Johnson's running mate, Weld, is CFR scum

[LibertyEagle]

I knew that Trump had mentioned Haas when he was pushed for a name. I wasn't at all happy about it, haven't forgotten it and have been keeping a close eye on his foreign policy. If it looks like Haas, or any CFR member will be involved in a Trump administration, I will not be voting for him. I feel that strongly about it.

Note: It has always seemed to me that all potential candidates who have a snowball's chance, are confronted with accepting an Insider as a running-mate or other close "advisor". I remember when Reagan was running. He promised that he wouldn't choose an Insider as VP and then voila, Daddy Bush, the consummate Insider. Goldwater-conservatives were not pleased at all.

Now, back to Johnson and his CFR running-mate....

[cajuncocoa]

I haven't listened to the entirety of this second one, but the beginning sounds good. It was made in 1967.

Oh look who's going all "conspiracy theory" on us now. Don't go embarrassing Rand with all this stuff on this website LE. You're going to make us Rand supporters look like loons.

[CPUd]

So Trump wants Richard Haass, president of the CFR, to be his top national security advisor. So all the fake outrage from Trumpkins about William Weld being the chair of the CFR is... fake. Wuddayaknow?

So we should "dial down" the Middle East so we can get involved in a military presence in Asia? Hmm...

So we need to get out of the Middle East so we can get involved in nation building in Pakistan? OMG.






Of course it does. Trump himself doesn't know anything about world affairs. He's said it himself: he'd rely on his foreign policy advisors. Like the good Mr. Haass.

Yep, he will even outsource his own job:

Trump Adviser: Trump Will Outsource Being President to His VP

[CPUd]

Here is the leader of Trump's transition team:

[LibertyEagle]

Oh look who's going all "conspiracy theory" on us now. Don't go embarrassing Rand with all this stuff on this website LE. You're going to make us Rand supporters look like loons.

Rand is no longer running. Try to keep up. And as Ron said, it's not a conspiracy theory at all. It's very real.

[LibertyEagle]

Here is the leader of Trump's transition team:

Yeah, I can't stand him. Is he a member of the CFR, or did he just present there? Honestly, I don't know. But, there is a huge difference. Regardless, I agree that Christie is a piece of crap.

Kinda like how Rand Paul met with Bill Kristol, but Rand isn't a neocon.

How is it that you think this somehow magically makes Weld a great guy? This thread is about Weld, by the way. If you want to start your 300th Trump thread, go do it. But, this thread isn't the place for it. Thanks.

[cajuncocoa]

Rand is no longer running. Try to keep up. And as Ron said, it's not a conspiracy theory at all. It's very real.

Rand is running for re-election to his Senate seat. Did you miss that? (Some people think 9/11 was an inside job too....I believe in conspiracy theories. You're the one who used to come unhinged.)

[specsaregood]

I've never heard of them so just wondering what's the problem with CFR

If you are really interested, read this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Shadows-Power-...dp/0882791346/
The shadows of power, by James perloff.

It is well worth it.

[r3volution 3.0]

Why don't you include where I also said that I will not be, if he chooses a CFR running-mate. Try being honest.

But you're just fine with him choosing a CFR foreign policy advisor (and several other neocon advisors, like Walid Phares).

And with him having supported the Iraq and Libya Wars, the PATRIOT Act, NSA spying, etc (i.e. the whole CFR program post 9/11)?

It's only if he selects a CFR member as a running mate that you'd become concerned?

http://www.targetliberty.com/2016/03...ouncil-on.html

Trump Names President of Council on Foreign Relations as Top National Security Adviser

Reposted for emphasis

[juleswin]

Yeah, I can't stand him. Is he a member of the CFR, or did he just present there? Honestly, I don't know. But, there is a huge difference. Regardless, I agree that Christie is a piece of crap.

Kinda like how Rand Paul met with Bill Kristol, but Rand isn't a neocon.

How is it that you think this somehow magically makes Weld a great guy? This thread is about Weld, by the way. If you want to start your 300th Trump thread, go do it. But, this thread isn't the place for it. Thanks.

It doesn't make Weld a great guy, people are posting Trump's CFR connection to point out the irony of a Trump booster using CFR connections in attacking another politician, a politician almost nobody on this website supports.

[CPUd]

It doesn't make Weld a great guy, people are posting Trump's CFR connection to point out the irony of a Trump booster using CFR connections in attacking another politician, a politician almost nobody on this website supports.

The Trump supporters know the LP will be splitting votes from the GOP even more so this cycle, thus the LP is a threat.

[Suzanimal]

the last time that happened:

Michael Badnarik

Libertarian

Texas

397,265

0.32%

perhaps Ron's idea of coalition building is better than a purity test.

You can build coalitions AND remain pure - like Ron Paul.

There are 4 parts to Tom Woods talk but this is the part that I thought was the best. Especially the second half of the fist video and the second video, which is only a few minutes long. If you don't have time, just watch the second video (part 4).

"if people can't get a straight answer out of the Libertarian Party, we might as well close up shop" Tom Woods

The talk is about Libertarian branding.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Yeah, I can't stand him. Is he a member of the CFR, or did he just present there? Honestly, I don't know. But, there is a huge difference. Regardless, I agree that Christie is a piece of crap.

Kinda like how Rand Paul met with Bill Kristol, but Rand isn't a neocon.

