90.9 WBUR - Boston's NPR news station
Top Stories:
PLEDGE NOW
Libertarian Candidate Gary Johnson

Libertarian Party presidential candidate Gary Johnson joins us with his vision for the campaign and the country.

Libertarian Party presidential candidate, former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson. (AP)

Libertarian Party presidential candidate, former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson. (AP)

Gary Johnson is a triathlon-running, mountain-climbing, budget-cutting former two-term governor of New Mexico.  He tried to run for president as a Republican.  That did not work out.

Now he’s running as the Libertarian party candidate.  The other end of the spectrum from the Green Party’s Jill Stein.  He’s on the ballot in 47 states.  With Ron Paul out, he’s got supporters.  In swing states, he could be a real factor.  And his own platform?  Slash federal spending.  Bring troops home.  Legalize pot.  Go Libertarian.

This hour, On Point:  Libertarian contender Gary Johnson.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests

Gary Johnson, the former governor of New Mexico, he is running on the Libertarian Party ticket for President of the United States.

From Tom’s Reading List

National Review “If Gary Johnson were president, he would immediately cut all federal spending — entitlements, defense, education, everything — by 43 percent to rectify our fiscal blunders. And he’d just be getting started. In a recent interview with National Review Online, the former governor of New Mexico — and a rumored presidential candidate — outlined his governing philosophy and some of its practical applications.”

GQ “With Gary, and it’s okay to call him Gary, it’s not so much the things he says and does that are spectacularly unusual (or spectacularly misguided, depending on your point of view) for a presidential candidate. It’s the things he doesn’t say and do.”

Reason “Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson made a brief appeal Monday to a handful of people attending a civil rights event sponsored by the National Union of American Families at Independence Square in the heart of Philadelphia.”

Video

Check out the latest Gary Johnson campagin video here.

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on this site.
  • Nathaniel Hamrick

    Johnson 2012

    • ValleyVoter4GaryJohnson

      Right on! For more info on the Massachusetts campaign for GJ, follow “Massachusetts for Gary Johnson 2012″ on Facebook.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Stephen-Schweter/100002893852509 Stephen Schweter

    Very good interview ,Like to thak Mr. Stossel for having Mr. Gary Johnson on his program. I am for Mr. Gary Johnson formally a Dr.Ron Paul supporter but his vote as a write will not count in my State and Gary is on the ballet

  • https://twitter.com/MerlinHenry Melin Henry Harper Jr

    What would be his fiscal and tax policy 

  • Gregg Smith

    I love Gary Johnson.. but I learned my lesson in ’92 with Perot.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Exactly my feeling.

    • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

       Perot was a nut.  If he hadn’t dropped out in the middle and then come back, there’s a good chance that he’d have won.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Didn’t he drop out because of some personal attack on his daughter or his daughter’s wedding?

        His running mate had some problems in the debate: “Who am I”

        • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

           Correct–as I remember from the time, he was slightly ahead in the polls during the summer.

      • Gregg Smith

        I think you’re right but at the time he made sense to me. Clinton was elected with only 43% of the vote.

        • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

           By nut, I mean personally.  His ideas did make sense.

          • Mike_Card

            He is/was definitely a smart guy, but his worldview was that Texas is merely a mini-United States, which is just silly.  Perot represented a lot of peoples’ aspirations–not much reality.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          I actually liked those flip chart presentations.

          Remember the “giant sucking sound”.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    “Al Qaeda is alive and GM is half dead”
    -DC examiner editorial headline 9/17/2012

    Tom, please ask Mr. Johnson what he thinks of the auto bailouts — this is the classic example of government intervention for the ‘common’ good vs. libertarian laissez faire philosophy.

  • Wm_James_from_Missouri

    There was a time, in my early years, that I would have supported the Libertarian agenda but then I became of member of the real world, of working and investing. It was then that I swung wildly to the right. Later I voted as an independent but now I lean to the left and yearn for an even more enlightened political persuasion. Dear Americans, the future is about technology, cognitive science, neuro-economics, genetic enhancement, supercomputing, AI, hyper-computing, space mining, seemingly magical materials, human longevity, nanotechnology etc.. It’s not about creating ever more entropy by supporting the reckless abandonment of reason, rules of inference and warrant ! Adam Smith was, indeed, a brilliant man, but his sun is setting. —- Fear not, for a new sun rises which will bring forth a new guru for the ages. That sun will shine on a man that brings enlightenment through technology and the insights that it provides. His hand will guide us to reason that can be proved and whose roots can be traced. We, as a species have journeyed so far. Let us not turn back now. The future is forward !

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      We are all tempted by our “enlightened” visions of grandeur. But it always ends badly when forced on everybody.

      You should have stopped with Live and let live within a Constitutional Rule of Law.

      Enjoy your enlightenment, and let the rest of people find theirs. It’s one of the few joys of being human. 

      • Wm_James_from_Missouri

        In a Universe of infinite possibilities there exist an infinite set of possible Constitutions, each better that its’ predecessor !

  • Roy-in-Boise

    Third party candidates are a waste of time and in this case a vote for Romney. Perot gave us Clinton in ’92 and Wallace gave us Nixon in ’68.

    • RolloMartins

      The wasted vote is for Romney or Obama. Nothing will change, and you know it. A vote for Johnson or (as I prefer) Stein, will at the very least cause the discussion to shift. Perot didn’t elect Clinton, but he did cause a shift to the fiscal center. If Johnson–or Stein– got 15% (or even 10%) it would be a political earthquake, only for the better. Nothing will truly improve without electoral finance reform: this is the critical plank in the Green Party platform. Without that, why even vote?

    • sickofthechit

       …and worst of all, Nader got us Bush!

      • Government_Banking_Serf

        Just imagine if progressives and libertarians held their noses and voted for some Paul/Nader alliance and we took what they could agree on.

        We would win an election, and things would be more radically different and more pro-People power than in a long time.

        Look up Paul / Nader on Banking, Crisis, Foreign policy.

        If you don’t cheer their points of agreement, I don’t know what you would cheer, unless you are a Banker or work for the Fed.

        That we don’t go for it, is pathetic, and our pettiness and knee-jerk partisanship will get us what we deserve.

        • nj_v2

          That’s right, Dave, Ron I-don’t-believe-in-evolution, and I’m-not-sure-global-warming-is-real Paul.

          Back to the 1800s! Good campaign slogan.

          Just call me petty.

          • Government_Banking_Serf

            Nader doesn’t believe in Evolution? Can you read? Points of agreement…

            If you aren’t aware of the points of agreement vs. the status quo, then stop wasting our time with your empty responses and look it up. Some people care, and are looking beyond the RNC/DNC or Communist fallacies for reform.

      • nj_v2

        That bogus claim again.

        http://damnedliberal.com/?p=3764

        “Nader Cost Gore The Presidency”: False

      • Roy-in-Boise

        Exactly!

    • Mike_Card

      It really is a toss-up to conclude that Wallace took votes away from Hubert, regardless of the party tag.

  • http://www.facebook.com/agnew.raymond Raymond Agnew

    The government today is the direct result of your choosing the corrupt lesser of two evils for generations.   John Adams— ” THE VOTE FOR FREEDON IS NEVER WASTED “

    • RolloMartins

      Very true. Which is why I’m voting for Jill Stein and the Green Party.

    • Denis

      Very true statement… Thats why I’m voting for President Obama and Joe Bidden

    • http://www.facebook.com/leonard.bast.90 Leonard Bast

      Very true statement. That’s why I’m voting for Freedon. A vote for him is never wasted. 

    • Acnestes

       Simplistic and naive.  Great slogan, though.  Made for a bumper sticker.

  • responseTwo

    Alan Greenspan was a libertarian. When the economy crashed and his libertarian view were proven incompetent he said “I’m shocked”. Ten of millions of American suffered (many permanently) and Greenspan walked away without a scratch on his life. This is how libertarianism works. The well-to-do come up with dream worlds and when it collapses they walk away from it.
    Ian Rand collected social security and Medicare. Her lawyer said because she had a life where she made not much money she needed the benefits.

    • RolloMartins

      I used to be a Libertarian. Then I began to wake up to how the real world works. Libertarians end up the same way: as hypocrites or patsies.

      • Government_Banking_Serf

        And how do Dems and Repubs end up?

        Are you kidding?  What would you call people that willingly allowed, by ignorance, or greed or fear, what happened to us in the crisis? 

        Morons?

    • ChevSm

      Alan Greenspan was NO libertarian.  Some of his writings prior to taking over the fed leaned libertarian but his actions while in control of the fed were the opposite of libertarian. 

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Greenspan’s belief in how the Wall Street folks would act, as indivudials, seemed pretty damn libertarian to me, and it drove much of his “let the markets decide” behavior. It was straight out of Atlas Shrugged.

        • Government_Banking_Serf

          TF, seriously, where did the fuel for all the Wall St and Gov-based (Fannie/Freddie) bubble shenanigans come from?  Where did all the leverage come from? Where did the Bailouts come from?

          You have to answer these questions and understand the arguments agains the Fed, Monetary policy and the Crisis.

          The Bubble and ensuing crisis could NOT have happened with anything like the scale it did, without the Fed’s monetary policy manipulation, and the implicit and explicit Too big too Fail Corruption of our market.

          Both those issues are ANTITHETICAL to libertarianism.

          Please read about sound money.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            Do you like the sound of your own voice as much as it seems?

            Because you have cornered the market on responding to your own posts, and also telling people what “expertise” you have which they lack, in the guise of a question.

          • Government_Banking_Serf

            Great reply!

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      BS

      Nice try though. Always furthers the knee-jerk anti-libertarian ignorance for a while.

      http://www.lewrockwell.com/mcmaken/mcmaken132.html

  • Sarahdeo

    I had no idea who Gary Johnson was until I went to a website called “Isidewith.com” where after answering some question, the site said that I agree with Gary Johnson for 87% of the issues. Its making me really consider Gary Johnson. I’m looking forward to this show.

    • http://www.facebook.com/leonard.bast.90 Leonard Bast

      You would seriously consider (voting for, I assume from the context) a presidential candidate based on the results you got from taking an online quiz? I’d like to suggest serious study of local, state, national, and international issues through a reading widely a variety of credible newspapers, books, and online sources (and listening to intelligent discussion programs such as this one) as perhaps a better way of making a choice of who will lead our country. Real Clear Politics is a good place to start; it summarizes not only recent polling data but also offers a daily compendium of the best political articles, essays, etc. from a variety of sources. As Jefferson believed to his very core, an informed and educated citizenry is an absolute necessity if democracy is to survive.

      • Sarahdeo

        I believe that people need to educate themselves and know who they are voting for. My point is that I had never heard of gary prior to this ” quiz” and I am looking forward to learning more about this candidate as he was previously unknown to me.

  • Yar

    Ask Gary Johnson about the role of government using genetic modified crops (next hour’s show) as an example.  Should California have the right to require explicit labeling of genetically modified food? What that will it mean for the state and the country?  
    Should a LLC be allowed to patent life?  Isn’t limited liability really the single thread that ties the right together?  It goes all the way back to Cain and Able, I am not my brother’s keeper.Would the free market, (an oxymoron, for markets are never free) put airbags in cars? I never expect to need my airbag, or food stamps, but I am part of the 47 percent that’s comforted by the knowledge that they are there.  Nobody would pay for the development and manufacture of an airbag unless the costs are spread over many consumers.
    Government can work to help solve problems, it takes cooperation. 
    That is what the 47 percent that will never vote for Mitt Romney really want, a government that works for everyone.  

    • Yar

      More examples:
      The U.S. House of Representatives is poised to vote on legislation designed to cripple Obama administration efforts to strengthen and enforce public health and environmental protection laws.

      The bill, H.R. 3409, attacks a variety of public protection efforts. It would:

      block the U.S. Office of Surface Mining (OSM) from adopting a new Stream Protection Rule (which was gutted by the Bush administration), even though OSM has not yet proposed a new stream protection rule; eliminate OSM’s ability to designate an area as “unsuitable for mining;”

      block the U.S. EPA from reducing carbon pollution by declaring that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant;

      repeal critical clean air safeguards against soot and smog and delay by at least six years the implementation of new toxic air pollution standards – leading to thousands of unnecessary deaths and hospitalizations;

      block EPA efforts to protect the pubic from exposure to toxic coal ash;

      strip EPA of important authority to ensure that water quality standards are enforced, and interfere with EPA’s ability to work with states on clean water protection;

      create other barriers and hurdles for issuing new rules for protecting the public and the environment.

      • William

          When one of the EPA’s leading administrators (Al Armendariz) advises his staff to compare EPA enforcement to Roman Crucifixions that is a good indication the EPA is out of control.

        • Yar

          “EPA is out of control.”
          Please define control? If you lived below a coal ash pond, you would see out of control very differently.
          An LLC can never fully carry the full responsibility to keep our citizens safe. Corporations have externalized these costs while privatizing profits for decades. The EPA is just another form of the IRS, their role is to keep the accounting fair.
          Another example from the news this week is a property owner(Julia Trigg Crawford) in Texas who didn’t want the XL pipeline going across her pasture, ”

          http://nacstop.org/standwithjulia/index.html

          • William

             Spend some time with people working in the trucking industry, steel industry, food processing industry and farmers and see what they put up with just to do their jobs. I work with people that have been in these industries for over 40 years and they say the EPA is more out of control than ever before. They have the opinion the EPA is working very hard to put them out of business. You know the EPA wants to regulate farm dust? How can those people be so stupid to try and regulate farm dust?

          • Don_B1

            The EPA has NEVER proposed regulating farm dust. That is just one of the many big Republican canards.

            I would ask you for a reference, but you would only link to a Republican lie center, not something in the EPA, because it does not exist there.

          • William
          • Don_B1

            Only idiots and Obama-hating Republicans (duplication there?) believe your charge.

            There Clean Air Act has ALWAYS had an air particulate count by size, etc. that would be allowed in human-occupied (indoor, mines, etc.) areas. It has NEVER been applied to farm fields, and the EPA NEVER proposed to do so. But “libertarian” Republicans, like you, mostly to increase “hate-Obama” emotions, promote it.

            See PolitiFact, farm dust.

          • sickofthechit

            On Point, please fix your commentsection so the
            n
            a
            r
            r
            o
            w
            n
            e
            s
            s

            d
            o
            e
            s
            n

            t

            g
            e
            t

            s
            o

            r
            e
            d
            i
            c
            u
            l
            o
            u
            s
            !

          • TinaWrites

            Check out the story on “farm dust” on politifact.com.  They describe an anti-regulation subterfuge that is probably behind his anti-regulation regulation.  They conclude, “So while Fincher and others are saying the EPA could, theoretically, harass a farmer kicking up dust in rural isolation, there is little evidence the agency has now or ever had such an intention.”    Who says the EPA is out of control?  Little kids close to death from Asthma, or the people in Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale area whose water faucets are catching on fire, or Faux News?!!

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            William doesn’t live below a coal ash pond or a hog lagoon. Therefore it’s not important to him.

    • Steve_the_Repoman

      Yar,

      you may be interested in Joel Saletin’s take on Libertarianism.  I would like to hear your views on it.

      http://www.polyfacefarms.com/

      This also dovetails well with  the next topic.

      I often question whether justice fits well within a libertarian context.

      It sometimes seems that the power of the unjust can overwhelm the meek and those seeking to do what is right.  However, in an era when the powerful own the government on both sides of the aisle it is difficult to imagine solutions coming from our political leaders.

      • Yar

        I practice many of the same principles on my farm. I have used lime and fertilizer, I am a bee friendly farm, I would love to get beyond a single person subsistence operation without the inherent exploitation associated with ‘modern agriculture.’
        I attempt to live out my Christian faith through my farming practices. I don’t see it as libertarian though. But my definition may be different than Joel’s. I heard a different definition of anarchy yesterday, one of civility without leadership. An interesting concept. It starts and ends with exploitation. The wounds of abuse are carried forward for generations. This is where American democracy is off track, our freedoms have been based on the exploitation of others. This is
        why libertarianism is false. To have a truly free market, of ideas or products, one needs equality of information on both sides. (It is difficult to get a capitalist to see this.)
        Throughout human history the majority of human energy has gone to producing food. By introducing complexity into this process and removing individuals (hunter/gathers) from direct involvement, we set up a system ripe for extreme exploitation of people, land and animals.
        *From polyface farms:*
        *”*Plants and animals should be provided a habitat that allows them to express their physiological distinctiveness. Respecting and honoring the pigness of the pig is a foundation for societal health.”

        I try to respect the bee-ness of the bee while managing the mightiness of the mite.
        Complexity runs off the deep end very quickly.

        The commons are not tragic where the people are educated and connected by community. We have to fix education and community before anarchy has a prayer to work.

        • Steve_the_Repoman

          Thank you for your response.

          My current preoccupation is with how we become a true body relationally – whether within a family, a community, a church, or a body politic.

          I agree that anarchy, the dream of true libertarians, does not have a prayer of functioning before the establishment of a community based on charity and justice.

          The problem then becomes how to mesh the principals of freedom and justice within a secular setting.

      • TinaWrites

        Stop thinking about “our political leaders” and remember to think about Our Right To Vote.  The wretched Tea Party figured out how to infiltrate a major political party.  Occupy Wall Street needs to do the same thing with the Democratic Party!  They, we, whomever, need to convince the Dem Party bosses that we won’t vote for their candidates if they don’t stand for the policies we advocate.  Somehow or other, this is not happening.  The Conservatives are writing books that read as (and sell as ) best sellers.  Those who believe in what a government can do to solve problems, etc., need to make those ideas clear at the Party level.  We need to make it clear that we will NOT vote for their crony candidates who only want to serve themselves or their corporations.  We need to USE OUR POWER OF THE VOTE WAY BEFORE THE DAY WE GO TO THE VOTING BOOTH!! We need to let the Democratic and Republic Parties know that even tho they can outspend us, that We, The People, can OUT VOTE THEM!

        • Steve_the_Repoman

          Thank you Tina,

          an educated and active electorate is a good start.  I have had this conversation with both Republicans and Democrats – they are not yet listening.

          I dislike any/all of the vote suppression methods that are practiced by the Republicans ( and in cruder less practiced manner by some Democrats).

          But do not “political leader” and voting go hand in hand?

          How do you remain active/optimistic that WE can outvote THEM? I try not to view TP and OWS with a broad brush and hope that OWS will gain a degree of influence and the truth will out.

    • TinaWrites

      Again!  Beautifully said!

  • Shag_Wevera

    I have a love/hate relationship with libertarian philosophy.  I love the ideas on the drug war, military involvement abroad, and some aspects of individual freedom.  The stuff about civil rights and taxation makes sure I’d never vote for a libertarian.

    I’m all for a strong third party, I just hope it doesn’t end up being libertatian.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      What part of the libertarians’ civil rights position?

      (I have my own ideas but I will not write them here yet, as I’m sure the subject will be addressed.)

      • Shag_Wevera

        I can’t quote directly, but Rand Paul has expressed ideas saying civil rights legislation was wrong, and that the market would have eventually solved those problems.  You could probably “google” it.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

          That’s what I thought the reference was; I simply wanted to see your take.

          At some point I don’t trust the libertarian’s makeup of overwhelmingly white males. That makes them a bunch of citizens who very seldom had to be in conflict with local or state governments for basic dignities and rights as a group.

          And it’s been my observation that when a little bit of power is wrested and spread among the less powerful the first thing that happens is that the “losers” of that bit of power rewrite history about how they were ceding it happily all along.

  • Doug Welch

    Run hard in the swing states Gary!

  • J__o__h__n

    Romney has no core values.  Conservatives seeking an alternative to him should vote for Gary Johnson.  Unlike Jill Stein who has never been elected to anything other than town meeting rep, he has been a governor. 

    • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

       And progressives should vote Green.  Both major parties have run out of their usefulness.

      • nj_v2

        Or Justice.

        My periodic endorsement for Rocky Anderson:

        http://www.voterocky.org/

        Can anybody tell me anything he advocates that  doesn’t make sense or why this wouldn’t be a vast improvement over the current Republocratic dytopia?

        • Don_B1

          The problem isn’t whether there are ideas here that will or won’t work; the problem is that he can barely get them heard because big money does not want most of them in any combination, and will spend to prevent their adoption.

          At least one of two things have to occur:

          1) A lot more people have to take a big interest in politics, which means the bottom half of the income scale.

          2) Campaign finance has to be radically changed to a public funding based on voter support.

          Neither of these will in any way be easy; it will take even more frustration or some fantastic leadership from someone in the current two parties. I think that is more possible from the Democratic Party but I am not holding my breath.

          The problem with waiting for rising frustration is that then the forces of chaos could be released with groups focusing on “simple solutions that do not work”; e.g., the Tea Party, which allowed itself to be captured by the wealthy who wish only to increase their rent-seeking ability.

      • J__o__h__n

        The Democrats delivered health care.  I probably agree with the Green party more than the Democrats, but they haven’t delivered anything.  Jill Stein couldn’t even win governor of Mass.  A vote for her is a waste. 

        • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

           The Democrats delivered health care?  I’ve yet to see it.  Are you getting any benefit from the supposed reform yet?  A public option now would have been reform.  What happened was a complication of the current mess.

          • Don_B1

            Millions of people have seen benefits (those under 27, women, etc.) and only a few provisions have taken effect yet. Over the last two years, premiums have NOT gone up at the rates of previous years, in spite of Republican (false) claims to the contrary.

            Certainly a public option would have been better (as would single payer, Medicare for all) but the insurance industry had the ability to scare enough of the public to prevent it. With two Democratic Senators (Nelson, D-NB, and Lieberman, D/I-CT) in the insurers pocket along with ALL Republicans there was no chance of doing better.

            But there is a path to adding a public option through the Exchanges, and if that proves itself single payer can come from that.

      • Don_B1

        Unfortunately the Democratic Party did not find the way to defend unions while preventing the abuses that played into Republican attacks on the idea of unionization to protect workers rights and dignity.

        So now some of them find their need for big campaign donations requires their getting support from rent-seeking capitalists in order to be competitive. Currently most legislators spent over 30% and many up to 60% of their time soliciting campaign donations, which is a lot easier when the potential donor can write a big check.

        New parties will not be any better unless campaign financing is done through the government. Investigate Lawrence Lessig’s website for Public Campaign financing for the details of his approach:

        http://www.conconcon.org/

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Romney has core values.  He wants the US to be prosperous with good jobs and economic growth and he doesn’t want massive debt to be left to our children and grandchildren.

      Sounds good to me.

      • jefe68

        Mitt Romney is not fit to be president. When he was governor of Massachusetts he seemed to have lost interest after two years in office. The joke was where’s Mitt Romney?

        I do think Mitt Romney has core values, they are greed, condescension, arrogance, and a disdain for anyone not as well off as him.  

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Well, let’s review what happened.

          He implemented 8 of 10 of the major government reforms.  Reversed the $3B shortfall without raising broad based taxes and created a $2B rainy day fund.

          At that point he lost all leverage with the 87% Dem legislature.  The budget woes were solved.  The employment rate was nearing full employment and the Dems were concerned that his final 2 reforms would decimate their patronage havens like the turnpike authority.

          Romney calculated that his job was mostly done and decided to move on instead of trumpeting his own horn and fighting back against daily Globe distortions.

          The way I see it is Romney was the classic doer — but not a politician. 

      • nj_v2

        It’s amusing, in a sad, pathetic kind of way, to watch the wingers here stumble and grope to try to find ways to defend the indefensible.

        • Gregg Smith

          I agree 100%.

          • nj_v2

            Another week, more clueless trolling from Greggg.

      • Acnestes

        Willard doesn’t care a whit about your children and grandchildren other than that they be available to tend to the wants of his children and grandchildren.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        When the opposite of a belief simply doesn’t exist, that’s really weak.

        No candidate is proclaiming “I don’t want the US to be prosperous with good jobs…”.

        • Don_B1

          @WorriedfortheCountry:disqus 
          Romney can say all the (necessary) platitudes but he has NO PLAN that will achieve those goals for anyone who does not already have them.

          Actually, he puts those goals AT RISK for even those who have them now: a country where EVERYONE does not participate in its growth is one where everyone suffers in the end.

          Romney talks about helping everyone, but his proposals only punish the poor for being poor, no matter the reason that they are poor. There is NO “hand-up” in Romney’s proposals.

      • Mouse_2012

        Romney and Core Values should have in between “has No”

        Mitt Romney: “I’m Running for Office, for Pete’s Sake!

        Classy

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    The problems in our nation need Green or Libertarian solutions.  The Democans and the Republicrats are too hidebound and corrupt to do anything useful any more.

    • Mouse_2012

      The R.O. bots don’t care as long as their side wins. Also the he/she said Enshrines corruption

  • ccbard

    Slashing government spending prior to economic improvement? Austerity?  Dumb, and dumber.  

  • Mouse_2012

    I wish him luck,

    I agree with many of his civil libertarian views and think the financial ones wouldn’t happen. I’d be far more incline to vote for him than Romney or Obama.

    Let’s face it Romney and Obama both support many of the Status Quo on F.P./Homeland Security/Spying on Americans/War on Drugs(war on the poor).  

    • Don_B1

      While I have some sympathy with your views, I am not sure I agree that Obama supports the Spying/drugs, etc.

      The many and deep problems, especially economic, that he faced meant that he could not vigorously work on all problems, even some important ones. I will wait for a second term to make a final judgment.

      For a feeling of the additional difficulties Obama faced, please read:

      http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/09/fear-of-a-black-president/309064/

  • Mouse_2012

    Both National Convention got 50 Million a piece of our Tax dollars.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VCZ6YOEX4P7YG2MEYBW43IZC6U Tom

    This should be rich.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002032939732 Nathan VanGorder

    Very glad to hear Gary Johnson on NPR! Please make clear that he is being kept out of the debates much to our country’s detriment. We already know the non-answers that President Obama and Gov. Romney are going to give. He (and Jill Stein) would add a GREAT deal to the debate by adding actual differences in opinion.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    The only wasted vote is the one that you cast for someone that you don’t actually support.

    • J__o__h__n

      Or the vote that you don’t cast against the greater of two evils. 

      • Ray in VT

        One can always vote for Chtulu if one is sick of voting for the lesser of two evils.

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    “If everyone wasted their vote on me I would be the next president”

    Um, that would be EVERYONE, not everyone who believes his politics are best for the country. There is a reason the Libertarians have never gained a big following. Not Federal, not state, not county, not city.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      Yeah, most people are happily deluded thinking that participating in their slice of Crony Capitalism is sustainable. Or that Debt is make believe. Or that Financial Charlatans will run the world for our own good, or that better-meaning moral technocratic bureaucratic rule would be even better.

      The point is facing up to Reality, and that Democracy, Liberty, Free Markets, and Punishing Corruption and Cheating is the most efficient and prosperous formula the world has seen.

      As stated years ago now on this blog, the reason Libertarianism hasn’t taken off is sadly that it takes too much thinking to understand the mechanistic reality and benefit for most people. That’s a tough one.

      It’s astounding how many are against the founding principles and don’t understand them mechanistically and historically anymore.

      • Don_B1

        I think you left out the regulation that government has to provide to enforce those freedoms; if something is not illegal can it be corruption or cheating? Too often these are only in the “eye of the beholder”; witness that the big bankers still do not believe they did anything “wrong” in overleveraging CDOs and gambling with CDSs, because they had ensured that Congress would not allow them to be regulated.

        • Government_Banking_Serf

          I agree with that, and am for basic, transparent, no favors for anyone over others, predictable, protecting the market, not picking winners and losers or “managing” the market, Rule of Law for the  Financial Industry. Including harsh punishments.

          And no Bailouts.

          Given that, things would be alot better, and calls for the Government to provide more of everything for us would likely not be so great.

  • http://daiseyjayne.wordpress.com/ Jayne

    LOVE, love Gary Johnson and I’m a Democrat.  have been following him for months since I read an article in Esquire magazine.  He’s got his ducks in a row, minds his own business (not worried about what people are doing in their private life), keeps religion and government separate and has practical solutions for our economy. 

    • nj_v2

      Leaving people alone in their private lives and making the collective/commons work are two different things.

    • ccbard

      He doesn’t seem to see the consequences of his economic “solutions”.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VCZ6YOEX4P7YG2MEYBW43IZC6U Tom

    Well, I can’t WAIT to hear foreign policy ideas. I guess geopolitical relationships with other world gubmints are right out. Sheesh.

  • J__o__h__n

    It is only 10:14 and I have already lost track of his simplistic solutions.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      Typical elite technocrat sycophant response. Chase our own tail into oblivion rather that let the people make their own choices.

  • Yar

    Is healthcare covered in your 23 percent VAT?

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6JNEJZPTE2XFGFEH2FL5C7GZKU Kathleen L

      Libertarian healthcare is to throw us all to the market and completely deregulate it. And for libertarians, that doesn’t mean just eliminating regulations on insurance, but on the entire medical complex. No more FDA or drug testing, no more licensing or inspections, poeple’s rational self interest will sort all that out.  

      • Government_Banking_Serf

        How’s George McGovern’s Diet recommendation’s and the USDA Food Pyramid working out for us?

        The 40 year do-gooder Government supported dietary experiment has FAILED, delivering us more Diabetes, Heart Disease, Cancer etc, and the skyrocketing Health Care Costs to go with, in history.

        Yes. I do trust free individuals with freedom of information to make better choices than leaving it to Big Brother.

        • Don_B1

          That is one real example of bad recommendations, based on insufficient data. But it was NOT the Food Pyramid that caused the problem; it was the statement that animal or substitute fats should be reduced (true), but had no recommendation for sugar reduction also. Note that educated individuals can avoid the consequences.

          But the individuals grouping together to promote “evil” vaccination as the cause of autism is an equally bad thing which will have bad consequences even for those that refuse to subscribe to it.

          Lets agree that humans make mistakes and government has a role in helping us all avoid them.

          • Government_Banking_Serf

            I appreciate you recognizing that situation, but to pass it off as a “mistake”, and then twist the governments role to actually helping us avoid them, when it was the pusher along with do-good fanatical vegetarian public interest groups is disingenuous.

            You could easily argue that our whole fiscal/health care crisis and perverse, crony, subsidized foodstuff marketplace including Big Pharma we all love to hate, were the Direct Descendent of this Colossal Mistake.

            It is the textbook example of putting your trust in the Government knows best basket.

            As you said, “educated individuals can avoid the consequences”, and so those most hurt by the Government are the poor and uneducated!

            Then we have the Financial/Housing debaucle….  same deal, same bad policies, same bad incentives, same corrupted, crony, government-connected marketplace, and….Disaster?

            Seeing a pattern here?

            Punish Lawbreakers, and have basic Rule of Law for the market.

            Otherwise leave the Driving to We the People!!!

          • Government_Banking_Serf

            Its the carbs. The fats are fine without the high carbs. Grains and sugar did us in. Yet another way we are willingly treated like cattle.

      • Don_B1

        Exactly! When millions have their health destroyed or are dead, the lawsuits and spreading knowledge from private investigations will bring arrogant corporations, which will declare bankruptcy before paying out court mandates, to reason!

        And the C-levels will escape with the company’s profits. It is the Alan Greenspan theory that business crime statutes do not need to be enforced because the market will work it out.

        And as Keynes said in another context, “In the long run, we are all dead.”

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6JNEJZPTE2XFGFEH2FL5C7GZKU Kathleen L

    The Libertarian nutties all talk about how they want to do sensible things, but don’t forget, they also want to end all restrictions on business, end all safety net programs. Libertarianism sells itself on “no war and legalize drugs,” but their actual agenda is social darwinism that makes even the ridiculous ideas of the Republican party seem moderate.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

    NDAA showed how the whole Republican/Democrat fighting, never agree on anything has all the sincerity of professional wrestling. So controversial, it was passed with large margins on both sides with hardly a whisper of dissent.

    • Don_B1

      That is because they each saw little downside to voting to pass it (most voters don’t think it will apply to them) while Democrats know that Republicans will chant, “Soft on terrorists,” etc.

      Until the voting public, particularly in primaries, refuses to fall for such ridiculous claims, there will even be more.

  • Jason Hoffman

    I consider myself a “Recovering Libertarian.”  I was an ideological libertarian for 20 years (since my Sophomore year in college when I was introduced to Nozick by an avowed communist, of all things!) However when I saw what happened when my ideals (lowered and rebated taxes, resistance to and recession of government regulation) were put into play by the Bush administration and it tanked the economy, I was quickly disabused of my notions.  How can you answer the recent memory of these failures with the same arguments that the LP has made since Andre Marrou was the candidate?

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      If you think Bush represented Libertarianism, you could not have been an ideological one.

      Taking one or two aspects of something and putting them into an otherwise corrupted whole, and then blaming the new additions for failure, is intellectually dishonest.

      Fed Banking/Monetary Policy, Militaristic adventurism, erosion of Rule of Law for elites, and classic Crony capitalism play far more a role in outcomes than a few vote pandering tax cuts that were libertarian in name only, if even declared such.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Maybe if there was some pushback by TruePrincipledLibertarians back during the Bush regime, rather than just cheering on the rightwing hackery which aligned with your beliefs. Either that or there are too few of you to matter.

        But I don’t care, because that’s a “you” problem, Leather Dave. Not a “we” (left-wingers, journalists, media critics) problem.

        • Government_Banking_Serf

          I’m sure if you were listening, there was. Of course you prefer calling people Tea Baggers and Racists more that examining what drives people’s criticisms of the modern Republican party, if you even care. I never voted for Bush. I think I was Nader back then.

      • Don_B1

        @google-f3c08a0db1bdfc852b4edf0b8ea78686:disqus 
        To the extent that Romney embraces Ryan’s economic plan and that seems to have a lot of Libertarian support, Romney’s “Five Points” differs little from George W. Bush’s economic policies. See:

        http://www.nextnewdeal.net/rortybomb/romney-will-solve-crisis-exact-same-gop-plan-2008-2006-2004

        Beyond economic policy Bush differed widely with Libertarians.

  • https://openid.aol.com/opaque/862139a4-e557-11e1-bc17-000bcdcb2996 Webb Nichols

    Now it is also time to interview Rocky Anderson, former Mayor of Salt Lake City, and the Justice Party. 

    • nj_v2

      Let’s keep plugging, maybe OP will have him on.

      OP’s Mother Ship, WBUR had a brief interview with him on their midday news program recently.

  • Mouse_2012

    When Life Gives You Lemons,You Paint That Sh@t Gold Romney’s an Lemon WFTC keeps trying to paint gold

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VCZ6YOEX4P7YG2MEYBW43IZC6U Tom

      What? Type correctly, please.

  • William

    He has some really good ideas about Medicaid.

    • Don_B1

      I will need to see more details, but at some of what he said reminds me of what Obamacare will do.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    If he can keep funding for science–including NASA–protect the environment, and create a healthcare system for all, I’d support him entirely.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6JNEJZPTE2XFGFEH2FL5C7GZKU Kathleen L

      The Libertarian health care system is easy. Get the government out of it. Drugs would be cheaper if they weren’t tested for effectiveness and safety. Get rid of the FDA. There’d be more doctors if they weren’t licensed, get rid of that and let anyone call themselves a doctor. You can sue them if they kill you.

  • nj_v2

    Ask him how we protect the environment without all those Big Government regulations.

  • ccbard

    If you cut back Medicare and Medicaid drastically, cost of health care will rise dramatically as doctors and pharma compensate for their financial loss.  

    • jerwest

      Lasik surgery and cosmetic surgery aren’t covered by the government or private insurers.  Yet their cost has fallen dramatically over the past 2 decades. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

    Libertarians are basically anarchists – but still want everyone else forced to kick in money to protect their property.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      Might makes Right Anarchy vs. Sound Money, Constitutional Rule of Law Libertarianism is a stark choice. If you don’t understand it, you should read more.

      Cute one-liner though.

      • Don_B1

        That certainly shows where you come from.

    • Don_B1

      The word Feudalism applies; the economic term is rent-seeking (from Adam Smith).

  • skeptic150

    More to think about.?

  • Scott B

    “Fair tax” isn’t fair. No matter how it’s sliced, and even with a “prebate” check, someone that’s making minimum wage and forced to budget to the nickel for the basics is much more effected that someone that isn’t worried about the tax on a new car or replacing an appliance.

  • Matt Wade

    Cut federal spending by 43% and you cut the American economy by 43%. Result? Economic collapse and zombie apocalypse. Get this clown off my radio.

    • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

       Don’t you see something wrong with our economy if the government is responsible for almost half of it?

      • Matt Wade

        Federal spending makes up 20% of GDP, not even close to 50%. And no, I don’t see anything wrong with it.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           The current numbers are Federal is 24.5% of GDP and local and state is about 12% of GDP for a total of about 36-37% of GDP.

          Way too large.

          However, once Obamacare kicks in this number increases dramatically.

          Further, we reach a point that the size of government spending prevents the GDP from growing and then government takes a bigger and bigger percentage until we collapse.

          The irony is we are killing the golden goose.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            Any time you want to stop lying about the Affordable Care Act, and introduce “bidness cycle”…

            Otherwise I’ll just invite you and all the righties who cared about spending before Obama was inaugrated to have a meet-up. I’ll rent you the phone booth.

          • Don_B1

            That is because the CURRENT level is some $1 trillion or more BELOW what a full-employment economy would produce, and its TEMPORARILY high expenditures are in support of the safety net.

            When you increase the numerator and reduce the denominator, the result goes up.

            This ratio will return to pre-2008 values when an infrastructure spending bill of sufficient value puts enough unemployed to work and creates the virtuous circle which boosts the recovery so the economy grows on its own.

            It is by keeping desirous and qualified people, young and older, unemployed by not spending to create aggregate demand that we are “killing the golden goose.”

          • Government_Banking_Serf

            The level of spending by consumers that supported the level of production pre-crash, was a Debt-fueled, Fed Easy Money CHARADE.

            So now we just need to issue more debt to regain the obviously unsustainable levels of consumption and associated “economic activity” and all will be fine?

            This is the insanity of Keynesian economics and unsound monetary policy. Talk about a ponzi scheme!

            When the outside world stops taking our debt…. Bing! The music stops and party’s over!

            Sound money, and an organic supply and demand economy encourages living in reality, not Producing and Consuming for Producing and Consumings sake to maintain the charade of ever increasing prosperity.

  • Stephen Rourke

    What impact does raising the retirement age have on job growth?

    • sickofthechit

       It seems to me it would need to be done incrementally so that a 40 hour job becomes 32, then 24, then 16, then 8, then retirement.  Social Security benefits would move along a complimentary path increasing 20% each year. The new employee could be brought along on a similar path with overlap for job training and mentoring.
      Charles A. Bowsher

    • Don_B1

      Supposedly (and dubiously) it is supposed to reduce government spending, thereby freeing the “free markets.” This has different affects (though in the same direction) for both Social Security and Medicare:

      1) It is supposed to reflect the growing age expectancy of seniors. But the relevant number is the CONDITIONAL  age expectancy at 65, which has been growing most for the wealthy (by years — they take better care of themselves because cost is no problem) while only a year or two for the poor and middle class. Thus it is a way to deny the lower economic half of paid-in benefits.

      2) On Medicare it puts potentially expensive people in the general pool of all workers for an extra period while removing some healthy people from the Medicare pool, thus making Medicare more expensive. It works both ends against the middle. (You do have to look at the relative expenses of the people being shifted from one group to another to see this; it takes a bit of thought.)

  • kmh5004

    In general I like the libertarian agenda, but it tends to not have enough flexibilit.  Cutting government in a recession is not a good idea.  You should run in another 4 years when your ideas would make sense.

  • Government_Banking_Serf

    When we are in the monetary collapse, it will be hilarious to see all the apologists scrambling and panicking and looking for the next Free lunch solution to maintain Utopia.

  • Matt Wade

    New Mexico ranks #45 in per capita income at $17,000 a person. 

  • Government_Banking_Serf

    Alan Greenspan FED CHEIF, was not libertarian in practice.

    Bunk.

    That’s a canard that has been shown to be false, and is always trotted out by lazy knee jerk anti-libertarians.

    You can’t be libertarian and a Fed Monetary Manipulator/Bubble pumper at the same time. Its that simple.

  • Mike_Card

    Ha, ha, ha!  Good one, Tom!  You really had me going!  Now, who is the topical guest, really??

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      I’d like an economist on this panel, myself, as a counterpoint to Johnson.

      • Mike_Card

        Yup, me too; and while we’re at it, get us a real, practicing librarian and not just some politician!

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

          I’m all for librarians being on the radio, but did you mean “librarian” or “libertarian”?

          • Mike_Card

            Oh.  Never mind.  (Thanks, Roseann Roseanna Danna.)

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VCZ6YOEX4P7YG2MEYBW43IZC6U Tom

    Ha! He doesn’t want to avoid the question of regulating Wall Street or not. But he’s doing a fine job of not answering. 

    • jerwest

      What he’s saying is Government regulators often lie in bed with their industries and produce rules that are designed to let coporations through a so called regulation. 

  • Yar

    Along with the fair tax, what about a fair wage?  Tie wages to the cost of an essential commodity such as energy. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6JNEJZPTE2XFGFEH2FL5C7GZKU Kathleen L

    Just imagine taking a vacation in a libertarian paradise! 
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QDv4sYwjO0

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       Pretty funny.

    • Don_B1

      It is just a step or two in front of Haiti, but Haiti is closer.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

    The bottom, bottom, line – we live in an oligarchy – how would libertarianism change this? Or do we just get the same oligarchy doing the same things wearing a libertarian suit and waving libertarian flags?

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      That’s your cynical view. If you/we don’t participate in Self-Government, that may happen. If we don’t understand and enforce Rule of Law, that may happen. If we let the Government Cooperate with Finance and hope for some magical “Third Way” and beneficence, and no longer believe that power corrupts, it will happen, and STILL won’t be “libertarian”, but STILL more of the same government supported Crony Capitalism with barriers to entry, poor competition and Too big to Fail.

    • Don_B1

      Libertarianism would enable the oligarchs to further control the country as those with money could enforce their control with Orwell’s newspeak, as the Republicans are doing now, but more easily.

  • Matt Wade

    Like all libertarians, you can agree with them for about 3 minutes. Then they say something so totally insane it negates everything they said previously.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      Like what?  Please tell us what is more insane than the status quo and the trajectory of policies, monetary policies, foreign policies, lack of Rule of Law, technocratic Discretionary Rule by Wall Street/Washington Revolving door cronies, that have brought us to where we are today?

  • Government_Banking_Serf

    Alan Greenspan Fed Chief and Sound Money is an Oxymoron. Deal with it.

  • Mouse_2012

    The Feds buys our debt and also buys the debt of banks who can’t sell the toxic crap on their books.
    According to the report on the Fed they backstop 16 Trillion$$ for Big Banks.
    Yet very few in the Major parties have tried to even attempt to address this.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      and JFK got shot for it.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VCZ6YOEX4P7YG2MEYBW43IZC6U Tom

    Let’s move on to his foreign policies already. 

  • Nicholas Moore

    Voting for Gary Johnson is like recycling: if EVERYONE did it, the world would be a better place.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      Funny that those most likely to recycle are likely those most knee-jerk against supporting GJ.

  • Mouse_2012

    The Fed has created the ability for banks to borrow at .025% who could than go back and buy T-Bills at 3%. In a sense free money

    • sickofthechit

       Actually better than free money, they don’t need any money to start with!

  • J P Fitzsimmons

    Any man who hates financiers and bankers as this man does can’t be all bad.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      No, no, no, you have to coddle bankers and financiers for them to treat you nicely. Haven’t you learned anything from Clinton, Bush, Obama?

      • Don_B1

        Bankers are among the most thin-skinned, needy people on earth.

  • Government_Banking_Serf

    1. The Lefties here pretty much believe in Communism. 

    2. The Obama/Romney supporters pretty much believe in Crony Capitalism, Unsound Money, Too Big to Fail and More of the Same. 

    3.The libertarians, rule of law, and sound money folks are Reformers.Too bad there is so much cowardice for change today.To claim we have seen anything like 3., is a joke.

    To want 1. needs a robust argument against historical reality.

    To defend 2. is the definition of insanity.

    • Mouse_2012

      Yet somehow Communist China supports the Republicans and work with the Chamber of Commerce. So do righties here pretty much believe in Communism? Also the RNC pretty much rejected all the libertarian views so what whould you call them?

      RNC defends our war on drugs, Fed Actions, the Dec 31th bill passed, blind support to an foreign country, war with Iran. and on and on. What would you call them? Fascist  ?
      Fascist  ?

      • Government_Banking_Serf

        RNC was in number 2.

        • Government_Banking_Serf

          Fascistic is pretty close for both parties. One is more Socialistic in nature one more militaristic. Both cozy up to Big Money to fund and support their visions which take great power to enact.

          Liberty, Rule of Law, Self-Government, limited Federal Government the only experiment in history to try and hold such forces at bay.

          Too bad we forgot all that.

          Read The Road to Serfdom

          Socialistic dreams/trust opened the door  to Hitler’s power grab and fascistic rule.

          http://lamar.colostate.edu/~grjan/hayeknaziism.html

          • Don_B1

            There were many missteps along the way, but it was the Brüning Chancellorship’s austerity program, trying to pay off its WWI debts and supposedly get out of inflation, that led the German people to vote Hitler and his party into the Reichstag.

            Austerity in a time of depression leads to deeper depression, not growth and recovery.

          • Government_Banking_Serf

            Just because we want “growth and recovery” doesn’t mean it can be magically plucked from the ethos without consequence. We are at record debt levels now. We are nearing mathematically impossible levels for payback/growth expectations.

            Printing money, borrowing money does have a limit.

            What will happen is the whole scheme will collapse, as mathematically impossible, the masses will suffer for a bit, the Central Bankers and Big Gov technocrats will get together and make the case for a One- World Currency, and the obligatory One-World Technocratic Management of that economy, which we all know will be One-world “Governance” by Financial Elites.

            We will have lost sovereignty, lost the experiment in Self-Governance, and be fully under the boot of a modern tyranny that will likely be impossible to revolt against, given military realities today.

            So we can go down that path, or we can vote for change and Responsibility and power back to the people again.

    • J__o__h__n

      It is ironic that you are complaining about more of the same.

      • Government_Banking_Serf

        Great argument! Now I know why the gut wish for Communism can work, or why the Status quo is doing just fine!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

     43% reduction in defense spending sounds good

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    “Attorneys do a much better job than regulations…”

    So this guy wants to freeze in amber all the faux tort reform stuff in “good bidness climate” states?

    I just hope his kid doesn’t get an arm ripped out in Texas. Then he’ll learn what the “tort reform” means in the real world: Corporations will still get all the damned lawyers they can hire.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       “Attorneys do a much better job than regulations…”

      at making things impossible to understand so they can dance around any side of a “rule” to “prove” their reading is right and the other attorney is wrong.

      Yeah, I’ve seen it and it ain’t pretty.

    • Don_B1

      The worst part of restrictions on tort law is the steady drift by companies to require arbitration, particularly in labor disputes. Arbitration really tilts the playing field against the worker.

  • Yar

    You just increased unemployment by 43 percent.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       Yeah, somehow that never gets mentioned. Cut the size of government, military or not, and you cut jobs. Income tax paying jobs. Goods and services buying jobs. Social Security and Medicare paying jobs.

      That doesn’t mean we need BIG government but be careful just how fast you whack it when there is no private business that will immediately:
      1) provide the same services
      2) hire the laid off employees to do the work.

  • Matt Wade

    Libertarians won’t be happy until we all work 100 hours a week for $6/hr in industries that destroy the environment. After 20 years of that, you are laid off and sent away on a iceberg. Meanwhile the capitalist owners live in heavily guarded gated communities. Its Thunderdome, baby.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      WTF? Where do you get this crap? Sounds like Might makes Right Anarchy.

      Keep reading.

      • Government_Banking_Serf

        Rule of Law and a Constitution and Self Government.

        Pesky little things that keep us from Anarchy.

    • sickofthechit

       Libertarians sound like the fabled “job creators” the Repugnicans keep talking about.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    GM want the government to sell its stake in GM.

    Obama says no — at least not before election.

    Why?  Can we have a debate.

    What is Mr. Johnson’s view?

    • sickofthechit

       What I heard yesterday is that we would lose money if we sell now.  So I say don’t sell.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    At this point, there’s no good reason for us to defend Europe from Europe.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      What do you mean, its a jobs program, haven’t you heard, cutting spending means cutting jobs?

      Sadly our whole un-free market economy backed by Debt and the Federal Reserve is a Giant “Jobs Program” that we are clearly addicted to and refuse to let go of or reform.

      That is where all the resistance comes from. People like their Crony Capitalism, Debt and Fed-based illusion of prosperity, and do not want to live in a reality-based world.

  • William

    He is dead on about cutting back on defense and pulling troops out of most overseas locations. 

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    The “free market” worked very well for the bankers:
    1) People with money to invest were buying as much as they could get. Foolishly, it turns out, they trusted that those selling were honest brokers of relatively safe “investment quality” paper.
    2) Banks bundling mortgages together all sliced and diced to make them untraceable into “complex financial instruments” sold to the buyers. When they couldn’t get “quality” mortgages, they threw in less “safe” ones because the buyers wanted more. When they ran out of those they threw in junk mortgages given to people who couldn’t afford a mortgage under any sane system because the investors wanted more. 

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      I’m glad you put “free market” in quotes, precisely because it was NOT a Free Market, and of course blaming a real free market with competition, no cronyism, punishment for rule breakers cronyists under the Rule of Law, and a Sound money economy, which never existed would be infantile.

      • Don_B1

        Any time the wealthiest can extract as much money as they “need,” they will spend some of it to change your “Rule of Law” so they can extract yet more money.

        The only way to prevent that is a much higher top marginal tax rate on high incomes so the rich don’t feel they have “excess money” to spend in bribing legislators. That and public campaign financing would reduce the ability of the rich to move to rent-seeking activity at public expense.

        • Government_Banking_Serf

          That post is full of your cynical presumptions. It’s the Fed who pumps easy money into the Financial Class, with naive or corrupt hope that they do something good with it for the rest of us.

          People becoming wealthy through work, wise choices, innovation, saving etc, is not something to be detested.

          The issue of political corruption needs to be dealt with by Rule of Law. I think Tar and Feathering would go a long way.

          Just because enforcing anti-corruption of politician is a tricky business that will always take great vigilance by the citizens, does not make us throw out the baby with the bathwater and outlaw “wealth”.

          Demand total Transparency of Campaign Contributions, so WE the People can see who is getting greased and vote accordingly.  Removing the ability of people to contribute with their $/voice is a noble but quixotic quest. Better let them throw their fistfulls, but let us see it.

          Not to mention, life in prison for any proven quid pro quo or corruption. Political corruption is worse than drug dealing.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Afghanistan was a legitimate war that should have been done better, but the Iraq war was just stupid.

  • jerwest

    Can Gary Johnson please tell us how we can get a lawn signs and support his campaign? 

    • http://twitter.com/ViragoDP DebP

      Go to his website garyjohnson2012 dot com and find your state campaign director.  They should have them.  Also, “like” the state FB page (State Name for Gary Johnson).  Usually you can find them through there and will also be informed of upcoming events, etc.

  • Evan_Ames_IA

    What would Governor Johnson do as far as investment to prevent future social costs? In Health care for instance, investment in optional birth control for the poor can prevent the tax payer from paying for unplanned children either through taxes or insurance premiums.

  • http://www.facebook.com/beth.h.berry.9 Beth Hettrick Berry

    I always hear the phrase “job killing tax cuts” but never “job killing spending cuts”. How can we cut 43% out of federal spending without leaving masses of people unemployed. Can the private sector employ all these people.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       Nope, they don’t have the capacity to take it over “immediately”. IF private companies can do “it” better and cheaper, there needs to be a transition, not “blow it away and wait for the private sector to pick it up”.

    • Mike_Card

      I don’t think I’ve heard either.  The one I’ve heard over and over is the,  “job-killing tax INCREASES.”

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001436729213 Wes Nickerson

    The Libertarian Party subscribes to the Austerity Agenda, which is a recipe for another Great Depression. What we need is a massive jobs program to directly give everyone jobs. That would boost the economy. I support funding that through taxing the wealthy, through restoring taxation on capital gains to the same as labor taxation. I support a 1% tax on all transactions on Wall Street, the Robin Hood tax. What we need is a Green Party president. What we need is Jill Stein for president. Jill Stein is even more libertarian, supporting more civil liberties and freedom in her policies than Gary Johnson.

    http://www.jillstein.org/

    • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

       How do you plan to pay for that jobs program?  More debt?

      • sickofthechit

         Recapture the stolen money from the temporary bush Tax Cuts for the wealthy, as well as the lost inheritance taxes from the reduction in the estate tax (no it is not a “death tax” it is a transfer tax since you pay it when the money is transferred whether alive or dead).

  • Mouse_2012

    Right on point with Iran and drugs and Foreign Policy

  • nonchromosomal

    Great interview, Tom!  Lots to think about.  More like this, please!

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    “Fifty laboratories of innovation” in education?

    The Texas lege has been called “the national laboratory of bad government” for my entire life, and with reason.

    The whole of Texas gov’t has a very bad track record of turning unregulated block grants (and blue state tax money) into a trough for the governor’s cronies. Less Federal control over this is pretty naive.

    • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

       But under his proposals seemingly, each state would have to accept the consequences of its choices.  Bad educational systems wouldn’t work, and the state would be handed a motivation to make something better.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Texas’ screwing up their education system and saying “Thank God for Mississippi” would result in less of my tax money going there?

        The motivation of less block grants wouldn’t work. The naivete Johnson has about Congress makes it a non-starter as it is.

        There are enough anti-science, jam God (and they mean the Fundamentalist Christian God) hacks on Texas’ Boards of Ed already.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    His point is that the Supreme Court ended segregation and the Feds enforced that without a special department to do it.

    • J__o__h__n

      Eisenhower had to send in federal troops to end it. 

  • sickofthechit

    I think that Gov. Johnson is wanting to leapfrog reality with his candidacy.  He brings up the still present (in my mind) horrors of the 2000 election in Florida when votes that could have given the victory to Gore were instead wasted on Nader.  Twelve years later we are still paying a to heavy price for a third party candidates shortsightedness and quite frankly, selfishness.

    Until we enact proportional allotment of Electoral College Electors, or abolish it altogether, a third party can only yield bad results.  Why not work to amend the Constitution so that all elections are two person runoffs if no one gets 50%+1 vote.  Many other democracies use this technique and it opens up the elections to many more candidates.  I personally like the idea of purple thumbs for all voters as well.
    Charles A. Bowsher

  • Yar

    No Gary, that is not quite true, blue states are sending money to red states. Like New Mexico, and my state of Kentucky.  To them it may be worth it to keep the residents there.  Didn’t a lot of poor migrate from New Mexico to California since the recession.  Good business model, poor model of government. 

    • http://twitter.com/ViragoDP DebP

      Californians migrate to NM because of lower COL. Probably why NM now has many film studios. I lived there when he was gov and NM did well during those years.

  • Government_Banking_Serf

    Tom could you ask GJ to address the role of the Fed and Monetary Policy in setting the stage for the financial collapse.

    What fueled and made possible all the shenanigans by Wall St?
    1. Repeal of Glass Steagal
    2. Debt-based Monetary policy.

    Follow the funny money.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       I wonder what Mr. Johnson thinks of Glass-Steagall.

      I suspect he is against it but also against the bailouts.

      • Government_Banking_Serf

        I tend to want to get back to Glass Steagall, but it is true, and people don’t seem to discuss it much, that removing the possibility of too big to fail, and of Bailouts, would VASTLY change the behavior of market players, especially with a bit more teeth in the punishments for reckless and damaging white collar crime and behaviors.

        Alan Greenspan’s anti-libertarian monetary policy fueled the beast, and the Bailouts ensured its survival.

  • ThisIsNotBritannica

    It’s a little depressing that Gov. Johnson is facing resistance in his attempt to recapture some of the freedoms stolen from us by a tiny cartel of Central Bankers in 1913 (Fed Res Act.) and 1916 (Income Tax), who have gone on to impoverish and oppress us all.

    This knee-jerk resistance to a racapturing of personal liberties makes no sense in a nation of supposedly free people.

    A vote for Obama or Romney endorses this impoverishment and oppression.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      Par for the course around here. The ultimate “voting against your interests” irony.

  • Government_Banking_Serf

    This board loves Crony Capitalism!

    • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

       Not all of us.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       No to Solyndra.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       The poor spend every cent they make. The rich spend as much or little as they like. If you slap a 25% tax on their next multimillion dollar yacht, they just don’t buy it.

      And what do you bet that consumption tax won’t apply to purchases of stock? Just as with the income tax, the consumption tax law would go from one line to thousands of pages of loopholes, etc to mollify one group or another but you can guarantee that group won’t be the poor.

      • Steve__T

         ” If you slap a 25% tax on their next multimillion dollar yacht, they just don’t buy it.”

        No they will lease it, and right it off as a business expense.

    • nj_v2

      Way to go, Leather Dave. Just keep making sweeping over-generalizations. Don’t forget the catchwords. Seems to make you feel more secure. Whatever works for you.

      • Government_Banking_Serf

        thanks nj, feel free to prove otherwise instead of complaining.

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    Consumption tax replacing income tax – nail the poor as hard as you can.

    Nice plan.

  • bacterial_sizzle

    It scares the hell out of me that 4% of Americans would rather have corporations rule their lives than democratically elected officials. Soon, we’re all going to be buying canned air. I’m surprised we’re still “entitled” to free oxygen, actually…

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      The scary thing is your lack of understanding of libertarianism and GJ or RPs positions.

      Your 2-party status quo has delivered us to corporate america on a silver platter.

      The thing Crony Capitalism and Finance Vampires fear most are Honest Competition and Sound money.

      Both of those qualities have been absent for a lonnnng time.

      • Eric Herot

         Does anti-trust regulation count as “crony capitalism?” or are libertarians in favor of that?

        • Government_Banking_Serf

          I favor a Rule of Law framework, transparent, enforced, predictable, not favoring one group over another, that encourages competition, discourages monopoly/oligopoly, punishes fraud, collusion and corruption.

          A blind, rule of law, followed by all. Not a Discretionary Hodge Podge that elites and corrupt lawmaker and law enforcement officials use to maintain the power elite status quo.

          • Eric Herot

             Well yeah I like puppies, brownies, and sex, too, but the question is not “what” but “how.”

          • Government_Banking_Serf

            Bill Black, Glenn Greenwald, Ron Paul. Ralph Nader.

            Blender,

            Vote,

            Voila!

    • Steve__T

       
      carbon Tax will tale care of the entitlement.

  • Don_B1

    You are right: The “Tragedy of the Commons” can be avoided if the education of the community leads to effective regulation to provide consequences to those who choose to violate them.

    One of Reagan’s sayings that is true was “Trust but verify.”

  • Eric Herot

    Isn’t most of Europe proving right now that “solving” debt problems through austerity and budget cuts instead of growth really just results in even more poverty and austerity?

    I think it’s telling that he doesn’t talk about growth as a way to balance the budget.  Clinton did it, and I think we can easily do it again, but gov’t spending cuts are pretty widely proven to be not the way.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      So next time you are 50,000 in debt, just take out another credit card.

      What is the magic quality of American taxpayers that makes you think astronomical levels of debt will ever be able to be paid back?

      Why do you think there are no consequences to this?

      • Eric Herot

        The main reason that borrowing money against a credit card is a bad idea is that it is a ripoff.  Also, the government is not very similar to a household that’s on a fixed paycheck but is simply buying too many pieces of consumer electronics.

        A more accurate example would be a business whose revenues are falling because a competitor has introduced a superior product.  The “cut the deficit” approach would say that the business should fire employees and shut down manufacturing until expenses no longer exceed revenues.  This seems to work at first, except the underlying problem (the inferior product) still exists, so next year revenues will fall even further, and you’ll have to repeat the process, and so on, and so on, until eventually you go out of business.

        This model is kind of suicidal (not to mention depressing) so what many businesses decide to do instead is to borrow money (sometimes against credit cards, if no one else will lend to them) to build a better product that, if it sells well, actually pays off not only the debt incurred to build it, but all previous debts as well.

        In the case of the government, you’re right that it’s crazy to believe we can borrow money forever to pay the basic operating expenses (debt interest, healthcare, social security, etc.), but it does make sense to borrow to pay for things that have a direct return on investment, like renewable energy grants, infrastructure projects and college education (read: stimulus).

        Actually if you don’t pay for a stimulus by borrowing, you basically defeat the purpose because you are taking away from the economy in one place while you add in another.  It’s basic economics.  Those libertarians who CAN do math tend to ignore this because they have ulterior motives (read: special interests), but it’s not rocket science.

        • Government_Banking_Serf

          Why should we think that the government will be better at Investing in new fields/products than Private individuals/business?  Private businesses/individuals should take the credit/borrowing risk/rewards, not the Federal Government which is too bureaucratic and corruptly linked to special interests to do so, picking winners and losers (political contributors).

          So the arguments for reducing Corporate or Business Tax rates, to give them more incentive to Invest is not so radical after all, unless you want the Government to run the economy.

          • Eric Herot

            The problem with this as the *only* model is that no business can plunk down a hundred billion dollars with the promise of a ten, twenty, or fifty year payoff.  Businesses just can’t operate with that kind of timeline.  Their investors will not lend them the money to do it (or if they do, it will be at interest rates that cancel out any added “efficiency”).

            Also, in a recession caused by a lending crisis like this one, businesses typically just don’t have access to the capital to do things like this.  No bank is going to lend a business a hundred billion dollars to build a railroad or a bridge (unless of course that loan is backed by the government).  There’s a reason so few major infrastructure projects are built by completely (or even mostly) private investment.

          • Government_Banking_Serf

            I guess we’ll just have to wait for things to organically come back and sustainable, not subsidized, demand to reform. The idea of Government working at a Grand scale of “investment” with our tax dollars, with its record, is not exactly a comforting thought. ESPECIALLY if you are talking high-risk new technology dreams. Roads and Bridges are one thing. I’ll leave Macs and Search engines to Apple and Google. (No Al Gore excuses please).

            Just because it may take a while to recover from our collective folly, doesn’t mean there is a short term magical fix by an omniscient Government.

            Let the people bring us back. Keep the politicians and Fed backed Wall St vampires out of it.

            We can do supply and demand just fine with out all the financial voodoo and debt charades.

          • Eric Herot

            No one is suggesting that the government should get into the venture capital business.  The government should invest this borrowed money in the things that it is good at investing in, like public schools (including colleges and universities), basic research, and infrastructure building. These are things we need anyway, but we get them at a great price during a recession because there are a lot of people looking for work (particularly in the construction sector), so costs are low, and the treasury market is basically begging the US government to borrow money (i.e. very low interest rates on the money we do borrow).

            All of these things will make it a lot more likely that the next *private sector* technology boom, (and possibly a renewable energy boom) actually happens, and that it happens here instead of someone else’s country.

    • Steve__T

       The thing is they want to cut the wrong things. If they got rid of homeland unsecurity we would save billions. but they want to get rid of education so in the future they wont have to worry about people with discernible thinking and logical reasoning.

      • Eric Herot

         This is why I’m so skeptical of Libertarianism as the solution to all of our government problems.  They operate in this fantasy land that if only we just could force a 50 percent spending cut, we’d get rid of all the “waste” and leave only the good stuff.  But if the governments of many poor countries are any indication, the waste, fraud, and abuse are always the LAST to go.

        Just think about it: If you have a corrupt politician and you suddenly tell him he can only spend half as much, do you really think he’s going to cut the program that he’s receiving the bribe for FIRST?  I doubt it.

      • http://twitter.com/ViragoDP DebP

        Gary Johnson does want to get rid of Homeland Security, TSA, do away with Patriot Act and NDAA.

  • MaxBTV

    Even if he was elected president, what are the chances any one of these propositions would go through congress? Slim to none if you ask me.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Matthew-Schutter/100001090122833 Matthew Schutter

      If Gary Johnson would get elected it would cause such a political earthquake.  The house is alway campaigning because their term is 2 yr.  The senate would be harder to get things through but the ones that are up for re-election would vote his way.  

      The only thing congress is woried about is to get elected and if America would put a third party as President congress would go so fast to the President’s tune that you wouldn’t know what hit you.   They want Republicans and Democrats in Congress NOT third parties! So if that means paroting Libertarianism, to keep their jobs, so be it!

      In November, give the middle finger to the R&Ds, vote straight Libertarian!

      Live Free,
      Matt Schutter 

  • Government_Banking_Serf

    Great Blindside Tom! R. Paul.

    Note R. Paul said no, and you don’t follow the nuance of how R. Paul holistically addresses the problem, and go instead for the easy demonization.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=14901646 Aaron McKeon

    There are many who say a vote for Gary Johnson is a vote for Obama, and some who suggest a vote for Gary is a vote for Romney.  Then there are those who suggest voting for Obama or Romney won’t produce any real difference and that the two parties are more alike than they are different.  Can you explain the actual PRACTICAL differences between the Democrats, Republicans, and Libertarians?

    • http://twitter.com/ViragoDP DebP

      Here is a comparison of the three right now.  Hope it helps some

  • Don_B1

    You are right: The “Tragedy of the Commons” can be avoided if the education of the community leads to effective regulation to provide consequences to those who choose to violate them.

    One of Reagan’s sayings that is true was “Trust but verify.”

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    “There’s the big thing about immigrants not paying taxes…” per Johnson.

    Plenty of immigrants pay taxes and don’t get services. A fake SSN means real money into SocSec. All the things I can apply for with my long-form, raised seal birth certificate, many immigrants cannot without fear of being rounded up.

    Why does a libertarian seem so dedicated to right-wing framing?

  • frustratedinVT

    How do you believe you could actually be successful making any changes with the constant bickering in the house and senate? That is where the real change needs to happen for; excerise term limits!
     

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y6CO5C2HE4WM2OYGCDVWGPRXXM oldman

    How is pushing everything from one level of government to another changing anything?

  • Government_Banking_Serf

    Can GJ please talk about the issue of Sound Money, Malinvestment and how it relates to our current problems?

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Our War on Drugs is one of the major causes of violence and crowded prisons.  We’ve failed to stop drugs for decades, and we keep trying to use a prohibition model.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       I agree. All the “consumers” should move close to the source and become “locavores”. No more need for a “war on drugs” and it would be a lot cheaper for them.

      Their citizenship will transfer to a hardworking, law abiding person waiting their “turn” to come to the USA.

  • Mouse_2012

    Ma. has the legalization of Pot this fall coming up.

  • ccbard

    “Fair” tax of sales would be a flop.  Suddenly all consumer goods will cost 25% more.  Workers won’t get 25% raises, so demand for goods will fall.  Businesses will lay off workers and the economy will spiral down.  

    • http://twitter.com/ViragoDP DebP

      With the fair tax you wouldn’t have any withholding from your paycheck.   check out their website, they have some good FAQ  fairtax dot org

  • Mouse_2012

    BBC just reported that 70% of demand for Cocaine is from Europe and the U.S. and how many Latin American  Countries see the War on drugs as a failure.

  • Eric Herot

    Also I really want to know where he stands on anti-trust regulation.  Would he force more competition by aggressively breaking up monopolies?  They are arguably one of the biggest obstacles to innovation and cost effectiveness in many industries.

  • Scott B

    Mr Johnson forgets why we have things like the “earned income tax credit”. It brought millions out of poverty.  That money isn’t buying big screen TVs and XBosx, or trips to Vegas, as so many would have us believe. It’s fixing the very used car, replacing the appliance that went bad, food on the table, it’s a cushion we use all year long when things get lean. 

    A “fair tax” or “consumption tax” would plummet those millions of people back into poverty, and throw dirt on their grave by making them pay a tax on everything they buy, provided that can buy it at all, and that takes the economy further down the hole its in.

    • rookierick

      …except that under the FairTax model, there would be *no* tax on that used car, or on any used goods.  Who buys *new* cars every few years?  Rich people do, because they can afford it.  Tell me again how “regressive” this tax is when it allows you to DECIDE whether you want to pay it or not, but DECIDING if buying that shiny new thing is worth the extra tax or if you can make do with the used one (that the rich guy got rid of when he bought ANOTHER new thing and paid taxes on it AGAIN).    I would posit that, particularly when you factor in the “prebate,” a thrifty individual could pay nearly zero tax under that model.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

     Notice how on many questions, Greens and Libertarians agree?  Why do we keep allowing the Democans and the Republicrats to continue in their opposition to rationality?

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      Glad to see you carrying the torch Greg, it’s a tough sell around here, keep it up.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Caller, are you familiar with the origins of the Republicans?  They were once a third party.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Vote for the best of the worst?  What an idiotic proposal.

  • IsaacWalton

    Sorry Gary…the young must take care of the old. WHO do they think was taking care of running and paying for society when they were in college? I graduated with 45k in debt. I paid it off and make great money now. Along the way I paid into medicare and social security. I have no problem doing it.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    “Young folks are going to be stuck paying for the insurance covering older, more ill people” (paraphrase).

    Can someone explain to Johnson what a health insurance pool is?

    And about how young, healthy people don’t ever plan on getting cancer, or traumatic brain injury, yet it happens anyway?

    • BHA_in_Vermont

      They should have planned better, they were shortsighted, should have known that stoned driver would be running a red light at that time and been somewhere else. 

      Besides we should all be responsible for ourselves, not seeing ourselves as victims, thinking we are entitled to health care or shelter just because we are members of the human race but not born to privilege.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      Catastrophic Insurance in a Market.

      Direct payment to Primary Care Doctors.

      Break the Health Care Bubble and get back to direct Patient-Doctor business.

      Most of health care industry is a scam.

      Thank George McGovern for our Low-fat, High Carb, High Disease, High cost medical care situation.  Good old do-gooder government planners.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Tom Ashbrook, you’re accepting the con job.  This is how the two major party corruptions continue in office–by inspiring fear that a vote for something better is a waste.

  • David Gillman

    The little boy didn’t cause the emperor to have no clothes, and mark-to-market didn’t cause the crash. It uncovered it.  

    Find a libertarian for your show who isn’t a plain ignoramus, because I’d really like to know what the movement stands for, if anything.

  • cuppajoe56

    Alot of people seem to be forgetting that the president only serves one role. He would still have a congress made up of many opinions. People should not vote out of fear or worry. The president should represent the best of the American people. Gary Johnson offers a presidency that would be that. I think he offers a vision of the best America, that runs efficently, that is a good neighbor, respects privacy, and works together under equal rules for everybody. Its common sense that we shouldnt be afraid of endorsing even if a congress would never let it happen.

  • J__o__h__n

    When is On Point having the Prohibition party candidate on?

  • Human898

    I would like to share examples of true “free market” in several areas as Mr. Johnson appears to have expressed grave naivety about human nature, why and how most laws come to exist. It ain’t because everyone acts like angels when no one’s looking and they are left to do as they like.

    I don’t know anyone who particularly LIKES one more regulation or law, but when people do not respect others, the greater number of people (society) asks for a prohibition against things like con artistry, thievery and those with a general disrespect of people for one another and society. Mr. Johnson seems to lack a certain ability to think about how we came to have a financial collapse. It wasn’t because people were behaving responsibly on their own.

    Study of history has shown we have been there and done that with respect to much of what Mr. Johnson seems to be advocating for and we’re here now because we’ve been there and done that and people didn’t behave like responsible and good angels to one another, but the opposite in a lot of cases. Society has come up with a means to regulate people walking all over one another and to peacefully settle disputes, the intrusions of one persons “freedoms” upon another and by a third and as impartial party as might be reasonably possible, when people in conflict will not solve their conflicts by themselves.

    There is always room for improvement, there is always fat that can be cut, there is always need for review and revision and the cleaning out of archaic laws, revamping of existing laws still needed, adding or deleting laws as change requires, but I have yet to see how the expressed Libertarian formulas will work, except in some fantasy land of wishful thinking, like maybe the merry ole land of OZ.

    There are places where a momentum of public interest has developed a population of people who have come to see and appreciate the benefits of not only working together, but respecting one another and respecting the importance trust has in their society and the only means trust can be maintained, but that is an evolution that comes voluntarily and NOT with people being free to run roughshod over one another with the idea that losing is simply the loser’s fault, not because some injustice may have been involved.

    Civilized societies come from a society’s commitment to people being civil to one another. That means there has to be some means of condemning and discouraging uncivil behavior. People can magically and voluntarily suddenly become angels or they, through negotiation, can agree to and establish definitions for civility so they can determine when someone is NOT being civil and provide some consequence for not being so. Civility requires that people be civil to one another in order for it to work. History shows us the human struggle with that. Civility also does not mix well with certain types of ambition, one of them being greed. Greed is not referred to as a human virtue, but the opposite in religion and culture. It is not a human virtue because of all that it breeds with regard to corruption and harm to society because of that corruption. Corruption does not fit into any civil society. There is no honor amongst thieves and thievery is perhaps the highest or lowest (depending upon how one looks at it) form of capitalism and/or socialism with the thought that anything at its extreme polar end would appear to be about greed and benefit of the few as opposed to the whole (individuals and society).

    I often think about what I would do if I were king of the world. But then each person on earth perhaps has their own idea of what the world would be like if they were king or queen of it. Reality says we all need to figure out a way to compromise between our inner desires and everyone else’s inner desires. It’s a constant struggle, but the struggle to find compromise is perhaps better than the struggle to find freedom from people who want the world to be only as they see it or the struggle to live in a world where only might, makes right.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      You need to keep fighting against the “free market” and for a free market.

      • Human898

        I’m for a responsible and corrupt free market.   Unfortunately that is delusional and living in denial of reality.   Not that it cannot happen, but based on the history of humanity markets have been a lot more “free”.   The problem is, with no one saying no, you can’t cheat, lie, pickpocket, steal and otherwise commit crimes, people would commit crimes that society wanted to stop. 

        Now

        Thieves, con artists and all manner of corrupt people would love nothing more than to see fewer laws and regulations or see the repeal of laws that say they can’t practice their “trade”.

        • Government_Banking_Serf

           I never argue here against rules punishing cheating, lying, stealing, collusion, corruption etc. I argue for transparent, predictable, Rule of Law for all, within which markets should operate freely.

          That is vastly different than agreeing that we should have a large, activist government run by technocrats who ‘manage’ our lives and economy for desired ends, for “our own good”.

          Punishment for breaking unbiased ground rules is a far cry from having the Government determine what ends are best for us and forcing us to comply.  

          We the people can use OUR government and Constitution to check abuse of power, and “game-rigging”. Beyond that, and National defense (not offense), we get into treacherous waters.

          • Human898

            If you’ve read the Preamble of the Constitution of the United States, along with a common defense, the representative (of “the people”) government is charged with doing that which would “promote the general welfare”. 

            I would say amongst other things, acting as referee as well as saying NO to dishonest, unethical, inconsiderate, uncivil people and people whose freedom is dangerous to the larger segment of “the people” is promoting the general welfare.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      The anti-libertarian Monetary policies of Alan Greenspan, the repeal of Glass Steagal fundamental Rule of Law by Clinton, and the over-reaching Government actions of Fannie/Freddie, and finally the Bailouts of Too Big too Fail, that the too big crony crooks knew were coming, caused the collapse.

      • Human898

        With all due respect, please try to make some reasonable sense.  Mr. Greenspan is sometimes referred to as a cronyist’s libertarian.  All your arguments appear to contradict themselves.   You want more “free markets”, but want to keep people like Alan Greenspan and his cronies from participating.  How can you suggest everyone be free to do as they like at the same time you’re railing against people who appear to do as they like or a society that, through it’s democratic representative mechanics WANTS some means of recourse and regulation against people who are irresponsible with other people’s money and economy?  You want everyone to be free to do what they want, BUT for those you think should not be able to, yet you seem to believe you’re on to something new and different than what everyone else wants, which is to be free to do as they like and block anyone who might get in their way from getting in their way.  

        Why are so few talking about what basically makes the world functional on a daily basis, COMPROMISE!   We all give up something to get something, we all respect one another and work out our differences in what constitutes our “freedom” peacefully and move on down the road, with a lot of most of what we wanted, but having had to trade some of what we wanted to get it, agreeing to the trade we asked others to make in the process.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Fair tax is interesting until you dig into the details.

    It would wreak havoc with the housing industry.  Next time you want to sell your house see how that works out for you with that 23% tax.

    • Ray in VT

      I’ve always wondered if it would apply to absolutely everything, and housing did occur to me.  It blew my mind years ago that some states tax groceries, which would seem to have a highly negative impact on the poorest people.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Yup.  OK,TN and SD tax groceries at 5.5%.  WV is at 5%.

        • Ray in VT

          I also saw AL and MS

          http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=1230

          That just seems unconscionable to me.  I can see taxes on soda or chips or something like that, but bread, milk, fruits and vegetables?  I also like how Vermont doesn’t tax clothing, unless it is an item over $250 (or something).  Taxing basic clothing items also just seems wrong.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Sounds like VT is similar to MA.  We have a ‘luxury’ tax on expensive clothing items above a certain threshold too.

            Notice how Nike keeps their kicks below $250 a pop. :)

          • Ray in VT

            I just can’t believe how much people are willing to pay for things, like shoes, based upon the logo.  I used to be a runner, and I tried some of the expensive shoes, and the $120 worked just the same as the $50 shoes as far as I could tell.  I try not to pay more than $40 for a pair of sneakers as a rule.  I was very heartened recently to see that a lot of New Balance shoes have “Made in America” sticker on the boxes.  They were priced at $50.  I might very well up my price in this instance to support those jobs.  I thought that pretty much all shoe production had move to Southeast Asia.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             I’m a New Balance guy .  The factory outlet is close by, in the old mill town -Lawrence. I shop there occasionally.

          • Ray in VT

            That’s cool.  I don’t favor any particular brand.  I just want a good quality shoe.  I wear running or cross-trainers all the time for the support.  Years of running and working on hard surfaces have wrought havoc on my legs, so I need good shoes.  I feel that I’m too young to have balky knees and legs, but my body has taken a real beating over the years, so that’s what I’ve got.

      • Mike_Card

        CO is 5.5%.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

       So this Fair tax would apply to the re-sale of items? thats crazy. I thought I liked it but not if they want the 23% from things like garage sales.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         I’m not an expert on fair tax but I did read the Neil Boortz book on it years ago.

        I believe the resale is not taxed but a new home would be taxed at the full 23%.  This creates a market distortion that hurts the new home industry.  Right?

        Maybe an expert can chime in.

        • http://www.facebook.com/joshua.s.mccullough Josh McCullough

          What you said about resale items not being taxed is true.

    • http://twitter.com/ViragoDP DebP

      What is taxed?
      The FairTax is a single-rate, federal retail sales tax collected only once, at the final point of purchase of new goods and services for personal consumption. Used items are not taxed. Business-to-business purchases for the production of goods and services are not taxed. A prebate makes the effective rate )fairtax dot org). Alot of FAQ there.

  • Government_Banking_Serf

    I trust GJ and his supporters more than I trust Larry Summers and his.

    The sad difference is  GJ et al. would have the power of individuals, while L. Summers gets the full force of the unaccountable Federal Reserve, corrupted Washington, and Wall St. Cronies.

    Not a fair fight.  No wonder the technocratic, trust in Big Brother Social Engineers who keep running us into the ground always win.

  • nj_v2

    Wow! “I’m not sure how education and segregation tie together”?

    Holy cow!

    As usual, many dreamy Libertarian “solutions” are blind to reality and history.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Come on.  It was the education department and segregation.  Please be fair.

      It is reasonable to ask the value add of the dept. of education since 1979.

  • TinaWrites

    When my brother had his spinal cord injury, we were told that YOUNG PEOPLE are disproportionately those involved in catastrophic accidents.  They may not be as ill as older people, but they are more likely to suffer major injuries like sci, head trauma, etc.  Many people now survive these major injuries, so the cost over time is extremely high.  My brother was able to live an astounding 15 years with high cervical spine quadriplegia injury.  He reached his lifetime limit on his insurance plan about 7 years into that.  Mercifully, he worked for a major corporation with a major public face, and they found a way to keep him in something like an insurance plan that would cover his round-the-clock nursing care, etc., etc.  The “etc.’s” were expensive enough!  (He worked 5 days a week when he wasn’t ill.)

    The hospital also told us that many young people turned down health insurance, thinking they were too young for it to be necessary.  My brother had just turned down Long-Term Care insurance for the same reason.  He regretted that decision.  

    This was quite a while ago, but the argument that young people will be carrying the expenses of Obamacare is NOT a clear picture.  You never know when you might become ill with a major illness.  You never know when another person’s drunk driving can impact your health while the driver gets up and walks away.  Please stop waving Shiny Things called Truncated Arguments in front of young people.  The nurses, doctors, social workers who work with people of all ages when they have diseases or accidents know that we all need to be covered!    

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      (Tina, aren’t you a cancer survivor, or am I thinking of someone else in this space?)

      • TinaWrites

        Yes, thank you for remembering!  My brother had his accident and six months later my Dad’s Alzheimer’s reared its tragic head.  My mom had long suffered from the pain of rheumatoid arthritis, so I was The Healthy One until another six years passed and I was diagnosed with Stage I breast cancer.  I barely told my parents about it because I didn’t want them to carry even more and it seemed like I was very fortunate to have my cancer caught so early.  My Dad’s disease got profoundly worse, and we couldn’t have him stay at home anymore, but we couldn’t find a place to take him because HE ALREADY HAD THE DIAGNOSIS!  It took several years to find a place for him.  Eventually, my Dad, then my Mom, then my brother passed away.  Then, two years after my brother’s death, I found out that my cancer had come back, Stage 4, with metastases to my bones.  I’m one of those people in this new group who are fortunate enough to have many medications to help fight the cancer, almost as if it were a chronic disease.  Some meds have been mild, some not fun at all.  I haven’t always looked or felt like a cancer patient, but these past few months, I do feel that way, in part because of some cumulative side effects that will not go away just because I’ve stopped that particular chemo.  All the treatments work for awhile, then they stop, and its time for a new one.  That is the fortunate part:  there have always been new ones.  Sadly, I understand that our NIH is not funding Basic Scientific Research to the degree that they did previously.  Apparently, this is where a lot of the best ideas begin, then taken over by private enterprise.  This new situation must change.  

        I write here quite a bit about the expense of these diseases and accidents.  Maybe Mitt Romney could pay for all the health insurance it takes, but most normal people need really good, CONSISTENT health insurance coverage.  No amount of belief in Personal Initiative can PAY for these extraordinary expenses.  Yes, we must all individually do our best to secure ourselves our health insurance, but the companies and corporations are making this very difficult when they jettison health insurance as a benefit.  The entire country coming together as one big Buying Unit makes sense to me.  There are CHILDREN who are born with major diseases and conditions: they need to be covered and their parents alone cannot afford it.  For years, my whole family was healthy, then the first change occurred until I eventually thought I was The Healthy One in my family.  Then that changed.  We all need health insurance from pre-natalhood to death.  Yes, I do believe it should be considered an “entitlement” even though I fully agree to pay for it:  my share and a contribution towards those who cannot possibly contribute to their own insurance.  That last expense really won’t be much when spread out over the entire nation, especially when we get Our Jobs Back.
        Thank you so much for remembering!  I hope you stay happy and healthy!

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

          Cancer, a parent’s Alzheimer’s, and your sibling’s spinal cord injury?

          Be of good cheer. And any time you want to post about healthcare in regards to the real world, I will listen.

          My mom passed away some years ago; she had a stroke, and was gone four days later. Minimal suffering, minimal hospitalization, good insurance (likely better than mine now), no added burden on top of the loss of an immediate family member. So my personal experiences are not really poster-board material.

          (Of course if some jagoff hits me with their three-ton SUV tomorrow, that may change.)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

    Likes: His stance on Tax Code, Gay rights, Abortion, Drug war, Military, Foreign Affairs.

    But

    Dislikes: Did he say no funding for NPR on NPR? also Environment and Green Tech is Very important!! and his last quote “leave me to my life and I will live it to the benefit of others around me.”??

    I say no to that notion because I am human and I know human nature We are Self Serving and Greedy and if you say otherwise then you are lying. We seek power and are always looking to get an advantage over each other. If you truely believe that statment Gary Johnson then ask yourself this question. “Why do I have a lock on my House and Car?”

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      There is something “blank slatey” about how he would just consider all the money pumping into (say) extractive energy as “lost”, but lines up immediately with the right wing about not subsidizing “new, controversial things”.

      I see him getting cheered by saying some discredited right-wing canards about Solyndra, the tar sands pipeline, and such. But when it comes to getting rid of the taken-for-granted subsidies to oil and coal, will he really turn around on these audiences and risk getting booed?

      I think not.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

        I think that if the Libertarians and Green Party could come together and take the best parts from each platform they could actually pose a real third party canidate.

        Listen up both parties “Environmental protection and free markets are NOT mutual exclusive.”

        Cap and trade (Done right) would create a market place and a vehicle to reduce pollution.

        • Government_Banking_Serf

          Just stop. You are hurting people’s brains.

    • http://twitter.com/ViragoDP DebP

      In previous discussions he has stated that he holds that “leave me to my life” up to the point that you do others harm.  He specifically stated that it was governments responsibility to make sure the people are not harmed by the actions of corporations, and that would include any environmental polution, etc.  He did an AMA on reddit last week and I think that was a question.  He will do another later I heard.  Also, there is an online town hall tonight at 7pm eastern.  Go to his website and you can watch from there. 

  • Taylor Hutchison

    Does anyone know Mr. Johnson’s stance on Evolution? I wish Tom hadn’t pressed the Segregation issue and focused more on Science as the question was asked.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      Given his statement on education, I’m gonna guess the response is “free market” and “state, not federal, control”.

      So when a Texan or a Kansan (and more, as they are added) gets a HS diploma there’ll be an asterisk on it. There’d be some fun having to take summer courses before going to a real university to study science.

      • Edward_California

        Yes: the wonders of “50 laboratories of experimentation” in the hands of Texas, Kansas, etc.

        • notafeminista

          Because the Left hates it when people think for themselves. 

    • http://twitter.com/ViragoDP DebP

      Have you taken the isidewith quiz?  That is one of the questions on there.  It will match you to who best aligns with you.  It is a pretty cool quiz, give it a try!  I know his answer is on there.  There is a spot where you can view the candidate questionaire and answers, look for that.

  • Elizabeth_BO

    It appears that Mr. Johnson is a conservative politician.  What bothers me is that he, along with other conservatives, wants to cut entitlement programs to the actual taxpayers instead of  cutting military spending.  It’s  hard to believe that many American people support this kind of political philosophy and do not understand how much it undermines their own social stability. 
    It shows that education in America is not up to par bcs people are not educated about their own history, political history and simply do not know definitions of philosophical and political movements. 
    For now “we the people” expression means “mob” that is ready to attack, devour anything, anybody in the name of some hazy ideology and willing to pay for it with their lives and standard of living.   

    • http://twitter.com/ViragoDP DebP

      He’s proposing a 43% cut in military spending, which takes us to 2003 levels.  Most other areas he is talking reform, but quite honestly, the state the country is in, anyone is going to have to cut just about everywhere to get us back on track.  It is either that or lose it all.  The only difference is that he is being upfront about it and the other two are blowing smoke up peoples’ butts telling them what they want to hear.  When they get in office though, it will be a different story and we’ll end up with the same cuts, only larger probably, because they want to increase military spending, that has to be offset somewhere and it won’t be to their rich backers.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    If the Federal government will give us personal Federal Loans up to $10,000 and with an interest of 5% and a monthly payment of $100 or more. i think a lot of Americans will be happy.

  • Joseph_Wisconsin

     The Libertarian Party candidate for president would be an interesting topic for discussion, as well as important to the actual election if that candidate was Ron Paul.  Gary Johnson not so much.

    • http://www.facebook.com/joshua.s.mccullough Josh McCullough

      Weird since they agree on most issues and are pushing the same message: freedom. It’s not about the name, but the message.

  • Edward_California

    What a credit to your show, Mr. Ashbrook, that it opens its forum even to bombastic, moronic noisemakers like Mr. Johnson. A fountain of inconsistent, irresponsible smut issues forth from Mr. Johnson, desperate to gain traction, if only among the reactive or uninformed that don’t bother to check his premises, his numbers, or the consequences of his proposals. A credit to your wonderful forum, Mr. Ashbrook.

    • http://www.facebook.com/joshua.s.mccullough Josh McCullough

      Wow. Ignorance is bliss, huh?

  • reuterrat

    Many people are way off base on Gary Johnson in the comments section.

    Let me start with the Fair Tax.  First off, the Fair Tax comes with a monthly pre-bate to each home.  The pre-bate will cover all taxes up to the poverty line, so the poor will see hardly any taxes on them at all.  Also, poor people can then actually save additional money by buying used, since the secondary market is not taxed.  Finally, if you straight up replace the Fair Tax with the Income Tax/Corporate Tax, you will see taxes on the corporate side of production disappear.  So prices will naturally drop since it costs less for a company to operate.  Also, companies know that they aren’t going to be able to sell as much at a 23% markup, so once again, there will be lots of incentive to lower costs.  And finally, with tax breaks, subsidies, and loopholes out of the picture for corporations, corporations lose the ability to gain favor through lobbying the federal government.  This is the simplest method for defeating crony capitalism, simply remove the source of the power that corporations lobby for.  It will force corporations to focus on competition rather than throwing money at political agendas to gain unfair advantages.

    Secondly, Gary Johnson does not want to cut Social Security.  If you read his interviews on the subject, his goal is to cut everything from defense spending (43% of it) to medicare in order to save Social Security for future generations.  He does not even mention privatizing Social Security, just reforming it a bit so that it can continue to provide for future generations.  His argument as to cutting defense spending is that a 43% reduction still leaves us at 2003 level of defense spending, and for cutting medicare/medicaid is that if you don’t cut back somewhere you may end up with no medicare or no medicaid at all.

    Finally, the reason why Gary wants to move power back to the states is simple.  State governments are easier to influence for the average individual.  A federal corporate lobbyist has the ability to overshadow the voices of thousands of individuals.  At the state level this is not as big of an issue.  The states are supposed to be “50 laboratories for innovation”.  They are supposed to be able to try weird, and sometimes radical, practices to see if they work so that other states can either emulate them or not.  We all have seen how hard it is to change things at the federal level.  Why do we want to continue to give them the power to experiment for all of us?

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Please explain the effect on the housing industry where existing homes have a 23% advantage over new homes.

      Also, what about retirees who have been paying  income taxes their entire lives and have built up a nest egg.  Now they are using that nest egg in retirement and are hammered with a consumption tax and the rules have changed post facto. Sounds like double taxation.

      The transition is always the difficulty with systemic changes.

      • reuterrat

        Well retirees who have money in savings are probably accruing interest.  With the removal of IRS and capital gains taxes, they will actually earn more with the money they have saved.  Couple that with Johnson’s argument that the Fair Tax ends up being cost neutral (look up his arguments on this) due to the removal of taxes on the corporate/production side of thing and costs of products will not go up.  Plus retirees will still get the monthly pre-bate, just as every other family will, so the tax on basic goods and groceries is covered.

        The housing market is the toughest issue to solve.  I think what you will see is a rise in the value of current homes, due to the rise in cost of new homes.  There may need to be a workaround in place for this and it would require a bit more study I think, but this is one of the real legitimate concerns that I would like to see addressed.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          Thanks for the response.

          I was actually thinking more of the lower middle class retirees that rely on SS + maybe a reverse mortgage.  So effectively they are living off their savings.

          But speaking of the wealthy, what is to prevent the rich from consuming more foreign goods to avoid the sales tax?  We already have John Kerry buying his $17M yacht from a New Zealand shipyard.

          I’ll have to do some research on the ‘cost neutral’ claim.  It will help seniors with 401Ks but not those with Roth IRAs.  I also forgot it replaces the payroll tax.  Sounds a bit like fuzzy math. :)

          • reuterrat

            Yeah the transition will be messy.  I would imagine for people who paid tax dollars on investments you may be able to do a reimbursement of some sort though no idea as to what the costs would look like.

            As for the loopholes on foreign goods, that may be an issue, but I think its a matter of faith that since people will be making more on the income side that they won’t necessarily worry about the tax on the spending side.  I know in Texas we have an 8.25% sales tax on all goods instead of an income tax and it doesn’t seem to cause an issue with people buying from out of state or elsewhere.

            Obviously protecting the middle class is the biggest concern with this  sort of move. In the event of this sort of transition, perhaps current retirees falling into the range of $40k to $100k (or some similar range) income class could apply for a pre-bate buffer program to increase the size of their prebate so they avoid double taxation.  As time moves on, this program would dissolve as it would not be necessary to retirees who did not pay income taxes for most of their lives.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      Too much sanity, not enough demonization for that nice post to fly around here.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Take on my questions if you have answers..  I am sympathetic to the economic efficiencies of a consumption tax IF the income tax is abolished.

        • J__o__h__n

          He never replies with answers.  More likely you will be called a sheep of the two party system who doesn’t value liberty and the rule of law because you are ignorant as you haven’t read the right books.  You can’t argue with a cult member. 

          • Government_Banking_Serf

            What’s the name of your cult again? This cult stuff is such a cop out. You’ve never demonstrated an understanding of the points I’ve made, followed by a rebuttal. Instead, like many, you ignore the details, and go on to argue against your own prejudiced presumptions about “liberty” “rule of law”, libertarians, Ron Paul, etc etc, thoroughly satisfying yourself, but not advancing the discourse.

            I value your background, but don’t know whether you have read and contemplated all the books and ideas, or whether you have, as we so often do, read mostly things that interest and follow your existing world view.

            That’s why I’m always asking for a demonstration that you “get” the points I am making, can show the logic, but disagree for A, B, C……

            To spout off that all the things I’ve said ( I may explain poorly) or all the links, essays etc etc, are ALL illogical cultish nonsense, is, nonsense. They all have a rational, empirical, historically-based context, that makes “sense” to plenty of open-minded people.

            Just because the ideas tend to lead to a deep questioning of the two-party/Monetary/Crony Capitalistic dogmatic paths we have followed so long, does not make them a “cult”.

            But of course that is a very politically expedient defense for the status quo, and it’s nice you do their dirty work for them.

        • Government_Banking_Serf

          were you asking me WFC? I didn’t see what question you were asking me and thinking it was directed to above posters….

    • JohnGraff

      Moving power back to the states doesn’t really solve the problem of corruption (as anyone familiar with state and local politics can attest).
      http://www.stateintegrity.org/state_integrity_invesitgation_overview_story

      In fact it might just make matters worse. Special interests could target particular states for example lobbying for less stringent environmental or occupational health and safety standards. Other states might be forced to lower their standards to compete for business in a race to the bottom. Just look at the efforts of groups like ALEC. http://www.care2.com/causes/meet-alec-the-group-taking-over-your-state-legislatures.html

      Issues of national concern (like pollution) which cross state borders must be addressed at the federal level.

      Since the outrageous Citizens United ruling, corporate money has been pouring into all levels of government. Unfortunately, many states simply lack the proper methods and resources to catch and expose corruption.

      Johnson is in favor of “full disclosure” which is a step in the right direction. But what we really need is dramatic campaign finance and lobby reform including, if necessary a constitutional amendment, or a Supreme Court that recognizes corporations are not people and that money is not speech.

      • reuterrat

        Well Gary Johnson is against corporate personhood unlike both other candidates on the ballot.  You’re also jumping to extremes.  Thinking that all power should be moved to the states is obviously a mistake, but the majority should reside there.  In fact, Gary Johnson also has stated that it is important to regulate pollution for exactly the reason you state, however, that doesn’t mean that all regulation is good regulation even if the intent is in the right place.

        Don’t confuse my statement.  Moving power to the states does not solve the problem of corruption.  It just makes corruption easier to undo, since you have controls both above (federal level) and below (the voters) to help regulate and create change. The way things are set up now, we almost have to rely on the federal government to regulate itself. That just doesn’t make any sense.

        • JohnGraff

          What makes you believe that Johnson is “against corporate personhood?”

          He has indicated he might be willing to consider a constitutional amendment (which suggests that he agrees with the Supreme Court on the issue). 

          And again I don’t think moving power to the states makes corruption any easier to undo. You seem to assume there is more voter participation at the state/local level and therefore more control from below and this simply isn’t the case. For the reasons I pointed out above giving more power to the states and removing federal oversight (and regulation in general) as Johnson is in fact advocating will only make matters worse.

          • reuterrat

            I think you may have misheard somewhere on Johnson’s stance.  He indicated he would support a constitutional ammendment to overturn Citizens United, which would end corporate personhood.  He also believes in the Fair Tax to remove the source of the power that corporations lobby for.

            Also, I didn’t say anything about voter participation at the state level vs. federal.  My point was simply that the states have to answer to the federal government AND the voters.   Federal government only answers to the voters and moves much more slowly in response to them.

          • JohnGraff

            I’d rather see Johnson say he’d change the composition of the court (much easier than amending the Constitution). Less voter participation (which is what you have at the state/local level) means less attention and therefore greater risk for corruption. Look at ALEC. It’s much easier/cheaper to manipulate the system at the state/local level. Divide and conquer. Eliminating corporate taxes doesn’t remove the source of their power. They would still lobby hard for other benefits (deregulation, corporate welfare/bailouts, sweetheart deals, etc.) The only real solution is to remove money from politics and increase voter participation.

        • Government_Banking_Serf

          You’re making too much sense. You’re riling up the status quoits.  Hope you stick around for future topics and point of view, BTW.

    • webgiant

       “First off, the Fair Tax comes with a monthly pre-bate to each home.  The
      pre-bate will cover all taxes up to the poverty line, so the poor will
      see hardly any taxes on them at all.”

      But Gary Johnson also wants a Balanced Budget Amendment that bans deficit spending; plus the kind of corporate and financial deregulation that leads to Great Depressions/Recessions.  And therein lies the flaw.

      Cue the next Great Depression/Recession.  Most incomes drop below the poverty line, qualifying a majority of homes for the pre-bates.  The pre-bate portion of the General Fund becomes MASSIVE, causing it to eat up most of the budget.  Fair enough, so we do what *sane* governments do and run a deficit, borrowing to pay for the excess.

      Whoops, Balanced Budget Amendment, can’t borrow.  Whoops, FairTax, can’t raise taxes because that would simply increase the pre-bates.  So we have to CUT from an already tiny government budget, CUT from all the services Gary Johnson has grudgingly decided are ESSENTIAL to the running of government.

      It would be a government disaster.  And all brought to you by the insensible Gary Johnson.

      • reuterrat

        Well seeing as how you don’t have the first clue about how the Fair Tax works, despite me explaining it and then you quoting me explaining it, let me attempt to inform you one more time.

        The Fair Tax comes with a monthly pre-bate to EVERY HOUSEHOLD IN AMERICA.  That includes above the poverty line and below the poverty line.  Because the point is, NO ONE SHOULD HAVE TO PAY TAXES ON THE BASIC NECESSITIES.  So the Fair Tax starts off with the same pre-bate balance it will carry forever (percentage-wise, roughly). 

        I also would love to hear exactly what sort of “financial deregulation” Gary Johnson has plans for.  

        As to the rest of your argument, it is all far too oversimplified and lacks any basis in reality.  I mean, most of it requires major acts of Congress and very little of what you said was backed up with facts.  The typical type of venomous rhetoric that a 2 party system inevitably leads to.  Perhaps if we weren’t all so dang scared of new ideas, we might actually make some progress.

  • reuterrat

    woops

  • Edward_California

    It is a credit to your wonderful show, Mr. Ashbrook, that it is forum open even to bombastic, arm-waving characters, like Mr. Johnson. He clings to an audience either too reactive or too unwilling to check and see the overt invalidity of his proposals, his references, and his own numbers. I don’t know what’s scarier: that he spews forth this stuff manipulating a fringe for his own relevancy, or that he might actually believe this crap.
    Again, a credit to your show. Thank you.

    • http://www.facebook.com/joshua.s.mccullough Josh McCullough

      Ummm…what? Not sure how you can say such things; his policies make way more sense than O/R. He is the only hope we have at getting this country out of the hole we’re in!

      • webgiant

        Gary Johnson’s policies make more sense?  Removing the option of borrowing during a disaster?  Killing student loans?  Firing hundreds of thousands of soldiers and making them look for health care on the free market (43% cut to the military budget) during a recession?  Replacing the tax system with a regressive consumption tax?  Legalizing marijuana but keeping all other drugs illegal so he can force non-marijuana users into drug treatment programs? (I read his platforms)

        I’m sorry, but I just don’t see how anyone can see Gary Johnson as a “sensible” option in the Presidential election.  The free market hates his ideas enough not to fund his candidacy, why should we like him if the free market, the thing he praises above all other things, does not?

    • http://twitter.com/ihrtelectronica iheartelectronica

      I don’t know – he sounded pretty level headed. Why shouldn’t we talk about big ideas? Your comment implies a baby with the bathwater type approach. 43% across the board won’t work but a lot of the concepts he’s talking about aren’t just pulled out of the air – there’s substance there. You should target the individual proposals on their merits rather than trying to pull the “fringe” card.

    • webgiant

      Yes, bring on Ross Perot.  I mean, Gary Johnson.

  • Nicholas Sullivan

    I want to know what he would plan on doing with all the troops he is bringing home? The Gov also mentioned getting rid of many of the military bases across the country, what about those people? Unemployment is such a problem because of the large number of displaced local and state government employees. If the military is shedding members as well, it seems it would only add to the problem.

    • webgiant

       Yep, people always forget that cutting the military budget by 43% means firing hundreds of thousands of soldiers and cutting them off from their VA benefits as well.

      If you don’t fire them after you bring them home, then the budget isn’t really being cut.  If you don’t cut their VA benefits and throw them to the lions…err, make them find solutions in the “free market”, then the budget isn’t really being cut.

  • cg9

    Great to hear alternative presidential candidates!  Good to hear  different ideas even if some of them sound odd to me.  Can we look forward to your having Ross Anderson, who’s running for president for the Justice Party, on next?

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/XPEEX7A5NBNATTSIJXJADWU2UA yahoo-XPEEX7A5NBNATTSIJXJADWU2UA

    Like to vote him.

  • Outside_of_the_Box

    If there was ever a candidate that would stand up to special interests and reform the entire system with common sense and fairness, they would automatically get my vote. Even if they held other views I was strongly against. The reason being, when one understands the situation we are in today, one knows that no major issues are going to change without a fundamental overhaul of the system.

    • webgiant

      If you ever see such a candidate, report to the E.R. as someone has dosed your coffee with a hallucinogen.

      Presidential Elections require upwards of $1 billion in campaign funding to have any chance of winning.  As such, the system rewards candidates who do not stand up to special interests, and buries candidates who try.

      So the best you can hope for is a candidate whose campaign seems to be all about not trying to get you killed, and vote for that one.

      • Outside_of_the_Box

        Absolutely. That’s why unless the election rules are radically reversed, and other candidates allowed to run (I think 4 or 5 would be a good number) we will continue to be left with a tiny slice of the pie to fight over, while special interests laugh all the way to the bank.

  • olderworker

    I’d like to know what Mr. Johnson’s stance is on abortion. One thing I greatly disliked about Ron Paul was that he wanted “no government” and yet wanted to intrude on women’s right to choose.

    • JohnGraff

      ‘Gary Johnson supports “a woman’s right to choose up until the point of viability”[36] and wants to keep abortion legal.[37] He has been very vocal in his beliefs.[38] He supports legislation banning late-term abortions and mandating parental notification for minors seeking an abortion.[39] Johnson believes Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and should be overturned because it “expanded the reach of the Federal government into areas of society never envisioned in the Constitution.” He believes that laws regarding abortion should “be decided by the individual states.”[35]‘
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Gary_Johnson#Abortion

      • J__o__h__n

        So he supports letting states decide what reproductive rights women have.  Does he also oppose national civil rights protections like Ron Paul does?

        • Government_Banking_Serf

          You do know the “states” are your friends and neighbors, and we live in a representative democratic Republic?

          You do at your core believe we need an activist Big Brother group of elites, and do not have faith in the Bill of Rights, Constitution and Three Branches of Government to enforce the Constitution and protect those rights.

          Why?  While change is never fast enough, do you not see our country evolving toward the ideals of the Bill of Rights and Constitution?

          • webgiant

             I believe that if we don’t have someone higher up than the states from whom to get justice, the states are free not to grant us justice.  Any woman trying to navigate a patchwork series of 50 collections of state laws about abortion, prior to Roe V. Wade, could have told you about why it is stupid to trust just the states for civil rights.

            Plus my state is not my friend nor my neighbor.  I just happen to be unable to afford to leave (re: “my state is not my friend nor my neighbor” above).

  • KeithBrann

    Question to the candidate:
    Have you or are you considering campaigning directly to members of the Electoral College to try and sway at least one to vote Libertarian so as to trigger beneficial treatment in the 2016 election year?

  • Mike_Card

    One of the problems with the term “Libertarian” is that there’s no agreed definition.  It means whatever the speaker has in mind.  You can argue that the same applies to Republican or Democratic, but at least there are actions backing their assertions.  The whacked-out Pauls?  Ayn Rand?  Alan Greenspan?  Libertarians are the ultimate cherry-pickers and self-describers.

  • jimino

    Mr. Johnson’s complaints about his lowly real-world support are proof of the error of his theories about trusting the market.  Simply put, in the marketplace of ideas, nobody is buying his.  In his view, therefore, the market has led to poor results.

    • webgiant

      Interesting.  The free market hates Gary Johnson’s free market ideas.

  • Mouse_2012

    Romney just released 

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmurJ39RsbA 

    After some seem to feel Romney is like a Robot he came out with this.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6txmM8M9Iw 

  • Mouse_2012
  • hennorama

    Without commenting on the merits of Mr. Johnson’s proposal, the upheaval that would result from his proposed 43% immediate cut to ALL Federal spending makes this an obvious non-starter.  No doubt many others have pointed this out.

    Again, without comment as to the merits of his proposal, a change from a system of income taxes to the so-called FAIR tax would also be exceptionally disruptive to the US economy.  Such a change to the fundamentals of an ultra-complex and interrelated economy that represents about 25% of the economic output of the entire planet would have a plethora of unpredictable and unintended outcomes.

    The risks are simply too great to make such a change.

    Mr. Johnson being on the ballot in swing states is no doubt giving the Romney campaign nightmares.  Even a 1% level of voting for Johnson could spell the difference in a few states.  Romney’s path to 270 electoral votes is more difficult than Pres. Obama’s.  Johnson’s naked play for “Ron Paul voters” would lead one to conclude that a vote for Johnson is more likely a vote taken from Romney rather than from Pres. Obama.

    This spoiler potential is likely to be Mr. Johnson’s lasting legacy from 2012.  He will no doubt soldier on promoting his ideas, and we’ll see him again in 2016.

    • reuterrat

      Change is always risky.  Its why we continually add on to the complexity of our currently failing systems.  We all know that tax reform is needed.  The tax code is so incredibly bloated as it is that decoding it has spawned its own service industry.

      So what are our options?  Either strip down the code to something closer to a flat tax (obviously there will still be marginal tax rates to protect the poor), which will in time just grow to be bloated again and lead us into more economic trouble and continue to allow for corporations to reap the largest rewards due to the huge amounts of money they can pour into lobbying efforts.  OR we could actually try something different, and maybe even scary. But hey, it has worked for the state of Texas, why can’t it work for the federal government?

      As to your worries about a 43% cut in spending, as you yourself pointed out you aren’t even discussing the merits of any of his proposal.  You are simply stating generically that a 43% cut in government spending will have these terrible unintended consequences.  You may be right, but are we not headed toward terrible unintended consequences on our current course?  And is kicking the can down the road for our children to deal with the best way to go about solving the problem?

      One way or the other, some generation of Americans is going to have to suffer the consequences of our government’s inability to live within its means.  Do you honestly trust the government to follow a deficit reduction timeline that may last as long as a decade or two? 

      • hennorama

        Thank you for your well-reasoned and well-written
        reply.

        I’m neither disputing nor agreeing with your comments, merely clarifying mine.

        Mr. Johnson’s proposals involve a 2-step process.  First the 43% cut, followed by a switch to the FAIR tax.  My comments were a bit different for each.

        The abruptness of the 43% cut would be felt throughout the US and worldwide.  The mere magnitude of this cut makes it a political non-starter.  It would never get enacted.

        The impacts of the change to the FAIR tax would be even more widespread, given the interconnected nature of the US and other economies worldwide.  This would be even more difficult to enact, given the various special interests involved in practically every provision in the Federal Tax Code.

        I do understand the arguments both for and against Mr. Johnson’s proposals.  However, since I believe they have no possibility of enactment, I choose to not spend time discussing the merits.

        As things stands, neither step is politically viable on its own.  And even if you could get the 43% spending cuts, which is the more likely of the two steps, you couldn’t get the change to the FAIR tax.  You need both for the plan to work.

        • Government_Banking_Serf

          When one needs open heart surgery do they go for the Half-Bypass operation? 

        • webgiant

           Don’t forget Gary Johnson’s Balanced Budget Amendment: no deficits, EVER.  So economic downturn hits, FairTax Refunds go through the roof (due to all the people suddenly living below Gary’s magic poverty line), and since they have to be paid out of the General Fund and can’t be financed through tax increases (read his budget proposal) or borrowing, government services even Gary says are essential must be cut.

          Balanced Budgets sound nice in principle, but they assume that there will never be any disasters that require borrowing.  And Gary Johnson hasn’t demonstrated that kind of psychic power yet.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      moved

  • Sy2502

    What really amazes me is talking to people who clearly identify themselves as Democrats or Republicans and, after some discussion, they actually agree more with Gary Johnson than Romney or Obama. I am quite convinced there are many Libertarians out there who simply don’t know they are Libertarian because they don’t know what Libertarianism is. If only all these people voted for Gary Johnson, maybe we could make a real difference in this country. Same with the people who dislike both Obama and Romney, which are many. If they all voted for Johnson instead of holding their nose and voting of one of those 2, wouldn’t they send a clear message to the 2 main parties to clean up their act already?

    • Government_Banking_Serf
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=815914266 Beth Henke Campbell

       I always had identified myself as a republican, but a friend of mine told me a few years back that I was actually a libertarian.  After reading up on the party “platform”, she was right. I am. And I agree with you.. I think I’m not alone.

    • webgiant

      I’d have to remove my brain to vote for Gary Johnson.  I got a good
      education on those student loans Gary Johnson wants to abolish.  In two
      years I’ll be able to afford health insurance on that Obamacare plan
      Gary Johnson wants to abolish and replace with “survival of the fittest.”

      And
      then there’s FairTax and his Balanced Budget Amendment, both of which
      could kill the country by leaving us open to terrorist attack if there’s
      ever another recession.  Here’s how: on FairTax, everyone below a certain income
      level gets a refund of all the sales taxes (what FairTax uses) they paid
      during the year; on a Balanced Budget Amendment, you can’t run a
      deficit which means no borrowing at all.

      Now, cue another Great Depression/Recession, which were
      both caused by the kind of financial deregulation Gary Johnson
      supports.  Most incomes dip below the magic poverty income line; most
      people get a tax refund; massive reduction of the General Fund to
      finance the refunds; essential government programs must be cut to
      balance the budget; no borrowing allowed.  It’d be a nightmare. 

      Anyone
      with any real business sense knows you don’t wipe out your credit lines
      and try to run the whole business off cash, which is another reason I
      don’t like Gary: I doubt he has any real business sense.

  • RobertFallin

    I cannot believe some of these clueless comments.  Does not Obama and Romney supporting the right of the government to ignore the Constitution and kill or incarcerate US citizens without due process mean ANYTHING to you?  Does it not impress you that Iceland, whose economic policies since 2008 have resulted in spectacular recovery, did it by implementing the policies Gary Johnson suggests?

  • http://www.facebook.com/Little.Pep Christopher Valle

    I understand that many of you who are towards the two party system dislike johnson but in all fairness you guys should band together and choose him in the polls so that he may enter the presidential debates, that way you get the most out of the debates its only fair since this is an open minded country… right?

  • http://twitter.com/TongoRad TongoRad

    Libertarian’s concern for freedom stops at the workplace – they aim to extend wage slavery and a race to the bottom.

    • Andy Addleman

      Please explain how.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      Democrats want to round up all the dumb people who don’t know any better, and take care of them like pets to stroke their egos and then blame someone else when the Utopian dream comes crashing down around them.

      • webgiant

         Dumb people voting Democrat?  Check your studies: intelligence and education lean you Democrat, stupidity and ignorance lean you Conservative (Republican/Libertarian).  Plus we don’t feel that allowing the Invisible Hand to strangle Grandma, or strangle “the least of my brethren”, is a good thing.

  • Government_Banking_Serf

    Funny, it took the Libertarian Candidate coming on to generate the most thoughtful and pragmatic discussions on reforming the status quo that we have seen in months….. (and I don’t mean me).
    Heaven forbid we got behind someone like that….

  • Government_Banking_Serf

    Gary Johnson President; Liberty

    Bill Black Attorney General; Rule of Law

  • DrewInGeorgia

    I enjoyed the show and liked the majority of what Mr. Johnson had to say. I wonder, however, if Mr. Johnson understands that The Office of President does not translate into a direct dictatorship? Abolish the IRS? Legalize Marijuana? Initiate Isolationism 2.0? Ummm, yeah, that’s all gonna fly without a hitch. It’s not about what is good or necessary for Americans to progress, it’s all about our unwillingness to change even in the face of self-destruction. If we’re just going to toss up fru-fru theories about saving the Planet and our own sorry a$$es in the process, most of us can come up with some pretty straightforward solutions. Implementing those solutions is an entirely different story.

    I like Mr. Johnson and as I said I agree with the majority of what he has to say. However, if I thought a White Knight could ride in and save us while we collectively wage war against that very same Knight I would buy Mitt Romney’s baloney. I’m sorry Mr. Johnson but barring Revolution I don’t see any of your proposed solutions making it any further than the drawing board.

    • Government_Banking_Serf

      That’s quite a defeatist argument. The guy with good ideas can’t be a dictator so I’ll continue supporting the guys with crappy ideas?

      His messages and bully pulpit encouragements and visions would be far more reformist than “Hope and Change”.

      Damning with faint praise?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Alex-Pickrell/100000428945988 Alex Pickrell

      Isolationism 2.0? Don’t make me laugh. Right now America is the neighbor that comes on your lawn and breaks your shit. Are you saying if America isn’t constantly stomping around in your back yard we’re being isolationists? Please, get a clue.

      • DrewInGeorgia

        I would like the US to mind it’s own business, did I imply otherwise? Settle down.

        I was commenting on Mr. Johnson’s views which I happen to agree with for the most part (as I stated). All I was saying is that the reality we currently live in will not allow for it.

  • Government_Banking_Serf

    Just because we want “growth and recovery” doesn’t mean it can be magically plucked from the ethos without consequence. We are at record debt levels now. We are nearing mathematically impossible levels for payback/growth expectations.
    Printing money, borrowing money does have a limit.
    What will happen is the whole scheme will collapse, as mathematically impossible, the masses will suffer for a bit, the Central Bankers and Big Gov technocrats will get together and make the case for a One- World Currency, and the obligatory One-World Technocratic Management of that economy, which we all know will be One-world “Governance” by Financial Elites.
    We will have lost sovereignty, lost the experiment in Self-Governance, and be fully under the boot of a modern tyranny that will likely be impossible to revolt against, given military realities today.
    So we can go down that path, or we can vote for change and Responsibility and power back to the people again.

  • Regular_Listener

    I like Libertarians.  They are very idealistic, and their ideology in many ways represents the best of America.  But when you consider the practical consequences of putting their visions into practice, a considerably less attractive picture begins to take shape.  In a Libertarian world, you could do whatever you want with your free time, express any idea, hold any belief, enter into any kind of relationship, ingest any substance that you wanted.  But in the public sphere, it is very possible that a Libertarian economy would involve the rich and powerful quickly grabbing and holding onto the levers of power to a much greater degree than they do already.  No more welfare, no more social security, no unemployment compensation, no more medical assistance.  If you can’t afford something, tough luck, you can’t have it.  Everybody is a freelancer.  So you don’t like working 12 hours a day for a few bucks an hour, with no benefits?  Quit and start your own business.  America already did have a period of economic libertarianism, back in the 1800s, and working people were abused and worked like animals.  It led to the development of unions and a stronger middle class.

    • reuterrat

      Woah… Gary Johnson isn’t talking about any of those drastic actions that you mention.  He advocates saving social security and keeping some of the basic social programs that we have, just making them viable from a cost perspective by either cutting back or reforming them.  You call Libertarians idealistic but dangerous when taken to extremes, yet you forget that this is true with anything.  That’s why we should fight to always allow as many different viewpoints to be brought to the table as possible, because it levels out the extremism from each party.

    • http://www.facebook.com/liza.demmel Liza Demmel

      You are concerned that a Libertarian President will open a window to archaic conditions. It would put us back were every body has a chance to crap his share of success and happiness. Were labor is less protected and the poor will be on their own.

      You may have overlook that there are 535 elected Senators and Representatives in Washington, that all have to work together. For many years the power has concentrated to an unhealthy level. I am inclined to say, to the point were the system of checks and balances does not work anymore. There are five major reasons why it may make a lot of sense to have a Libertarian President at this time in history:a) This president is likely to appoint 3 Supreme court judges, the ultimate guardians of the constitution and our civil rights. Shy of Ron Paul, and a few good man in Washington, that are not running for President, I couldn’t think of a better man for the job. Our children will thank us, for electing a President that truly embraces the constitution.b) Bringing the troops home is a major step towards redirecting the country back to economy advancement. There is not a citizen alive that has lived a single day without his country being in war, to the point that people have casual discussions about what country to invade next.c) Over a decade of Terror Laws have driven away High Profile Investors and Business Leaders that left the country with their money. Small and large businesses have no planning security and some laws even put property rights in question. Cleaning up this legislation and provide a predictable set of rules will do wonders to the economy.d) Re-establish trust the financial system and our currency and simplifying regulations and taxation will make America once again the most attractive place in the world to conduct business. This is where jobs will come back to the US and new jobs will be created.e) Reducing the “financial” size of government, I wrote it that way, because it does not mean the “head count” size of government, will lead to simplified regulations, allowing for more innovation. This, combined with legalizing Marijuana has the potential to create an entirely new Hemp Industry, with 20000+ products that are in demand world wide. Every economic revolution was started by the emergence of a new industry. Gary’s credentials are excellent and documented. New Mexico is world leader in ecologically sustainable housing due to limited regulation. In many places in the world it would be very difficult to build and comply with restrictive building code.The sum of all components of his program add up to economic gross, a balanced budget, stronger dollar, more jobs, more liberties, renewed respect for America and the  elimination of parasitic practices in politics.With a common sense business approach SS will be most likely financially independent from political budget, like it is in all countries where SS works. Health Care will be purchased at market price and not government substituted without the ability to negotiate. That’s how you and I go shopping to find the the best bang for the buck.Common sense might be a new concept for Washington, but Congress will learn quickly, if they want to get anything past President Gary Johnson’s desk. With the checks and balances in place again, we will do just fine. I think Governor VETO deserves a promotion to President VETO.

  • sjw81

    this guy is great, just like ron paul or buddy roehmer. these people should be our leaders. not the jokers we have now. we are truly bankrupt. debt bubble will soon be bursting and then we will be in such a depression the world have never seen…

  • ExcellentNews

    Johnson over Romoney anytime!!!!

ONPOINT
TODAY
Jul 29, 2014
The U.S. Senate is seen on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, July 16, 2014. (AP)

The “Do-Nothing” Congress just days before August recess. We’ll look at the causes and costs to the country of D.C. paralysis.

Jul 29, 2014
This April 28, 2010 file photo, shows the Colstrip Steam Electric Station, a coal-fired power plant in Colstrip, Mont. Colstrip figures to be a target in recently released draft rules from the Environmental Protection Agency that call for reducing Montana emissions 21 percent from recent levels by 2030. (AP)

A new sci-fi history looks back on climate change from the year 2393.

RECENT
SHOWS
Jul 28, 2014
U.S. Secretary of War Newton D. Baker watches as wounded American soldiers arrive at an American hospital near the front during World War I. (AP Photo)

Marking the one hundredth anniversary of the start of World War One. We’ll look at lessons learned and our uneasy peace right now.

 
Jul 28, 2014
This June 4, 2014 photo shows a Walgreens retail store in Boston. Walgreen Co. _ which bills itself as “America’s premier pharmacy” _ is among many companies considering combining operations with foreign businesses to trim their tax bills. (AP)

American companies bailing out on America. They call it inversion. Is it desertion?

On Point Blog
On Point Blog
Our Week In The Web: July 25, 2014
Friday, Jul 25, 2014

Why the key to web victory is often taking a break and looking around, and more pie for your viewing (not eating) pleasure.

More »
Comment
 
The Art Of The American Pie: Recipes
Friday, Jul 25, 2014

In the odd chance that our pie hour this week made you hungry — how could it not, right? — we asked our piemaking guests for some of their favorite pie recipes. Enjoy!

More »
Comment
 
Hillary Clinton: ‘The [Russian] Reset Worked’
Thursday, Jul 24, 2014

Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton took time out of her global book tour to talk to us about Russia, the press and the global crises shaking the administration she left two years ago.

More »
3 Comments