It's Official: Gary Johnson Is A Left-Wing Candidate
An interesting discussion of Gary Johnson and the Libertarian slide into depravity (i.e. the "political" world). Note the AR reference at the end. Maybe time to form some kind of Objectivist party..
The writer uses leftist thinking to come to an irrational conclusion about libertarians with no basis in reality. Quoting Rand is an insult to her ability to reason. Were Rand alive she would be tweeting what a fool he is, while at the same time agreeing that Johnson and Weld may have destroyed the best chance for the free market in a century.
I usually agree with Tracinski because he often makes valid observations, and many of his other articles are pro-liberty, but he owes Libertarians an apology for this poorly reasoned screed. Painting an entire group of people who have a history of being defenders of the free market and of individual liberty for actions of one person that they can't control is akin to blaming all the American people for the looting, traitorous actions of Obama.
Democratic and Republican? I ask because I don't
know.--If they did, why did they nominate Johnson
and Weld if they don't go along with what they say?
mspalding describes the nomination process. Johnson and Weld were nominated in 2 separate ballot processes.. In the first ballot (the best indicator of the real intent of the voters) 52% voted against Johnson (for other candidates) and 58% against Weld. (The VP is selected separartely, not selected by the pres candidate.) In the second ballot 48% voted against Johnson and 49% against Weld. So they won the nomination with 52% and 51% respectively, IIRC.
The less than libertarian campaign approach has been a surprise to many libertarians. Johnson ran in 2012 and thinks that the same approach would be a futile waste of effort. His goal is to get enough support to get in the debates and present the rational libertarian alternative to the people.
For sure I'd like to see the entry fee to run for office include automatic placement on the ballot no matter how long the list - and in the voters pamphlet - everywhere. That, operating the election and tabulating/reporting results should be the sum total of public expenditures. Just for starters. True the parties operate their own primary candidate selection and neither State nor federal can interfere short of a criminal action such as stuffed boxes but the candidates on the ballot should neither be limited nor given preferential placement but randomnly with out duplicatin the location in the ensuing years.
"Well, fine, but from now on the Libertarians can just shut up about being the “party of principle” and about being so much better than those compromising Republicans—statements I have heard endlessly, ad nauseum for my entire adult life. That is now officially over."
Lump them all in with the GOP who has been betraying everything they claim to stand for since the inception of the party. Libertarians haven't betrayed anyone, and 45% of the delegates at the convention voted against Johnson and 49% against Weld as the candidates to represent the party. And in the first ballot (which shows the real choices of the delegates) more than 50% opposed them both.
His logic is rubbish.
The facts don't support his conclusion.
If ANYONE should shut the frak up its Tracinski who has lost his ability to reason and resorted to a mud slinging fight with some other writers who don't represent the Libertarians.
The reality is like a line from Animal House ;^) If Tracinski had said that about Libertarians at the convention, I'd agree.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTF2j...
Objectivists now: "Libertarians are the enemy, because they are too much statists!"
I mean, okay. Both statements were true. I don't disagree. But let's focus on the crucial issue here: Gary Johnson is way better than Trump and Hillary, and he is a stepping stone towards more liberty oriented positions becoming mainstream. He is very, very close to obtaining a spot in the debates, and could possibly be the only hope we have of not descending into an imminent dictatorship.
Yeah, I agree we should watch his positions and voice our disagreements with things like carbon tax and forcing the Xian bakers or whatever. But these are not the most important issues in this election, and none of the other candidates are any better on those things. So calling him a Leftist is pointless and actually not true.
Still the best option we have.
want to be the leader of any organized 'movement.'
I do approve of an intellectual movement..." Whether she would approve of an "Objectivist" party at this point I do not pretend to know. She
seemed to say that it would be hopeless to try
to get any lasting and significant political change
in this country before getting enough people con-
verted to the Objectivist philosophy. But we don't have much time left, we have to do some-
thing.
