Tag Archives: libertarian

A candidate with a good record this election year

Gary Johnson—June 20, 2012
He comes in peace. (Image source: Wikipedia/Flickr)

I’m sure there will be people questioning my sanity in considering Gary Johnson for President in this election cycle… but you can’t deny the unfavorable numbers for the other two in the polls— “the two most unpopular nominees in the history of polling.”

Crappy candidates have produced low turn for decades, and some people say it doesn’t matter much who gets into office.  The bureaucrats behind the scenes don’t switch parties.  True, but that doesn’t mean we stay at home, does it?  As responsible citizens we must do what is right— to believe in better, to educate ourselves and fight for better, even if we lose the battle.  ’Cause otherwise, we deserve less for our less.

I’ll show you my cards in saying I’m not terribly enthusiastic about Johnson; he’s said some things that sound stuck in 2006.  (Invading Iraq was a bad idea; we get it.)  He wasn’t the strongest candidate in the 2012 Presidential election— a distant third place, at 0.99%.

This election year, he has improved.  And out of the leading four in national polls (with Jill Stein polling fourth), I have to say Johnson/Weld is the best choice.  How?  First, the two governors have proven themselves. …Just the fact that they were governors, while Clinton and Trump have zero governing experience at the helm, in an election cycle where substance is severely lacking… it’s more than enough to have a good look.

Bill Weld. (Image source: Tina Fineberg/The Boston Globe)

William F. Weld, running for VP on the Johnson/Weld ticket, was so popular as governor of Massachusetts (1991-1997) that he got 71% of the vote in his second term reelection.  In an article by The Boston Globe (in which RNC people laughed him off), “Weld began his career working for the House impeachment committee investigating President Richard Nixon and later served as US attorney for Massachusetts in the 1980s.”  Someone that makes you think of John Kerry— but not beholden to party, and much better in overall character, some even speak more favorably of Weld than Johnson. …Okay, so Weld’s a bit pink in skin tone… but he has a nice record.

Gary Earl Johnson, running for President, also hit the two-term limit, and made a surplus in New Mexico by vetoing excess spending.  His admirable qualities won’t fit in one page, but I can briefly say that he’s gone the distance.  At 63 years of age, he has not only climbed Mt. Everest, but all of the Seven Summits in the world… His athletic climbs were not without frostbite, breaking a leg and losing an inch and a half in an unrelated accident, but you just know he’s determined.  You can get a glimpse of how athletic he is on the Wikipedia page: “an avid triathlete who bikes extensively. … During his [time] in office, he competed in several triathlons, marathons and bike races.”  (He’s known to swim too.)

The two former Republicans have proven themselves capable, and are on the ballot in all fifty states.  But it shows you how rigged the FEC-and-media two-party system is that Johnson/Weld might not even appear at the debates because they haven’t, so far, polled at least 15% on average as required by the Federal Elections Committee.  Before the Republican convention, they averaged 13%.

(Correction: as of mid-September, they didn’t yet have Rhode Island; they now are the only third-party candidate to be on the ballot in all 50 states.)

While some settle with the rules, I’ll rightfully dissent.

Just as there’s nothing Constitutional about the FCC fining broadcasters for indecency, there is nothing Constitutional about the FEC penalizing media for including other candidates in debates.  Rigged is a strong word, but it is.  You couldn’t even print a buried endorsement in a book without potentially being fined by the FEC until the Supreme Court recognized the First Amendment issue in the Citizens United case, a case misunderstood by many.  The FEC is composed of Democrats and Republicans.  And 15% mathematically means less than seven options and usually only two voices heard across party lines.

The news media?  Their constituents aren’t so much members of the audience but shares in ratings, respect with the establishment, and respect in the media circle… otherwise known as the closed media circle.  It’s a business, after all.  Anchors are groomed on how well they can stick to a script, and the consequences of a given network’s favored candidate getting elected are regularly overlooked.

The public at large, indoctrinated for so long, is undoubtedly unsure about third party candidates.

