Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 45

Thread: Gary Johnson supports NAFTA

  1. #1

    Gary Johnson supports NAFTA

    I was looking into this because of my feeling that he supported globalism/internationalism and my desire to pin it down a bit. I personally think the most local representation is the only way to have representative government because individuals have less voice in policy the more centralized and distant it is, so it is a point I care about. This isn't about free trade, but in my view NAFTA is managed trade that reserves through cronyism the benefits of trade only to the well connected, and that the international forums to work out disputes further removes trade from the realm of the individual to the benefit of the corporatist.

    According to Gary Johnson's interview in Playboy as reprinted in this cannabis newsletter that came up in a google search, GJ does favor NAFTA, and was asked about his support of it. http://cannabisnews.com/news/7/thread7965.shtml

    and there was this:

    Johnson also said he differs from Ron Paul on how to promote free trade, and that he generally supports NAFTA and other free-trade agreements.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/02/11/fo...#ixzz1KSNRLo8y
    Last edited by sailingaway; 04-24-2011 at 09:56 AM.
    "Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesn't want to hear.” -Ron Paul

    "Bathtub falls and police officers kill more Americans than terrorism, yet we've been asked to sacrifice our most sacred rights for fear of falling victim to it." -Edward Snowden



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Glad some people here are not fooled. Or that "one issue" supporter

  4. #3
    I'm particularly fond of the dispute settlement section. Which is decided by up to 15 unelected panelists from with the financial services sector.

    http://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/en/vi...piID=145#A1414
    Article 1414: Dispute Settlement

    1. Section B of Chapter Twenty (Institutional Arrangements and Dispute Settlement Procedures) applies as modified by this Article to the settlement of disputes arising under this Chapter.

    2. The Parties shall establish by January 1, 1994 and maintain a roster of up to 15 individuals who are willing and able to serve as financial services panelists. Financial services roster members shall be appointed by consensus for terms of three years, and may be reappointed.

    3. Financial services roster members shall:
    (a) have expertise or experience in financial services law or practice, which may include the regulation of financial institutions;
    (b) be chosen strictly on the basis of objectivity, reliability and sound judgment; and
    (c) meet the qualifications set out in Article 2009(2)(b) and (c) (Roster).

    4. Where a Party claims that a dispute arises under this Chapter, Article 2011 (Panel Selection) shall apply, except that:


    (a) where the disputing Parties so agree, the panel shall be composed entirely of panelists meeting the qualifications in paragraph 3; and

    (b) in any other case,

    (i) each disputing Party may select panelists meeting the qualifications set out in paragraph 3 or in Article 2010(1) (Qualifications of Panelists), and

    (ii) if the Party complained against invokes Article 1410, the chair of the panel shall meet the qualifications set out in paragraph 3.

    5. In any dispute where a panel finds a measure to be inconsistent with the obligations of this Agreement and the measure affects:


    (a) only the financial services sector, the complaining Party may suspend benefits only in the financial services sector;

    (b) the financial services sector and any other sector, the complaining Party may suspend benefits in the financial services sector that have an effect equivalent to the effect of the measure in the Party's financial services sector; or

    (c) only a sector other than the financial services sector, the complaining Party may not suspend benefits in the financial services sector.
    Also, one would hope the members of the panel would be known. But i can't seem to find out who they are. Does anybody else here know?
    http://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/en/view.aspx?x=283#Who are panel members
    Who are panel members?

    Panelists are chosen from rosters of experts established by the Parties in each NAFTA country. Panelists must be of high standing, good character, objective, reliable, and have sound judgement and general familiarity with international trade law. The majority of members of a panel, including the Chair, must be lawyers.
    But no names or current list from what I can see.
    The wouldn't be settling these disputes with anonymous people in a smoke filled room would they?
    Last edited by specsaregood; 04-24-2011 at 10:02 AM.

  5. #4
    But come on! He supports weed man!

  6. #5
    Good info, thanks. Why do we need laws for free-trade? It is kind of like ... why do we need to bomb them to achieve peace? It doesn't make any sense.