Assume for a moment that the voting public are about 50% democratic and 50% republican. On the democratic primary election, sanders and hildebeast pretty much split the vote- and on the republican side Cruz got 1/3 and trump 2/3 in the primary. In my simple math I say that at least in terms of purely popular support hildebeast gets 25% ,sanders gets 25%, Cruz gets 1/3 of 1/2 or 16 2/3%. And trump gets 2/3 of 1/2 or 33 1/3%. I thought cruz represented the most "principled and constitutional" group. Trump got the people disgusted with the crony establishment. And sanders/hildebeast got the true evil statists split between the crooked and crony group (Hillary) and the misguided and ignorant group (sanders). This is simplistic for sure, but if Cruz got only 1/6 of the voters , a really consistent and principled candidate doesn't stand a chance in the current election. The tide has turned in the country towards hildebeast/sanders statism becoming the majority philosophy, with pragmatism (trump) and constitutionality (Cruz) fighting among themselves and dividing the rest of the vote. Johnson is a mix of everything and will get nothing. Green Party will pick up some sanders support but no electoral college votes. With sanders and Cruz out, we have crooked establishment vs anti- establishment left. Unless Cruz, Johnson, and trump join forces somehow (unlikely)- the establishment who have already paid thru campaign contributions, will want Hillary in so they can now play. It really is. Pay for play
If that is a zero then two situations also occur.
The Constitutional Republic vote of whatever size is one. Is there enough left to matter and if there is how many? I don't see that group counted in any of the polls and only mentioned in passing by some not at all by the left.
The Military has free rein to follow their oath of office from which loyalty to the Constitution is a requirement and a duty and which they are not released unless they resign (commissioned) or serve out thier time (enlisted). Not really a free rein except in the manner they choose to accomplish the mission. In effect they would be or perhaps are the only Constitutional legal authority left. Perhaps they might get support and in advance from a segment of the court. Segments of the Congress and so forth. But at that point those would have no authority until the military gave it back.
How they do it when they do it and what happens to those in the way is irrelevant to the one central requirement Support and Defend te Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. It's also their call when they give it back that is judge the population to be worthy.
Enemies Domestic you covered rather well.
With the support they would get from a significant portion of the country and the prior planning (military has plans for everything every eventuality) It's a 24 hour over the weekend hiccup to put stars in the oval office. No tanks required.
So the percentage I look for is those that would support the Constitution and the Republic...
Especially those within the military.
And it's the main reason Obama or Hillary or anyone else cannot declare martial law. On doing so they would be handcuffed and jailed.
Start witih DOHS are they likely or not likely to uphold their oath of office which says the same thing. They represent the only sizable possibility as the Protective Echelon. And many are former or retired miitary. They are not big enough, strong enough nor anything enough assuming their own members don't join with the military thus following their oath of office.
Followed by Law Enforcement nation wide.
followed by registered weapons owners
But judge all of these groups as anti Constitution as well as pro Republic. There's some from both sides. For that matter how much of the military would be loyal to their oath. Answer is don't use them against the population and make damn sure the military itself knows that. IF it became necessary due the usual riots and TV liquor store break ins that's different. But no more Kent States
Now there is another source of suipport Guard and Reserves. Quietly activated. Just anothere weekend drill. To keep an eye on things. .
The actual accomplishiment is not that big a deal and requires no tanks in the street. The reason. Their is no organized effort planned out to stop the military from doing their legally required job.
Nor in the media network centers. They will do as they are told as always. They would eat their young to get ratings and the morality of doing as told has escaped them thus far. Interviews for opinions might be useful in locating certain people's locations come to think of it.
College campus's you are kidding me are you not? All huddled in their safe spots.
If iyou want support shown publicly just ask the population that supports the Constitution and Republic to show up at rally's Perception Management.
That leaves political party headquarters. Cut the heads off hydra the rest pooooooffff gone.
The current elected politicians would be dissolved until the decision to have new elections was madekl - by the military.
Key factor. As long as no harm came to the President the Secret Service Detail is happy.
On Jan 20th he's sent into retirement with full protective detail SS and Military.
Cruz was the closest I have seen this cycle to a loyalist to the constitution. Before that was Ron Paul. But you can see how far they get in a general election with mob rule being the law.
I would say that the constitutional republic vote is never talked about in the polls. It is not ZERO by any means, but I would estimate it at a portion of the votes Cruz got, plus definitely some from the military.
In my day we discussed and talked it out with good instructors. Mabe 'in the day' they don't have time for 'ethics?'
There is a always a group in the military that upon commissioning and pinning on the gold bar of an Ensing or Second Lieutenant immediately forgets their Cadets oath. 'will not lie, cheat, steal, nor tolerate those who do.' The better Officer, Non-Commissioned schools had one of those as well. The proof was the 100% participation signs in front of each company HQ for donations to various this and that.
