PDA

View Full Version : Re: Johnson / OG paulbot got something to say




Paulitical Correctness
08-15-2016, 05:57 PM
Regardless of your opinion on J/W, anyone who was around for the '08 Ron Paul run has to be at least marginally pleased by the fact that people are taking the time to examine and discuss libertarianism.

The average voter in 2008 asked "what the hell is a libertarian?"

Then in 2012 they said "those libertarians are whackos..."

Now in 2016, someone who incites minimal interest from Ron Paul purists is breaking double digit poll numbers, encouraging enough enthusiasm from first time donors to participate in a money bomb, and making former republicans and democrats take a closer look at their options.

Do you remember discovering Ron Paul? A lot of these Johnson supporters are undergoing the same transformation. Don't rain on their parade because they haven't had the focus and time to further delve into an entirely different political ideology. It all starts with "this guy sure is a breath of fresh air..."

This year's ticket may not be a breath of fresh air to many of us, but it's opening an entirely new block of voters to Ron Paul's version of libertarianism.

Instead of looking at Ron Paul's Liberty movement as this exclusive thing why not find a Johnson supporter and say "hey, you know who's even more awesome than Gary Johnson? Ron Paul."

I've seen hundreds of comments on the GJ Facebook pages that say things like "I've never donated to a political campaign but there's never been a candidate like this before!" and "lifelong republican here proudly casting my vote for Gary". Today they watched with excitement as his money bomb ticker rose. Sound familiar?

Maybe it's disappointing that a better candidate to represent a strong third choice wasn't put forward, but instead of being the typical libertarian pessimist why not take a step back and look at the opportunities that come with it. Ron Paul started all this as a movement of ideas didn't he? I'd say Gary's popularity is an indication that our ideas are winning, not that they have been hijacked.

LibertyEagle
08-15-2016, 06:06 PM
Gary has nothing to do with "our ideals", or Ron Paul's. Johnson said he would sign the Trans Pacific Partnership. That makes him a traitor.

Paulitical Correctness
08-15-2016, 06:23 PM
The point is people are fed up and looking for alternatives. Gary is not the torchbearer for Ron Paul by any means but the fact that people are giving the LP any attention at all is a good thing.

Dismantling the misconception that there are only two legitimate political parties in the country is a huge step in the right direction. I'm not telling you to support Johnson, I'm telling you to see his surge in popularity as an opportunity.

Part of the reason I never came back to these forums was because purists and cynical elitists seemed to undo any progress made. Just today I made a similar comment on another platform about the progress we've made as a whole and the first response was filled with cynicism and profanity.

You can "traitor" this and "nothing like Ron Paul" that all day long. It misses the point.

69360
08-15-2016, 07:38 PM
Gary has nothing to do with "our ideals", or Ron Paul's. Johnson said he would sign the Trans Pacific Partnership. That makes him a traitor.

Enough already. Every single thread doesn't need your comments about TPP.

satchelmcqueen
08-15-2016, 08:03 PM
Gary has nothing to do with "our ideals", or Ron Paul's. Johnson said he would sign the Trans Pacific Partnership. That makes him a traitor.

maybe so, but im not going to vote trump or clinton. this is our only "other" viable choice. he isnt perfect by far, and weld is horrible BUT got any other ideas? we all seriously better consider voting for johnson this one time to at the very least get rid of the other two. johnson is a good starting point if he wins the prez spot. the other two, nope, ...complete garbage and only more of the same, yet i think itll be way worse this time.

also lets not forget that johnson was the ONLY one in a past debate in the GOP that said he would pick ron paul as his vice. i respect him for saying it. the rest never would have and didnt.

satchelmcqueen
08-15-2016, 08:06 PM
The point is people are fed up and looking for alternatives. Gary is not the torchbearer for Ron Paul by any means but the fact that people are giving the LP any attention at all is a good thing.

Dismantling the misconception that there are only two legitimate political parties in the country is a huge step in the right direction. I'm not telling you to support Johnson, I'm telling you to see his surge in popularity as an opportunity.

Part of the reason I never came back to these forums was because purists and cynical elitists seemed to undo any progress made. Just today I made a similar comment on another platform about the progress we've made as a whole and the first response was filled with cynicism and profanity.

You can "traitor" this and "nothing like Ron Paul" that all day long. It misses the point.
my point as well. johnson is our ONLY other option. he is way better than clinton or trump and would make a very good start to moving liberty forward. im just excited he may get into the debates. that alone might be enough for him to win once he gets to talk against the other two.

this getting into the national debates is the direct effect of our ron paul movements efforts over the last 8 years. if not for ron pauls surge in popularity and what he spoke about, this 3rd man in a debate would NOT be happening as it is now, so yes!, this has something to do with the ron paul movements seeds of liberty.

