand your points – however I have to disagree with your reasoning. Unfortunately you appear to be one of the majority today that has allowed yourself to be duped by the socialist dogma or conditioned to think there are no absolutes, because you percieve it to be in your – not societies – best interest. You have allowed yourself to beome part of the vast number of narscissists and nihilists. You have traded your moral agency for moral relativism. If it feels good for me it must be right.
        God gave us will, He gave us choice, it’s up to us to make the correct choice. You say my belief is merely a religious construct. Well your belief is a humanist construct. The difference is one is from God and is good, the other is from the radical feminist/ radical homosexual/socialist cabal that runs things in the west today and it is evil. Evil in ‘nice’ sounding terms.
        I don’t know where you got the idea that I was punishing anybody, I was merely stating easily provable facts. I suggest you are reading something into my statements in order to rest easily with your own misguided humanist dogma, which, deep down in all of us, where God has put that divine spark, you know what’s right and what’s wrong. I really hope you can figure this out. Love the sinner, hate the sin.

  • liberty55

    There will never be a candidate that is perfect.. Gary comes close to my views on most subjects. I support him.

  • Lawrence

    At least Gary Johnson gives us an opportunity to vote our conscience. The trouble with the American people is they have no conscience and for that matter no shame.They vote for whomever promises what they want, not what is good for the nation.

  • Motov

    We must elect a government that will shrink itself, You will not find that in any of the two parties. TSA, must go they are anti-constitutional. I think we could easily cut the government in half by eliminating many bureaucratic positions. As Margaret Thatcher once said The problem with Socialism is you eventually run out of money. We have past that point a long time ago, We need radical reduction of Government to save this country.
    That is just plain and simple.
    We have far too many grubby hands on the dole. Many that do not even belong there.
    Washington DC needs an enema, the sooner, the better!


Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.