On twitter (and why do I bother), someone called Johnson ‘insane’ (with some extra salty language) for agreeing with Trump on the grounds that the current administration promoted the existence of ISIS.  That’s just something I would have to call fact.  The Bush administration created a power vacuum in overthrowing Saddam Husein, and the Obama admin. destabilized the region even further by arming anti-Syrian militants and toppling Qaddafi in north Africa, creating another power vacuum.

When Trump doubled-down on his wording, saying Obama literally founded ISIS (because ‘founder of ISIS’ got so much applause), radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt offered better language.  And that’s where Donald soon revealed his secret.  The media won’t “talk about your language, and they do talk about my language, right?”  To an extent that’s true; the media put “what sells” on the cover, even if the controversy is baseless.  And so The Donald plays the media by provoking controversies, even out of nothing at all if his overplayed “Second Amendment people” comments says something.

(To be honest, when I first heard the “Second Amendment people” sound bite, I found the comment innocuous.  I had tuned in suddenly and wasn’t prepped by a narrative.  Thankfully, CNN’s all-day impression of conscience was interrupted by a man attempting to climb Trump Tower, with suction cups.)

And so little coverage goes to the candidates who aren’t controversial.  Even in a slow news week, the third party candidates are ignored or dismissed.  Or both.

‘But he won’t be elected’— the leading reason why Johnson/Weld may not win.  Not so much an actual reason, but unsubstantial political popularity— partly lines, misunderstandings and a whole lot of complacency.

Still, Johnson resonates when people hear what he’s about.

“Most Americans are libertarians.  They just don’t know it yet.”

The contrast between Johnson/Weld and the others is huge.

Gary Johnson is naturally pro-Constitution as it stands for individual liberty— what it really means to be libertarian.  He is fiscally conservative and socially liberal; he naturally supports the rights of everyone, is against meddling in foreign lands, and supports authentic capitalism (as opposed to crony capitalism).  And unlike many Libertarians (with a capital L), his positions are so reasonable that they outshine the positions of his competition.  His record shows: he may well reduce the federal deficit, in a time we desperately need to get the national debt under control.  The same cannot be said about Clinton or Trump, who are partial about the American public, already weak and irresponsible on matters of national security and foreign policy, and carry major bills in their camp promises.

(Update: Johnson is still a politician.  Yes, with flaws in his record like anyone else, and supporters that may overlook things such as federal spending in New Mexico while he was in office.  It’s a bit of wishful thinking that he’ll fix the deficit.  I was mistaken, and the above paragraph has been corrected.)

“They have people over there, like Maggie Haberman and others, they don't — they don't write good.” (Image source: twitter/Getty)
“They have people over there, like Maggie Haberman and others, they don’t— they don’t write good.”—Donald Trump on the New York Times. (Image source: twitter/CNNMoney/Getty)

Donald Trump has lowered the standards for a politician.  Ostentatious “like you wouldn’t believe” and what the Republicans warned about in Barack Obama, supporters have been put in a position of having to constantly forgive him, and, with fear of Clinton getting elected due to a “spoiler,” generated bigger double-standards.  One Trump supporter called Gary Johnson foul-mouthed for calling Trump a “pussy,” twice.  …Compared to Trump, who has made dick joke(s) and publicly cursed on the campaign trail a number of times, saying he would “bomb the shit out of ISIS.”  Instead of proving himself as a candidate, Trump has picked at the flaws of others like a bully and made fun of Chris Christie’s weight for reality TV humor.

Gary withdrew his word usage… unlike Donald, who never apologizes.  The list goes on for what the Rs have to answer for, but I know— Trump supporters don’t care all that much so long as he speaks his mind with apparent transparency.

…Notice that I said apparent transparency.  How offensive the guy is is not the bigger problem.  Trump isn’t transparent.  And the red flags in his behavior are glaring.  He meets the criteria of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, and, in the attempt at a biography, shown himself incapable of talking about his childhood without lying— always self-aggrandizing because of a deep-seated insecurity, indicating that he does not believe he can succeed without manipulating people.  Establishment or not, he is a politician— of the worst kind.

In July, Tony Schwartz, ghostwriter of The Art of the Deal, rung the alarm bells, telling The New Yorker that he feels “deep remorse” in writing The Art.  Schwartz said he had financial difficulties, and probably wouldn’t have written it otherwise.  He had to sell Trump in a non-negative light— and what an exceptionally difficult task that was.  The reality is: Trump is not a successful business man; he has mismanaged business to the point of bankruptcy, having survived by parachuting millions out to himself, shifting much of the risk onto investors, coming out the other end because of the myth of Trump.  There is no chance that he will disclose his taxes because the unvarnished picture is… not so great.

Trump may be able to use his non-establishment charisma to rally the public enough to get the nomination in the Republican party among a list of exhausted choices, but one of his biggest flaws may likely cost him the election, if not drop out: He can’t be bothered.  Biases and inaccuracies aside, articles that seriously look into the character of Trump revealed that he has a surprisingly low attention span, and can’t be bothered to be improve his knowledge on the issues, apart from television and “internet” news.  One of his children even said that Donald hasn’t read a book in thirty years.  Even George W. Bush— who was ridiculed for ‘lack of intellect’— reads.  Currently, Trump is losing double digits to Clinton in swing states, and the number of swing states has grown, partly because… he can’t be bothered.

No, I want to debate.  I want to debate.

That isn’t to say Hillary Clinton is (much) better.  Clinton is status quo at best, not to mention mismanagement on steroids when it comes to matters of foreign policy.  (As far as I can tell.)

“There is no one worse than Hillary Clinton… except Donald Trump.”— Penn Jillette, who has endorsed Johnson for President.

Unlike President Obama, Clinton is extremely reserved and hides from the press.  (Another form of can’t be bothered? 😉 )  She has bent the truth pathologically, and gave inaccurate info to the FBI during the email scandal in which she took email storage into her own hands as Secretary of State.  She stated that director James Comey said she was “truthful.”  (Four Pinochios.)  Telling tall tales for entertainment is one thing (excusable), but lying to the families of those who died in the Benghazi attacks while telling her daughter the truth?  Sincerity is the last thing we can expect from her… so how much transparency would she ever actually offer as President?

The appearance of Time Kaine was refreshing.  Plus, he speaks Spanish. (Image source: ABC News/Andrew Harnik for the Associated Press)

A new email leak, and “pay for play” hit the headlines… The Clintons made money in speaking engagements, where it is alleged that they change positions based on who pays them.  Of course, getting paid to speak alone isn’t wrong or bad.  But $2 billion is a bit much for a family-name Foundation that began only 15 years ago.

Sure, Clinton represents the average worker, with no hypocrisy or conflict of interest… if you ignore campaign and Foundation donors that include Arab Sheiks, African mining magnates and Wall Street firms… and acting on “urgent suggestions” from George Soros, a hedge fund billionaire who’s made money off of the collapse of several economies and someone’s she’s connected to via the Secretary of State project… Nah, she points fingers and alienates voters like everybody else.

Bernie Sanders sure rubbed off on her leading up to the Democratic convention that she’s promising lots of new freebies the federal budget can’t afford… not without raising taxes, of course.  Lots of good ideas.

Out-of-control debt spending: the other norm of norms in this day of age.

That isn’t to say the Republican nominee would be better in spending, with large tax cut proposals without budget cuts.  Either way, the national debt will hit $20 trillion by next year.

Could the picture get even more nightmarish?  (Why, yes.  Yes it can.)

Politicians tend to betray not just the people, but the soldiers on the ground— something George Washington experienced firsthand.  So you’d better at least try to have a candidate who cares enough to be honest and loyal when it counts the most.

In short, I don’t trust Clinton or Trump.

Gary Johnson has a good record.  He isn’t a noise maker, and he isn’t controlled by special interests.  There isn’t much more to say about him because his negatives are few.  He is known to be the same person on and off the stage… There is real, positive reason to vote his way.

Of course, I know voting antagonistically won’t affect change.  I mean, if every one is voting for the “other” of only two, don’t the numbers even out?

“I’m supporting Clinton because she’s not Trump.”
“I’m supporting Trump because he’s not Clinton.”

Vote for what and whom you can believe in. …And prepare for the possible outcomes.

Image source: twitter.

Feel free to voice your opinion here.