Paulitical Correctness
08-15-2016, 08:52 PM
http://i.memeful.com/media/post/BRkm0vw_700wa_0.gif

CPUd
08-15-2016, 09:06 PM
Gary has nothing to do with "our ideals", or Ron Paul's. Johnson said he would sign the Trans Pacific Partnership. That makes him a traitor.

Take it to the evaluation thread:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?243917-Campaign-Evaluation-Johnson-Weld-Ticket-(POTUS)

eleganz
08-15-2016, 10:05 PM
Nobody is going to be perfect, I'm just happy third parties are being considered, its happened much faster than I ever thought possible, but then we got the miracle that is Trump this year.

We're never going to get the perfect candidate, the libertarian movement is way too splintered into different factions by level of purity. Nobody is ever going to be happy. GJ is not a bad guy, he has some of the issues wrong but he's right on a lot of things we care about and I'm realistically content with that.

William Tell
08-15-2016, 10:10 PM
The average voter in 2008 asked "what the hell is a libertarian?"

Johnson/Weld make me ask that now....

specsaregood
08-15-2016, 10:15 PM
my point as well. johnson is our ONLY other option. he is way better than clinton or trump and would make a very good start to moving liberty forward.


I disagree, he is just as bad if not worse than those other two and represents the death of the LP as anything ever worth supporting.

LibertyEagle
08-15-2016, 10:30 PM
Enough already. Every single thread doesn't need your comments about TPP.

Yeah, it does. Apparently, you haven't read about it. When are you going to do that?

CPUd
08-15-2016, 10:37 PM
Yeah, it does. Apparently, you haven't read about it. When are you going to do that?

Perhaps you should make your case why Johnson shouldn't be included in the liberty campaigns subforum :
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?243917-Campaign-Evaluation-Johnson-Weld-Ticket-(POTUS)

RJ Liberty
08-16-2016, 01:17 AM
Nobody is going to be perfect, I'm just happy third parties are being considered, its happened much faster than I ever thought possible, but then we got the miracle that is Trump this year.

We're never going to get the perfect candidate, the libertarian movement is way too splintered into different factions by level of purity. Nobody is ever going to be happy. GJ is not a bad guy, he has some of the issues wrong but he's right on a lot of things we care about and I'm realistically content with that.


Yep. Johnson's wrong on several issues, but he's right on at least 40 positions. That's good enough for me.

The Gold Standard
08-16-2016, 02:56 PM
I don't care for Johnson, but I voted for him before, so I won't rain on anyone's parade that wants to do it now.

NewRightLibertarian
08-16-2016, 03:06 PM
It's sad to watch a movement fall on the sword out of desperation, and that's what is happening to the liberty movement right now. I never thought the Ron Paul revolution would turn into a sad, lifeless movement of cowards willing to sell out their principles for a pat on the head from the mainstream media. Beyond tragic.

jllundqu
08-16-2016, 03:11 PM
Gary has nothing to do with "our ideals", or Ron Paul's. Johnson said he would sign the Trans Pacific Partnership. That makes him a traitor.

Jesus Christ with this traitor thing again..... TPP! TRAITOR!!!! I'm gonna make LE a personal meme to save some freaking time....

Natural Citizen
08-16-2016, 03:23 PM
Jesus Christ with this traitor thing again..... TPP! TRAITOR!!!! I'm gonna make LE a personal meme to save some freaking time....

But she's right. The TPP is an illegal transfer of power. Patently.

So now we're going to illegally transfer power from the people to the President and special interests behind closed doors in secret while we also send men from the government with guns to force Individuals to relinquish their rights to their property. We're going to force them at gunpoint to relinquish the fundamental principal support that provides for any right of claim to Individual Liberty and Life itself, and we're going to also illegally transfer power from them in secret. In Liberty, we're going to do that.

Yeah. Heh. A real champion of Individual Liberty, that Johnson guy.

But, hey. Fahgettaboudit. Pass the joint around. Flip on some porn. That'll make the pain go away. Party it up, boys. And tell your friends, too. Pay no mind to that gun at the back of your head telling you what to think and what to do. It's there in Liberty http://hyves-smileys.immerblei.com/img/smiley_sortof.gif. ..nothing to see there. Move along. Toke toke. Laugh it up.

Natural Citizen
08-16-2016, 03:27 PM
Btw, the statesman correctly agrees....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYF7aRGtNcg

Natural Citizen
08-16-2016, 03:28 PM
Bunch of sellouts around here these days.