    When Gary Johnson used the word 'kooky' in this video, I lost even more respect for him. Gary would be better off if he kept his mouth shut.
    "Everyone who believes in freedom must work diligently for sound money, fully redeemable. Nothing else is compatible with the humanitarian goals of peace and prosperity." -- Ron Paul

    Brother Jonathan

  7. #6
    Ross Perot was right when he spoke of NAFTA and the "Giant sucking sound" of jobs leaving the USA.

  8. #7
    Not surprising. It will be interesting to see people try to defend that.

    Of note is that Johnson's former State Director and Campaign Manager, Doug Turner, is listed on the CFR site. I asked him about this during his campaign for governor, he kinda laughed it off...

    And now Dondero is pushing Turner for Bingaman's seat...

    http://www.fontcraft.com/liberty/?p=34817

    Hmmmm...
    Don't let others get you down. Not naysayers, not pretenders, not appeasers, not opportunists; none of em.

    What others do pales beside what YOU do.

    Press on! - The r3VOLution continues...

    "Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence.Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'press on' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race."

    ~ C.Coolidge

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Qdog View Post
    Ross Perot was right when he spoke of NAFTA and the "Giant sucking sound" of jobs leaving the USA.
    No he wasn't.

    Jobs aren't physical objects that can get "sucked" somewhere or "shipped" somewhere. They're just what you call the arrangement where people agree with other people to exchange labor for money. If people aren't doing that, it's not because there's some scarcity in jobs.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    I don't think Johnson is a Libertarian at all.Probably another shill in the Mike Gravel mode.

  12. #10
    He probably supports free trade (which is fine) but doesn't understand that NAFTA isn't free trade, thought it was billed as such. He's not gonna understand things to the depth that Ron Paul does, don't throw him under the bus for that. He does talk radio interviews fairly often - why not gather the facts on NAFTA, bullet point the negatives, and call in a show to debate him about it?

    I suppose nobody here has ever taken a position based on incomplete or false information that they later changed?

  13. #11
    So, in an an interview 11 years ago he said that. Wonder what he thinks now. OH WAIT! He's changed on the issue and all I had to do was google:
    Ending NAFTA and other free trade agreements (as he believes they only promote support of corporate interests and do not promote free trade):


    http://www.jeremyryan.org/news/blog0...de=27115242011


    LOTS of people supported NAFTA in the late 1990's that don't now. I'm probably not going on a limb when I say, some of you probably didn't always belong to this movement.
    Last edited by BamaFanNKy; 04-24-2011 at 01:55 PM.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by BamaFanNKy View Post
    So, in an an interview 11 years ago he said that. Wonder what he thinks now. OH WAIT! He's changed on the issue and all I had to do was google:
    Ending NAFTA and other free trade agreements (as he believes they only promote support of corporate interests and do not promote free trade):


    http://www.jeremyryan.org/news/blog0...de=27115242011


    LOTS of people supported NAFTA in the late 1990's that don't now. I'm probably not going on a limb when I say, some of you probably didn't always belong to this movement.
    BamaFan, this guy is REALLY hard for me to listen to. He is speaking to a Ron Paul supporter video interviewer, and dodging question after question to my mind. When does this point come up? Because I am at 6:26 and they haven't gotten near it and I don't want to watch 24 more minutes of this. I would look at that one thing. Meanwhile, the daily caller citation I gave was not from the 1990s, obviously, and Tucker Carlson, who runs it, is libertarian enough to be in the loop, fairly well, I would think.
    "Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesn't want to hear.” -Ron Paul

    "Bathtub falls and police officers kill more Americans than terrorism, yet we've been asked to sacrifice our most sacred rights for fear of falling victim to it." -Edward Snowden

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by sailingaway View Post
    BamaFan, this guy is REALLY hard for me to listen to. He is speaking to a Ron Paul supporter video interviewer, and dodging question after question to my mind. When does this point come up? Because I am at 6:26 and they haven't gotten near it and I don't want to watch 24 more minutes of this. I would look at that one thing. Meanwhile, the daily caller citation I gave was not from the 1990s, obviously, and Tucker Carlson, who runs it, is libertarian enough to be in the loop, fairly well, I would think.
    Why do you care then. Move on. The thing I find funny are the posters who say "People come on here telling us we should support Johnson and it ticks me of....." then they turn around and post about Johnson. Inviting for people to defend him. If you don't like him, ignore him. Rule #1 of politics, don't talk about your opponent. Moffett in our state hasn't learned that and neither did Jack Conway.