Now i't s mostly done by payroll deduction but the method I'm betting is the same. Strong Arming, Blackmailing and a form of Protection Racket. If you don't then it's all the dirty jobs, no promotions, and a very low efficiency rating. As one Sergeant Major candidly put it to me "Spit Rolls Down Hill. You are at the bottom."
Having been given a truthful explanation laid down two envelopes. and shoved over the first one. Back then we gave cash until the deduction system started. That was the $2 and change they said was my fair share. He asked what was in the other one?
That one Sergeant Major was for just being asked politely. It was a $20. I put it in my pocket. He shook my hand and next month I received a promotion. From then on he refused to accept anything over the 'fair share amount.' We were 100% in that unit but collected less than half of the previous amouonts.That's how you roll spit uphill...
In those days at paygrade E-5 with jump pay of $55 a month added I was making a hair over $300 a month. $20 was a large chunk of change
"The Myth of Natural Rights" by L.A. Rollins (1983).
Some libraries may have it in book form in "The Myth of Natural Rights and Other Essays, which has the politically incorrect letter to Allah. I noticed that all the libraries near me have discarded it in this era of PC or maybe out of fear.
Estimated delivery: Sept. 2, 2016 - Sept. 20, 2016
Items shipped from fsbookco
The Myth of Natural Rights
The Myth of Natural Rights
by L. A. Rollins
$9.00
Qty:
Qty: 1
Sold by:fsbookco
Only 4 left in stock.
Condition:Used - Very Good
Gift options not available
In paperback now only three left in stock
"The Myth of Natural Rights and Other Essays
One available at $118.00
Both are at Amazon Books
http://hooverhog.typepad.com/hognotes...
Wisconsin libraries catalog and found nothing.
There were copies locally until about 2008 when they started to disappear.
That might be the whole 72 page work.
If you can stand RAW. Very intelligent but throws in questionable stuff which he seems to think will open some minds to actually think before belief.
Word is when he was forced to sell his tobacco stocks the money went into nearby coal mining.
Get the picture.
And that's all there is to the continuing scam of the Carbon Tax.
But I stil say don't rush to judgement there is plenty of timie and support the Libertarian Town Hall You won't get much more coverage than that.
Thieves. "Me-too" people. "Yes, but please not Rand" people. Theocrats.
The revolution must be intellectual, but the politicians generally will not be. Has anyone tried comparing the flawed Mr. Trump with the flawed Henry Rearden? My wife spotted Trump-as-Rearden over a year ago.
Right now we are facing a probably majority of the populace who are statists, and they will never respond to non-statist political arguments
One already exists.
http://www.theamericancapitalistparty...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QhZDEiwll8A
That can easily be stretched to inlude what iyou said about dumping toxics and it' sa direct attack meaning defense is authorized.
As to the rights the false premise is assuming they have the right to impose a right that in turn infringes on a previously granted or natural right or rights.
Money as free speech came about exactly that way if you follow the trail which started with King George III. But the proponents of that which in modern terms says Corporations have a person hood and tht gives them the rights of individuals and vice versa EXCEPT for two reasons the courts ignored. The smallest minority is a group of one and of those groups who can outspend a corporation. The whole reason for that personhood thing was to protect stock holders in a suit against the corporation and allow corporate employees at the highest level to hide behind that protection. But it's evolved into much more and now allows everything except direct contact with a candidate or public official using money. Corporations can be for example a 'Foundation. registered as an LLC.' That's their escape hatch.
The second reason goes like this. it's the Soros mantra. "I Have The Right without explanation to take away your rights without exception.
Cast your eyes over the Consitutiton and bill of rights and see how many rights were trampled by money as free speech. Something like Five if memory serves. But the court only considered none of that.
So we have to maintain that no right can be put in place that infringes in existing rights.
And that goes for states rights over turned by rogue bought and paid for judges who use their judicial power to overturn parts for the Constitution they don't like. I's a standard Soros secular progressive ACLU tactic followed by the circular but still false premised arguments which is radical reasoning for repeat a lie enough and it becomes the truth especially if you control education and the media. Look at how well that worked with the balanced budget with a surplus scam. And that was a five minute research job to disprove and a overnight weight to clarify one point with the Treasury Department.
But then we were dealing with reporters not journalists.
Ever so good but really really bad for the arteries still it beats boiling the rest of the kip to death - English style.