The Founders hanged traitors. They wouldn't even have sacrificed the fine workmanship of a slug on them. Nor would they have provided them its common dignity.

specsaregood
08-16-2016, 05:51 PM
Bunch of sellouts around here these days.

Be careful now NC; we are in the era of Gary Johnson Libertarianism, where you can do whatever you want as long as don't: hurt, offend, minorly irritate, bother, or look cross-eyed at other people, especially protected classes of people. And name-calling CERTAINLY will not be tolerated.

Paulitical Correctness
08-16-2016, 06:13 PM
And that quickly I'm reminded me of why I left this shithole to begin with. Enjoy your "inclusive" movement. I'm sure you'll get all those converts acting like that.

I wish the old guard of RP activists could be a little more open to actually growing their own movement instead of waiting for candidates and supporters who align with them on 99% of issues to just show up on their own.

Good luck ladies and germs!

Natural Citizen
08-16-2016, 06:15 PM
Later.

Natural Citizen
08-16-2016, 06:23 PM
Be careful now NC; we are in the era of Gary Johnson Libertarianism, where you can do whatever you want as long as don't: hurt, offend, minorly irritate, bother, or look cross-eyed at other people, especially protected classes of people. And name-calling CERTAINLY will not be tolerated.

Well. I dont know, specs. Somebody's gotta have the fortitude to call a spade a spade around here. I'll be darned if I'm going to stand around cheerleading for Individual Liberty's openly admitted aggressor. And I sure as heck wouldn't do so in Liberty's name. I don't really care if anyone doesn't like to hear the truth. Somebody has to say it.

Paulitical Correctness
08-16-2016, 06:26 PM
The old Ron Paul wing of the Liberty movement is full of pompous d-bags. Enjoy staying at 1% and making zero impact on the future of our country. It's cool though, you can bitch and moan about how you called it all along without ever having done anything to help. Stay on your sinking ship, asshat!

William Tell
08-16-2016, 06:31 PM
Hey, if GJ actually gets new people to embrace liberty, property rights, etc that's cool. Although he himself doesn't understand or believe in many of the things RP did. I haven't heard anyone say GJ cured my apathy, but I suppose they may be out there.

Weld doesn't embrace liberty at all. He's not good on anything.

Natural Citizen
08-16-2016, 06:35 PM
Hey, if GJ actually gets new people to embrace liberty, property rights, etc that's cool.

Well. Doesn't seem like an open contention that sending men from the government with guns to force Individuals or groups of Individuals to relinquish their right to property is a very practical way to teach people to embrace property rights or liberty. Seems like that philosophy is actually teaching people that property rights and liberty should be rejected fully. That's a communist philosophy. Patently. Of course, the right to property is the principal support for Life and Liberty itself. So, technically, by popularizing a rejection of
Individual Liberty's principal support, he's teaching people to reject Individual Liberty fully. And he's doing so in Liberty, no less.

But wuheva. If someone can explain to me how I'm wrong and that sending men from the government with guns to force Individuals at the end of their barrels to relinquish their right to Individual Liberty's principal support is embracing Liberty, then, by all means, I'm open for correction.

We can set that little thing about illegally transferring power from the people solely to the President aside for the time being. That's something else.

Natural Citizen
08-16-2016, 06:59 PM
The old Ron Paul wing of the Liberty movement is full of pompous d-bags. Enjoy staying at 1% and making zero impact on the future of our country. It's cool though, you can bitch and moan about how you called it all along without ever having done anything to help. Stay on your sinking ship, asshat!

I thought you were leaving.

specsaregood
08-16-2016, 07:00 PM
I thought you were leaving.

Maybe he got lost looking for his safe space.

satchelmcqueen
08-16-2016, 07:01 PM
ok so whats the choice then? i wont vote trump or hillary. there is no one else other than johnson with the ability to be on all state ballots. sooo, what am i supposed to do? johnson and weld arent perfect, but it seems like some of you here have no forward thinking. trust me, if rand was an option id vote for him without a doubt. if ron was an option...the same.

so who are you going to vote for? the ones who hate all 3, please tell me your secret candidate that has a real chance of getting into these debates. and i am NOT a traitor to this ron paul thing. fucking hell, i never thought id be classified as such by some of you after god damn 9 years of knowing me here.

Paulitical Correctness
08-16-2016, 07:03 PM
I'm done trying to reason with asshats. I've been a part of the movement since 2007. If you want to be arrogant toward me you're only proving my point.

Paulitical Correctness
08-16-2016, 07:04 PM
I remember you bro!

Natural Citizen
08-16-2016, 07:08 PM
Johnson will be lucky to get 2% of the vote. After November, this is all going to be over. And we're going to be back to principles.

Natural Citizen
08-16-2016, 07:12 PM
I'm done trying to reason with asshats. I've been a part of the movement since 2007.