  16. #14
    //
    Last edited by specsaregood; 04-09-2012 at 08:29 PM.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    No he wasn't.

    Jobs aren't physical objects that can get "sucked" somewhere or "shipped" somewhere. They're just what you call the arrangement where people agree with other people to exchange labor for money. If people aren't doing that, it's not because there's some scarcity in jobs.
    What do you call the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs from the United States elsewhere? They were likely due to failed policies like NAFTA. That seems like a giant sucking sound to me, no?
    Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by specsaregood View Post
    Bama, I'll be posting about Johnson just to see you dance a jig in righteous defense of him.
    The funny thing is that he isn't defending Johnson, but just changed the topic. Sailing asked at which point exactly Johnson says he opposes Nafta. Not responding to that question doesn't seem like defending Johnson to me.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by BamaFanNKy View Post
    Why do you care then. Move on. The thing I find funny are the posters who say "People come on here telling us we should support Johnson and it ticks me of....." then they turn around and post about Johnson. Inviting for people to defend him. If you don't like him, ignore him. Rule #1 of politics, don't talk about your opponent. Moffett in our state hasn't learned that and neither did Jack Conway.
    Most the people here don't have a clue about politics. Thats why you see these people showing up to various rallies with investigate 9-11 signs and other silly $#@!.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by libertybrewcity View Post
    What do you call the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs from the United States elsewhere? They were likely due to failed policies like NAFTA. That seems like a giant sucking sound to me, no?
    Again, jobs aren't objects extended in space that can be "lost." They're just what you call the arrangement when people exchange labor for money.

    If that's not happening, it's not because some number of "jobs" was "lost." It's not a giant sucking sound. It may be due to failed policies, some of which may be in NAFTA, but not in the way of anything being "sucked" anywhere. If more such arrangements are happening in Mexico, and fewer are happening in the U.S., then it's those two facts are not two parts of one shift of "jobs" from one place to another, they're two separate changes of condition in the two countries, one of which results from changes in policy for the better (such as a lowering of tariffs), and the other from changes in policy for the worse (such as an increasing of regulations).

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by specsaregood View Post
    Bama, I'll be posting about Johnson just to see you dance a jig in righteous defense of him. I find it rather entertaining.

    p.s.. so he did leave his wife while she was on her cancer-death bed or not? It is unclear to me.
    "Defend" also means correcting people? I honestly, don't care anymore. The more I read from people here the more I lose faith that this is about the movement but, more like their cult following of a man. I gave most the benefit that it wasn't cult like. Too bad it seems to be. If you want to lie..... go ahead. As for the wife thing, if you want.... search my answer on the issue. To spread that lie just makes people come off as desperate and not worth arguing and talking with.

    I don't bring up Cong. Paul's denial of scientific evolution, not giving racist money back after he's known to have received the money or his being one of a handful of GOP congressmen to continue the practice earmarks. There are issues I have with Congressman Paul as Governor Johnson. Not everyone is 100% true to their principle, even the great Ron Paul.
    Last edited by BamaFanNKy; 04-24-2011 at 06:43 PM.

  23. #20
    I wonder when some of the Johnson supporters will stop name-calling with the cult stuff. Somebody asks why GJ said he supported NAFTA, and BamaFan accuses Ron Paul supporters of being a cult. What a joke.
    Last edited by low preference guy; 04-24-2011 at 07:23 PM.

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by BamaFanNKy View Post
    Why do you care then. Move on. The thing I find funny are the posters who say "People come on here telling us we should support Johnson and it ticks me of....." then they turn around and post about Johnson. Inviting for people to defend him. If you don't like him, ignore him. Rule #1 of politics, don't talk about your opponent. Moffett in our state hasn't learned that and neither did Jack Conway.
    I gave you two citations of two separate interviews on this, I wasn't speaking through my hat. I asked people about this and no one answered, so I googled it and gave you what I came up with. I believe it. However, if you have a place in that video when he says something different than what he said to Playboy and different from what he said to the daily caller in 2010, I'd watch it. I don't want to say things about him that aren't correct, and I wouldn't just not like him, I'd outright oppose him, if he were after getting more NAFTA like agreements in place. There are too many people on board with the Doha round, using SDRs as international currency, etc, and we need fewer, not more, votes for that.
    Last edited by sailingaway; 04-24-2011 at 07:16 PM.
    "Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesn't want to hear.” -Ron Paul