How is it that you think this somehow magically makes Weld a great guy? This thread is about Weld, by the way. If you want to start your 300th Trump thread, go do it. But, this thread isn't the place for it. Thanks.

Rand also took at least one separate foreign policy briefing from Dan Senor before joining his committee in the Senate, and holds the same position as Haass with regards to the Kurds.

Rand isn't a neocon, but he's not in direct opposition with them, either.

[LibertyEagle]

The Trump supporters know the LP will be splitting votes from the GOP even more so this cycle, thus the LP is a threat.

Not with Gary's pro-death stance on abortion, "humanitarian" wars and open borders unlimited immigration BS. But, you might pull some lefties and associated world government fellow travelers.

[William Tell]

Ron probably would have voted for Constitution Party candidate no matter who VP was. He's been far more friendly with the CP than the LP in recent years.

He certainly would agree with Castle on more things than he would Johnson.

[r3volution 3.0]

He certainly would agree with Castle on more things than he would Johnson.

The Constitution Party platform calls for protectionism, drug prohibition, gambling prohibition, and obscenity laws.

[William Tell]

The Constitution Party platform calls for protectionism, drug prohibition, gambling prohibition, and obscenity laws.

So what? There are factions in every party, Ron Paul endorsed and voted for Baldwin/Castle in 2008. The LP platform was pro gun last I knew and they just nominated a gun banner. Parties are just vehicles for politicians. Please show me how Johnson holds better views than Castle.

[r3volution 3.0]

So what?

So those deviations (esp. protectionism and drug prohibition) are much more serious than Gary's.

There are factions in every party, Castle seems to be from the Baldwin/Paul faction. The LP platform was pro gun last I knew and they just nominated a gun banner. Parties are just vehicles for politicians. Please show me how Johnson holds better views than Castle.

I have no idea what Castle's views are personally.

He opposes the protectionism and drug prohibition advocated in the party's platform?

[cajuncocoa]

The Constitution Party platform calls for protectionism, drug prohibition, gambling prohibition, and obscenity laws.

If you look closely, it should be called The Bible Party, not The Constitution Party.

[LibertyEagle]

If you look closely, it should be called The Bible Party, not The Constitution Party.

How so?

[r3volution 3.0]

How so?

They're obviously very socially conservative: anti-gambling, anti-drugs, etc.

And in some cases, they prioritize social conservatism over constitutionalism, as in calling for federal obscenity laws.

...bizarrely enough, they do this in the name of the 1st amendment.

That said, my main complaint against the CP is their lack of ballot access.

I'd vote for them if they were the more viable third party, compared to the LP.

[Sujan]

The Constitution Party is authoritarian, under the banner of 'religious freedom'. Sounds like a party that will do well in Iran. No thanks.

[GunnyFreedom]

And a gun control Nazi lol. WTF "Libertarian" party lmao this is worse than the $#@!-stack Majors.

[GunnyFreedom]

The Constitution Party is authoritarian, under the banner of 'religious freedom'. Sounds like a party that will do well in Iran. No thanks.

Most people are a bit too authoritarian. Is there something about religious freedom you don't like? All of the people I have ever worked with in the CP around NC have wanted to obey the Constitution. Chuck Baldwin, the CP Nom for President in 2008 may be a pastor, but he's as much a strict Constitutionalist as Ron Paul. Some of the CP people I have met are a little misled, but none of them in authority that I have met were theocratic. I have, however, encountered plenty of knee-jerk revulsion over the appearance of mixing church and state, just because a given candidate happens to talk about his faith a lot. The kneejerk is largely justified, of course, because for most politicians it's all fake. God as propaganda. Eventually you become inured and assume that any of them who mention 'God' must be scumbags.

[Origanalist]

The Constitution Party platform calls for protectionism, drug prohibition, gambling prohibition, and obscenity laws.

No it doesn't, not at the federal level.

[William Tell]

No it doesn't, not at the federal level.

President Johnson will likely call for 75,000 troops to invade the bible belt and bring true liberty so everyone can be bookers and stuff.

[r3volution 3.0]

No it doesn't, not at the federal level.

It calls for federal enforcement of obscenity laws.

Otherwise, yes, they only want those unlibertarian policies at the state level.

...though that's not much consolation for a libertarian.

[Origanalist]

It calls for federal enforcement of obscenity laws.

Otherwise, yes, they only want those unlibertarian policies at the state level.

...though that's not much consolation for a libertarian.

Upholding States rights and opposing unconstitutional federal mandates, that is something I can get behind. If leviathan isn't neutered how do you hope for any kind of liberty?

[GunnyFreedom]

Upholding States rights and opposing unconstitutional federal mandates, that is something I can get behind. If leviathan isn't neutered how do you hope for any kind of liberty?

He doesn't get it. It's the #1 issue because until you disempower the beast then everything else is just rearranging deck chairs on the titanic. Until you disempower the beast you can end the Fed, it will be replaced by the Zed. You can stop Libya, it will get replaced by Syria. He's all scrabbling at surface symptoms, and he appears to hate anyone focused on the root causes.

[r3volution 3.0]

unconstitutional federal mandates

I say again, the CP proposes federal enforcement of obscenity laws.

Find me in Article I Sec. 8 the federal power to ban dirty words.

Go ahead.

...and when you're done not finding said power, then come back and tell me how I'm arguing against liberty.

(am I taking crazy pills or WTF is this $#@!?)