Sheeit. I've been humping pavement the old fashoned way since the 80s and before most of you ever even knew who Ron Paul was. Heck, most of you likely weren't even born. 2007. Phht. What the heck is that supposed to mean to me? Heck, I think I even have a sock around here from 07 if it makes you feel better.

Paulitical Correctness
08-16-2016, 07:23 PM
Cool story.

Natural Citizen
08-16-2016, 07:30 PM
Ah well. I'll give you your thread back. I'm pretty much done here.

Nighthawkeye
08-16-2016, 07:32 PM
ok so whats the choice then? i wont vote trump or hillary. there is no one else other than johnson with the ability to be on all state ballots. sooo, what am i supposed to do? johnson and weld arent perfect, but it seems like some of you here have no forward thinking. trust me, if rand was an option id vote for him without a doubt. if ron was an option...the same.

so who are you going to vote for? the ones who hate all 3, please tell me your secret candidate that has a real chance of getting into these debates. and i am NOT a traitor to this ron paul thing. $#@!ing hell, i never thought id be classified as such by some of you after god damn 9 years of knowing me here.
TyrantEagle calling people traitors all the while he supports Trump with a passion the biggest anti-liberty spewing Hitler want to be, tyrant in the history of presidential politics. Ignore em if you must, I like to read his spew as it gives me a hardy laugh. As for NC he supports Castle, which at least is a decent candidate, he feels leaps and bounds above Johnson, personally I feel their about even although Weld is pretty bad, not Trump/Hillary bad but meh. My argument against Castle is he is running for the Constitution party which has a very crappy, non liberty platform and he most likely won't be on my state ballot or many others likely less than half of em. So that pretty much means his votes are pretty much just protest votes which only support a party which I disagree with its platform even though Castle is better than his parties platform.

Paulitical Correctness
08-16-2016, 07:39 PM
Ah well. I'll give you your thread back. I'm pretty much done here.

And you done a fine job of building bridges and extending olive branches. Good on you ole man.

Natural Citizen
08-16-2016, 07:44 PM
And you done a fine job of building bridges and extending olive branches. Good on you ole man.

Get a little older and wiser and you'll learn that the only practical means of lighting the way is to set a few bridges on fire.

Anyway. Carry on...

Paulitical Correctness
08-16-2016, 07:55 PM
Get a little older and wiser and you'll learn that the only practical means of lighting the way is to set a few bridges on fire.

Anyway. Carry on...

Fair enough brother but remember I ain't your enemy.

Natural Citizen
08-16-2016, 07:57 PM
Fair enough brother but remember I ain't your enemy.

Yeah, I know.

You can't let people like me make you take your ball and go home, though. There will always be disagreement. If there isn't, then, things aren't being discussed properly.

Peace.

Leaning Libertarian
08-17-2016, 01:30 AM
Hey, if GJ actually gets new people to embrace liberty, property rights, etc that's cool. Although he himself doesn't understand or believe in many of the things RP did. I haven't heard anyone say GJ cured my apathy, but I suppose they may be out there.

Weld doesn't embrace liberty at all. He's not good on anything.

Libertarians were given a gift that comes perhaps only once in a century. Trump and Clinton both are especially disliked as candidates. They completely blew their opportunity with Johnson / Weld. I registered Libertarian after Rand dropped out, yet there is no damn way I am going to vote for this ticket. With all the horrendous options, I think I will personally write in Andrew Basiago and be done with this election cycle.

Natural Citizen
08-17-2016, 01:45 AM
I think I will personally write in Andrew Basiago and be done with this election cycle.

Ha. That's the guy who says he was a time traveler and visited Mars with Obama in Project Pegasus? I think he suspended his campaign some time ago.

Nash
08-18-2016, 04:42 PM
I don't understand the AnCap hate on Johnson. Yeah he's not an AnCap but he's at least in the same ballpark on most of the issues. He's also actually trying to get elected, not just educate people like the Ron Paul campaigns.

Anyone who thinks Ron Paul was actually running a viable campaign back in 2008/2012 is really not paying attention. You can't run on a platform of "dissolve the federal government" and expect to get elected. Yes he got decent percentages in some of the primaries, but those were basically from the same "let the world burn" supporters whom are now backing Trump.

I say all this as someone who voted for Paul in both 2008 and 2012 and canvassed for him door to door in my neighborhood and donated money to his campaign. It was all about getting the word out about libertarian ideas, not about winning.

The vast majority of people do not like libertarian purist positions. They will NEVER win in an election unless there is some monumental crisis. Johnson is a totally realistic libertarian candidate, even if you want him to accuse him of only being libertarian leaning, he's 500 times better than Trump/Clinton.

If you're truly into liberty you must realize you don't elections with feast or famine voting. You win incrementally. If Johnson does well (even if he doesn't win) that sets the table for a better chance going forward. Sitting at 1% of the vote with hardline ancap positions isn't getting us anywhere.

undergroundrr
08-18-2016, 05:07 PM
I don't understand the AnCap hate on Johnson. Yeah he's not an AnCap but he's at least in the same ballpark on most of the issues. He's also actually trying to get elected, not just educate people like the Ron Paul campaigns.

Anyone who thinks Ron Paul was actually running a viable campaign back in 2008/2012 is really not paying attention. You can't run on a platform of "dissolve the federal government" and expect to get elected. Yes he got decent percentages in some of the primaries, but those were basically from the same "let the world burn" supporters whom are now backing Trump.

I say all this as someone who voted for Paul in both 2008 and 2012 and canvassed for him door to door in my neighborhood and donated money to his campaign. It was all about getting the word out about libertarian ideas, not about winning.

The vast majority of people do not like libertarian purist positions. They will NEVER win in an election unless there is some monumental crisis. Johnson is a totally realistic libertarian candidate, even if you want him to accuse him of only being libertarian leaning, he's 500 times better than Trump/Clinton.

If you're truly into liberty you must realize you don't elections with feast or famine voting. You win incrementally. If Johnson does well (even if he doesn't win) that sets the table for a better chance going forward. Sitting at 1% of the vote with hardline ancap positions isn't getting us anywhere.

Excellent post. +rep. I voted for Chuck Baldwin in 2008 instead of Johnson. I thought if Johnson was a true libertarian he would have stayed out of Ron Paul's way at the time. Coming into this election I knew Johnson's peculiarities and impurities and had come to terms with it. I like Castle a lot, but you are voting for a party when you vote for a candidate.

I would love to elect someone who would dismantle the state on day one. But I'm very pleased with Johnson's rhetoric and strategy thus far. He's managed not to make the mistake of preaching to the libertarian choir. Libertarians habitually spout out formulaic dogma and marginalize themselves. Instead, he's proven he's his own man and shown he'll take the difficult steps to earn support. Despite his apparent goofiness, there's a toughness and resilience there that's pretty admirable.

Natural Citizen
08-18-2016, 05:14 PM
Fundamentals are not purist. Fundamentals are fundamentals. To refer to fundamentals as purist is nothing less than a slick, dishonest, attempt at stimulating the idea that fundamentals and the moral foundation for Individual Liberty can and should be arbitrarily accepted and rejected piece-meal. This is a disservice to the cause of liberty. Principles define liberty. Not policy.

devil21
08-20-2016, 01:10 PM
And that quickly I'm reminded me of why I left this shithole to begin with. Enjoy your "inclusive" movement. I'm sure you'll get all those converts acting like that.

I wish the old guard of RP activists could be a little more open to actually growing their own movement instead of waiting for candidates and supporters who align with them on 99% of issues to just show up on their own.

Good luck ladies and germs!

TPP, carbon taxes, gun control, CFR, etc. Ladies and gentleman, the Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson.

Calling it "libertarian" does not make it that. Just because people are using the word libertarian does not mean that the policies or the candidates are libertarian. It's an attempt to rewrite history and apply a different label to socialist globalism, which is quite obviously what is being pushed regardless of which candidate you 'vote' for. If anything it damages libertarianism because it utterly changes what the term meant during Ron's campaigns. Again, calling something libertarian does not make it such. It's not a win if the very term for the movement is perverted into something else entirely. You can't possibly think that libertarianism wins if socialist globalism policies are the outcome of the 'win'?

Btw, any candidate that has either been a lawyer or a governor knows that the real history of this land mass known as America is NOT what the average voter believes. Governors know that the corporate State Governments are nothing but corporate subsidiaries of the corporate United States (Inc.) government and are not autonomous governments.

r3volution 3.0
08-20-2016, 01:31 PM
Well said OP

Sadly, as you realized (or remembered) over the course of the thread, there are people within the liberty movement (or who consider themselves part of the liberty movement) who are deaf to this kind of reasoning. 99% purity isn't good enough for them (though evidently 1% is good enough, if the point of agreement addresses their pet obsession: gay cake, TPP, etc). The good news is that they're very few in number relative the number of people needed for a winning coalition, so they don't really matter, irritating as they may be.

69360
08-20-2016, 02:03 PM
Johnson will be lucky to get 2% of the vote. After November, this is all going to be over. And we're going to be back to principles.

It's going to be more than 2. Polls aren't off that far. That lesson was already learned. IMO it will be between 5 and 10.

Natural Citizen
08-20-2016, 02:05 PM
99% purity isn't good enough for them (though evidently 1% is good enough, if the point of agreement addresses their pet obsession: gay cake, TPP, etc). The good news is that they're very few in number relative the number of people needed for a winning coalition, so they don't really matter, irritating as they may be.

This right here is the most dangerous threat to the cause of Liberty, people. And it is blatantly right there in your face.

The TPP is an illegal transfer of power. Patently. Than, again, you openly state that the best form of government is a Monarchy. You openly promote the idea of Kings. This is a rejection of the right to Individual Liberty itself.

Monarchy Is the Best Form of Government - That's you, r3volution 3.0. You said that. And you continue to openly promote the ideology. It's no wonder you reject concern from real libertarians who reject the notion of a TPP where power is illegaly transferred to a King.


"Gay Cake", as you say, is a rejection of the right to property. It's communist. Patently. The right to property is the principal support for the right to Life and Liberty itself. To openly contend that your position is one that supports sending men from the govenment with guns to force Individuals to relinquish their property is communist. It is not libertarian in any way. This contention is one that is an open rejection of the right to Life and Liberty completely.



To people like r3volution 3.0, it really is good news that people who adhere to the primary supporting fundamental principles of Individual Liberty are very few in number relative the number of people winning by way of the Marxist coalition.

Because without people who adhere to Individual Liberty's most fundamental supporting principles, it paves the way for the cultural Marxist expansion and a redefinition of principles. To blatantly and openly mock these primary fundamental principles of Individual Liberty and Life itself as "pet obsession" is a blatant demonstration of aggression toward and disrespect for the right to Life and Liberty itself.

You put on a good front. I'll give you that much.

r3volution 3.0
08-20-2016, 02:19 PM
It's going to be more than 2. Polls aren't off that far. That lesson was already learned. IMO it will be between 5 and 10.

Agreed

Nate Silver has it at 6.6% at the moment, which is conservative relative the polling.

Natural Citizen
08-20-2016, 02:51 PM
He'll be very lucky to see 2%. Thankfully. That guy has no business even having his name mentioned in the same sentence with Liberty. He's a cultural Marxist at best. He's certainly a patent communist given that he openly admitted his rejection of the right to property. By default, this means that he rejects the right to Life and Liberty fully given that the right to property is Life and Liberty's principal support.

And on top of that he openly states that he'd consider officially signing off on a illegal transfer of power from the people to a King.

A real champion of Individual Liberty, that Gary Johnson guy. Makes a feller want to whistle fukin Dixie. :rolleyes:

undergroundrr
08-20-2016, 03:05 PM
"Gay Cake", as you say, is a rejection of the right to property. It's communist.

I hate communism too much to see that word thrown around willy-nilly.

The gay couple was going to pay for the cake. They weren't forcing the owners to redistribute the cake to them.

The $135,000 in civil damages was a travesty of justice. It was due to a corrupt court system and a result of unjust legislation. But not communism.

Now, the IRS is communism - http://thehill.com/regulation/282381-libertarian-gary-johnson-id-eliminate-nsa-irs-if-elected

Eminent domain is communism - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/08/19/donald-trumps-abuse-of-eminent-domain/

Natural Citizen
08-20-2016, 03:08 PM
I hate communism too much to see that word thrown around willy-nilly.

The gay couple was going to pay for the cake. They weren't forcing the owners to redistribute the cake to them.

The $135,000 in civil damages was a travesty of justice. It was due to a corrupt court system and a result of unjust legislation. But not communism.

Now, the IRS is communism - http://thehill.com/regulation/282381-libertarian-gary-johnson-id-eliminate-nsa-irs-if-elected

Eminent domain is communism - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/08/19/donald-trumps-abuse-of-eminent-domain/

Gary Johnson....your boy...the one that you're organizing for toward leadership of our nation...openly professed that it was his contention to send men from the government with guns to force an Individual or to force a group of Individuals to relinquish their right to property.

This is patently communist.

Again. The right to property is an indispensable and principal material support, not only of Man's God-given unalienable rights, but of Man's right to Life and Liberty itself.

You're out of your league, undergrounderr. Stop while you have a chance. Because I'll bury your argument in a hot second, brother. And I'll demonstrate absolutely no shame in doing so. I'm tired of being nice to you people. It doesn't work. A this point the only thing left is to start calling people out openly for the purpose of demonstrating precisely what it is that they are organizing for.

undergroundrr
08-20-2016, 03:24 PM
You're out of your league, undergrounderr. Stop while you have a chance. Because I'll bury your argument in a hot second, brother. And I'll demonstrate absolutely no shame in doing so. I'm tired of being nice to you people. It doesn't work.

No, I'm trying to help. You're not going to be able to make your points without precise vocabulary.

Communism is a system of economy that involves theft and apprehension of property. That doesn't mean that every time a government, king, shah, pope or petty thief steals something it's communism.

e.g. To label, say, mafia extortion as communism would be a misnomer. Calling it communism wouldn't somehow make it worse than it is.

Social welfare systems are communism. Taxation for redistribution is communism. That's just not what the gay Nazi cake issue is. It's the unintended* consequence of a do-gooder law.

EDIT: * or intended.

Natural Citizen
08-20-2016, 03:27 PM
No, I'm trying to help. You're not going to be able to make your points without precise vocabulary.

Communism is a system of economy that involves theft and apprehension of property. That doesn't mean that every time a government, king, shah, pope or petty thief steals something it's communism.

e.g. To label, say, mafia extortion as communism would be a misnomer. Calling it communism wouldn't somehow make it worse than it is.

Social welfare systems are communism. Taxation for redistribution is communism. That's just not what the gay Nazi cake issue is. It's the unintended* consequence of a do-gooder law.

EDIT: * or intended.

Gary Johnson's contention....again, your boy... is patently communist by his own admission. He contended...openly...and in Liberty...that he'd send men from the government with guns to force an Individual or to force a group of Individuals to relinquish their right to property.

Again. The right to property is an indispensable and principal material support, not only of Man's God-given unalienable rights, but of Man's right to Life and Liberty itself. To reject Life and Liberty's most fundamental principal support is to patently reject the concept of the right to Life and Individual Liberty fully.

Why do you hate freedom, undergroundrr? Hm? Why? Freedom is a wonderful thing. Why on Earth would you promote someone in Liberty whose open aknowledgment is patently aggressive toward and a rejection of the concept of Individual Liberty fully?

undergroundrr
08-20-2016, 03:29 PM
Again. The right to property is an indispensable and principal material support, not only of Man's God-given unalienable rights, but of Man's right to Life and Liberty itself.

Yeah, but it's not necessarily communism.

It's like the Cultural Marxist misnomer. Belief systems and racial heritages aren't an economy. You can't apply economic principles to them no matter how much the Frankfurters and alt-righters would like you to think so.

Natural Citizen
08-20-2016, 03:37 PM
Yeah, but it's not necessarily communism.



Sending men from the government with guns to force Individuals to relinquish their right to property, Gary Jonson's admitted contention, is patently communist.

undergroundrr
08-20-2016, 03:40 PM
Gary Johnson's contention is patently communist. He contended that he'd send men from the government with guns to force an Individual or to force a group of Individuals to relinquish their right to property.

Well, that would be authoritarian, but not necessarily communist. Anyhow, Johnson said none of those things. He did say that there's a law on the books, and whoever is in office has to uphold the laws. You'd be valid if Johnson had said "By dadgum, I'm going to implement a policy that will make those Jewish bakers sell those Nazis a cake whether they like it or not."

You're hearing what you want to hear rather than what was actually said.

Looked at in another way, you are also saying that Ron Paul, if he were president of the United States, would send men from the government with guns to force an Individual or to force a group of Individuals to relinquish their right to property. Until he could overturn the public accommodation clause, which he never put forth to my knowledge.

Not just public accommodation, but many other areas of law would require him to do so. And in fact he did it as congressman when he inserted appropriations to fund local constituency requests in bills. That money had to come from somewhere. But Ron Paul is not a communist despite your implications to the contrary.

undergroundrr
08-20-2016, 03:44 PM
Sending men from the government with guns to force Individuals to relinquish their right to property, Gary Jonson's admitted contention, is patently communist.

You can say that, but you're using the word communism like liberals use the word fascist. Find another word that actually means what you're trying to say.

Communism is far too evil. It's no good to have its true meaning clouded by misrepresentation.

Natural Citizen
08-20-2016, 03:44 PM
Well, that would be authoritarian, but not necessarily communist.

Yes it is. Patently.


Anyhow, Johnson said none of those things.

Yes he did. When asked if it's right to force Individuals to relinquish their property, he said "that'd be my contention, yes."

Is their some way that the government forces us to do things that doesn't inviolve guns if we don't comply?



You're hearing what you want to hear rather than what was actually said.

I'm hearing what his open contention actually means.



public accommodation

This is liberal speak.

undergroundrr
08-20-2016, 03:49 PM
This is liberal speak.

Dude, take a history class. "Public accommodation" is a thing and it's what you're fighting against. Learn something about it. It'll take you, like, 10 seconds. - http://citizensource.com/History/20thCen/CRA1964/CRA2.htm

You can call it liberal speak, but it's a law.

undergroundrr
08-20-2016, 03:50 PM
Dude, take a history class. "Public accommodation" is a thing and it's what you're fighting against. Learn something about it. It'll take you, like, 10 seconds. - http://citizensource.com/History/20thCen/CRA1964/CRA2.htm

You can call it liberal speak, but it's a law.

I'm kind of aghast. You never realized there's a public accommodation clause in the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

Natural Citizen
08-20-2016, 03:53 PM
Dude, take a history class. "Public accommodation" is a thing and it's what you're fighting against. Learn something about it. It'll take you, like, 10 seconds. - http://citizensource.com/History/20thCen/CRA1964/CRA2.htm

You can call it liberal speak, but it's a law.

Policy doesn't define Liberty. Principles do. Lawful and legal are two entirely different phenomenoa in that regard. CRA is irrelevant.

Wait. Are you black?

undergroundrr
08-20-2016, 03:59 PM
Policy doesn't define Liberty. Principles do. Lawful and legal are two entirely different phenomenoa. CRA is irrelevant.

Wait. Are you black?

What on earth does that have to do with anything? Are you? This is too much fun. I think I'd rather you not know. LOL.

The relevant question would be either "Are you gay?" Or, "Are you a Nazi?"

Actually, I'm a gay black Nazi, let's just go with that. LOL

Natural Citizen
08-20-2016, 04:04 PM
What on earth does that have to do with anything? Are you? This is too much fun. I think I'd rather you not know. LOL.

The relevant question would be either "Are you gay?" Or, "Are you a Nazi?"

Actually, I'm a gay black Nazi, let's just go with that. LOL

Well. Sometimes people believe that they have a right to have their feelings addressed. And they use the force of government to have their feelings addressed. That's what Laws like the CRA serve to accomplish. They're statist. Which is contrary to the fundamentals of Individual Liberty and proper Man-to-Man/Government-to -Man relations. CRA isn't the product of proper Government-to-Man relations. These relations aren't based on the fundamental principles of Individual Liberty at all. CRA is based on the Government-over-Man philosophy.

End of the day we're Individuals. So regardless of whether men from the government are sent with guns to force Nazis, gays, whites, blacks, or anyone at all to relinquish their rights, those men with guns were ultimately being sent to force Individuals and groups of Individuals to relinquish their property.

Natural Citizen
08-20-2016, 04:07 PM
And there's still that inconvenient truth that your boy contended that he'd consider signing off on an illegal transfer of power from the people to a King.

Is that libertarian?

KCIndy
08-20-2016, 04:09 PM
Anyhow, Johnson said none of those things. He did say that there's a law on the books, and whoever is in office has to uphold the laws.


No offense, but I find that statement to be extremely unnerving. There are an awful lot of truly stupid laws on the books. Should they really all be upheld?

Suzanimal
08-20-2016, 04:19 PM
No offense, but I find that statement to be extremely unnerving. There are an awful lot of truly stupid laws on the books. Should they really all be upheld?

We can't have people visiting their quarantined zebras without permission. :mad:

765346806335152128

KCIndy
08-20-2016, 04:26 PM
We can't have people visiting their quarantined zebras without permission. :mad:

765346806335152128


Dammit! And I already spent money to buy my zebra a get well card! :(

undergroundrr
08-20-2016, 04:52 PM
And there's still that inconvenient truth that your boy contended that he'd consider signing off on an illegal transfer of power from the people to a King.

Is that libertarian?

Of course not. Being president of the United States isn't libertarian!

TPP? Anything that redistributes power to the executive is awful. Any "living document" passed off as law is awful. I hope after considering it and actually reading it he'd decide not to sign it. But I respect that he says he wants to read it first.

Corporate interests are HUNGRY for TPP to get signed ASAP. It's also not impossible that Gary Johnson is courting corporate donors via Weld and doesn't want to come across as "anti-business." But I'm starting to sound like Peace & Freedom's trump equivocation here, so I'll not continue down that road.

Honestly, Gary Johnson's worst aspect is pro-choice. Why doesn't anybody complain about that?

It's interesting the way you keep saying "your boy." Have you been ruminating about gay cakes a little too much?

undergroundrr
08-20-2016, 04:56 PM
No offense, but I find that statement to be extremely unnerving. There are an awful lot of truly stupid laws on the books. Should they really all be upheld?

I'll let Judge Napolitano answer that: “Today in America, if you operate a public accommodation or deal in real estate, you cannot choose your customers; they choose you... Because discrimination based on sexual orientation is not prohibited by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Indiana and all other states are free to prohibit it or to look the other way in the face of it. But they are not free to encourage it or to make it lawful.”