    "Bathtub falls and police officers kill more Americans than terrorism, yet we've been asked to sacrifice our most sacred rights for fear of falling victim to it." -Edward Snowden

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by BamaFanNKy View Post
    "
    I don't bring up Cong. Paul's denial of scientific evolution, not giving racist money back after he's known to have received the money or his being one of a handful of GOP congressmen to continue the practice earmarks.
    Actually, you just did. Since we don't have a religious test for office, it would be weird to hold someone's fairly common religious beliefs against them, wouldn't it? And pandering to return $500 from a $6 million dollar money bomb that later turned out to have been from someone who was a white supremacist WOULD have made me lose some respect for Ron. That sort of stagy indignation is nonsense as far as I am concerned. But you are entitled to your own views.
    Last edited by sailingaway; 04-24-2011 at 07:22 PM.
    "Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesn't want to hear.” -Ron Paul

    "Bathtub falls and police officers kill more Americans than terrorism, yet we've been asked to sacrifice our most sacred rights for fear of falling victim to it." -Edward Snowden

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by low preference guy View Post
    I wonder when some of the Johnson supporters will stop name-calling with the cult stuff. Somebody asks why GJ said he supported NAFTA, and BamaFan accuses Ron Paul supporters of being a cult. What a joke.
    No kidding. People who use the cult reference misunderstand liberty. I was a liberty lover decades before I learned of Ron Paul. Ron Paul articulates liberty, as well as, or better, than anybody else ... and he stands up to the tyrants more effectively than ANY forum poster, so please stop the the cult references if you want to be taken seriously ... it's disingenuous.
    "Everyone who believes in freedom must work diligently for sound money, fully redeemable. Nothing else is compatible with the humanitarian goals of peace and prosperity." -- Ron Paul

    Brother Jonathan

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by sailingaway View Post
    Actually, you just did. Since we don't have a religious test for office, it would be weird to hold someone's fairly common religious beliefs against them, wouldn't it? And pandering to return $500 from a $6 million dollar money bomb that later turned out to have been from someone who was a white supremacist WOULD have made me lose some respect for Ron. That sort of stagy indignation is nonsense as far as I am concerned. But you are entitled to your own views.
    Actually, I am supporting congressman Paul in spite of his being a denier of science and keeping money from known KKK member after having racist newsletter stories. As well as the earmarks.

    I also gave you the video. I watched it the other day where he talks about the NAFTA stuff. It's not my job to give info to people who think Gary Johnson is nothing more than a hack, which people above do.

    As for the people asking me about the "Cult" comments. Observation at rallies has proven this. Seeing comments on this board about Ron Paul being near infallible and the almost worship of everything Paul show this. There is a reason it was discussed by certain people who monitor this site when I met with them in November. We all agreed there is a "scary" factor to the way some on here act and talk about Congressman Paul. Like I tell people, sometimes it's hard to see the truth because you're too deep into it. I've learned loooooong ago never to have idols or heroes in politics. They will disappoint.

    This was a recent story on how Cong. Paul did just that, yet I still support for POTUS: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2643529/posts



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by BamaFanNKy View Post
    Actually, I am supporting congressman Paul in spite of his being a denier of science and keeping money from known KKK member after having racist newsletter stories. As well as the earmarks.
    Ron is a "denier of science"? LoL.

    When people say things like this, they really lose credibility. Just because you don't agree with Darwinism does not mean you deny science. Science does not equal Darwinism, no matter how much the indoctrinators want to make it seem like it does. There are many scientists who are not Darwinists, some have even become famous for being anti-Darwinists, like Michael Behe for example.
    Last edited by Sola_Fide; 04-24-2011 at 09:10 PM.

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by BamaFanNKy View Post
    Actually, I am supporting congressman Paul in spite of his being a denier of science and keeping money from known KKK member after having racist newsletter stories. As well as the earmarks.

    I also gave you the video. I watched it the other day where he talks about the NAFTA stuff. It's not my job to give info to people who think Gary Johnson is nothing more than a hack, which people above do.

    As for the people asking me about the "Cult" comments. Observation at rallies has proven this. Seeing comments on this board about Ron Paul being near infallible and the almost worship of everything Paul show this. There is a reason it was discussed by certain people who monitor this site when I met with them in November. We all agreed there is a "scary" factor to the way some on here act and talk about Congressman Paul. Like I tell people, sometimes it's hard to see the truth because you're too deep into it. I've learned loooooong ago never to have idols or heroes in politics. They will disappoint.

    This was a recent story on how Cong. Paul did just that, yet I still support for POTUS: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2643529/posts
    Dude, your use of rhetoric here is despicable. You know these charges are lame, and you are saying them in the most desperate way possible. It is obvious that the only way you can build up GJ is by attempting to tear down RP. That is friggin sad. Further, the whole cult thing is being created by you clowns and there is no basis to it that can't be said for ANY AND EVERY other candidate.

    You are completely avoiding the real discussion and just being an ass

    Don't let others get you down. Not naysayers, not pretenders, not appeasers, not opportunists; none of em.

    What others do pales beside what YOU do.

    Press on! - The r3VOLution continues...

    "Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence.Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'press on' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race."

    ~ C.Coolidge

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by AquaBuddha2010 View Post
    Ron is a "denier of science"? LoL.

    When people say things like this, they really lose credibility. Just because you don't agree with Darwinism does not mean you deny science. Science does not equal Darwinism, no matter how much the indoctrinators want to make it seem like it does. There are many scientists who are not Darwinists, some have even become famous for being anti-Darwinists, like Michael Behe for example.
    Ah yes, losing credibility for having a problem with a candidate denying scientific facts? That whole "evolution is a theory, and I don't accept it" moment was not good for me. Again, I lose credibility for stating that I support the man even though he denies the factual scientific evidence of evolution? We have many religious people who run for office and if he (like Huckabee and otheres) is bound by his faith to deny scientific facts, I am fine with that. It's not a key issue but, it is a moment I do not defend him on.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by ronpaulhawaii View Post
    You know these charges are lame, and you are saying them in the most desperate way possible.
    Bama apparently is sad that Ron Paul didn't make sure that despicable people had more money in their pockets. He wants Ron to pander, that's when he'll stop criticizing him.

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by ronpaulhawaii View Post
    Dude, your use of rhetoric here is despicable. You know these charges are lame, and you are saying them in the most desperate way possible. It is obvious that the only way you can build up GJ is by attempting to tear down RP. That is friggin sad. Further, the whole cult thing is being created by you clowns and there is no basis to it that can't be said for ANY AND EVERY other candidate.

    You are completely avoiding the real discussion and just being an ass

    Wait, what is lame? The fact I think some people (I'm not saying everyone so, if you over react.... maybe...) are cultish in their following or the things that bothered me about Ron but, I still support? Is it wrong to question. Should I just accept. Tell me how I should act.

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by low preference guy View Post
    Bama apparently is sad that Ron Paul didn't make sure that despicable people had more money in their pockets. He wants Ron to pander, that's when he'll stop criticizing him.
    Even smaller projects received attention from the libertarian representative, such as $2.5 million requested “to redevelop historic downtown area and to purchase trash cans, bike racks and decorative street lighting” in Baytown.
    Well, I'm glad Baytown got their trash cans, bike racks and decorative lighting at the tune of 2.5 million.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 39
    Last Post: 05-27-2016, 01:16 PM
  2. Gary Johnson HOT: Gary Johnson Interview with Robert Wenzel - Just How Libertarian is Gary Johnson?
    By Tenbobnote in forum 2012 Presidential Election
    Replies: 165
    Last Post: 06-08-2012, 01:44 PM
  3. Gary Johnson Gary Johnson opposed to NAFTA type corporatism free trade, would have veto'd NAFTA
    By HardyMacia in forum 2012 Presidential Election
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-25-2011, 09:33 AM
  4. Gary Johnson Raimondo on Gary Johnson: 'Gary Johnson: Caveat Emptor'
    By sailingaway in forum 2012 Presidential Election
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 04-22-2011, 07:44 PM
  5. Replies: 61
    Last Post: 08-10-2010, 10:05 PM

Select a tag for more discussion on that topic

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •