Gary Johnson for President?

Users who are viewing this thread

Accountable

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,962
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
I haven't really heard of this guy, which has earned me scorn in libertarian circles. I plan to vet him, though. (I'd initially written that I'd check him out, but that just sounds ... wrong)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

GOVERNOR GARY JOHNSON ANNOUNCES HE WILL SEEK LIBERTARIAN NOMINATION


Today I am announcing that I will seek the Libertarian nomination for President of the United States. The Libertarian Party nominee will be on the ballot in all 50 states – as they were in 2008, and will offer a principled alternative to the Republican and the Democrat.
“This was both a difficult decision – and an easy one. It was difficult because I have a lot of Republican history, and a lot of Republican supporters. But in the final analysis, as many, many commentators have said after examining how I governed in New Mexico, I am a Libertarian — that is, someone who is fiscally very conservative but holds freedom-based positions on the issues that govern our personal behavior.

“Frankly, I have been deeply disappointed by the treatment I received in the Republican nomination process. I had hoped to lay out a real libertarian message on all the issues in the Republican contest. The process was not fair and open.
“This election is about issues larger than party or personal ambition.The future of our country is at stake. “
I believe this election needs a true libertarian voice. While Ron Paul is a good man and a libertarian who I proudly endorsed for president in 2008, there is no guarantee that he will be the Republican nominee.

“My Agenda for America, a libertarian agenda, is clear. It is not at an agenda you will hear from any other candidate or party.

  • I want to end deficit spending and cut federal spending by 43%.
  • I want to enact the Fair Tax to stimulate real economic growth and job creation.
  • I want to end the manipulation of our money by the Federal Reserve.
  • I support the Second Amendment and oppose gun control.
  • I oppose expensive foreign wars in places like Libya and Afghanistan where our national interest is not clear.
  • I want to cut the over-regulation of our families, our businesses and our lives.
  • I support a woman’s right to choose.
  • I support marriage equality for gay Americans, as required by the Constitution.
  • I support the legalization of marijuana, which will save us billions and do no harm.
  • I demand a government free of special interest influence, crony capitalism and corruption.
  • I support returning strict adherence to Constitutional principles to our government.


I am confident this agenda will resonate with the American people because it actually reflects the true beliefs of a clear majority of Americans. Sadly, neither the Republicans nor Democrats will offer this agenda to the American people. The Republicans talk about cutting spending and taxes but insist on government regulating our personal lives. The Democrats support more liberal social policies but they will tax and spend and borrow us into bankruptcy. America needs a third way.

I know first-hand that my governing philosophy works because of my experience as a successful two-term governor, elected and reelected as a Republican in a Democrat state. I know how to create jobs because I have created jobs. My record on job creation is superior to Barack Obama, Mitt Romney or any other candidate. I successfully governed as a Libertarian in everything but the name, and I am running for president as a Libertarian.
 
  • 19
    Replies
  • 428
    Views
  • 0
    Participant count
    Participants list

retro

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,886
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
He and Paul were always my favorites on the Republican side of things. If he wins the nomination for the Libertarians, I will most likely vote for him... assuming that DRP doesn't win the GOP nomination.
 

Accountable

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,962
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
I'd love to know where the Constitution requires marriage equality for gay Americans. I'd love to know where the Constitution mentions marriage at all.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here's a compilation of his performance at the debate.

[video=youtube;QRPrZxHUqsA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRPrZxHUqsA&feature=related[/video]
 

retro

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,886
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
The equal protection clause

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
 

retro

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,886
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Allowing something for one subset of citizens and not another is a violation of the equal protection clause. I figured you of all people would agree with that.
 

Accountable

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,962
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
I do agree. Where in the Constitution does it mention marriage?
Take your time. It can be any kind of marriage.
If you find it, let me know how the Constitution makes any kind of requirement regarding it.
 

retro

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,886
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Okay... if you're going to be completely fucking dense about it. No, the Constitution does not mention marriage. However, if the federal government recognizes marriage for one subset of citizens, it much therefore recognize it for everyone. If you'd like to make the argument that marriage shouldn't be recognized by the government at all, then you have an argument. But if it is, then it needs to be rcognized for everyone.
 

Accountable

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,962
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
Okay... if you're going to be completely fucking dense about it. No, the Constitution does not mention marriage. However, if the federal government recognizes marriage for one subset of citizens, it much therefore recognize it for everyone. If you'd like to make the argument that marriage shouldn't be recognized by the government at all, then you have an argument. But if it is, then it needs to be rcognized for everyone.
yahoo_giggle.gif
Sorry for stringing you along (don't throw nothing at me), but the fact that the Constitution doesn't even mention marriage is my point. The federal gov't doesn't recognize marriage, so there is no requirement for marriage equality. Kinda makes the promise empty, unless he's trying to be subtle in promising to veto a marriage amendment or refuse to enforce DOMA.
 

Stone

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,186
Reaction score
54
Tokenz
0.00z
yahoo_giggle.gif
Sorry for stringing you along (don't throw nothing at me), but the fact that the Constitution doesn't even mention marriage is my point. The federal gov't doesn't recognize marriage, so there is no requirement for marriage equality. Kinda makes the promise empty, unless he's trying to be subtle in promising to veto a marriage amendment or refuse to enforce DOMA.

The federal gov't doesn't recognize marriage

Just pointing out that the Federal government does recognize the marriage concept in many instances:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_and_responsibilities_of_marriages_in_the_United_States
 

Tuffdisc

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,024
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
15.15z
Oh I thought you meant the English football manager..nevermind that, at least you have a third party to contemplate over
 

Stone

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,186
Reaction score
54
Tokenz
0.00z
True (and it might make for a great thread to discuss the necessity for it today), but it's not a constitutional mandate, as Johnson implies.

One thing leads to another and we have the Supreme Court and Congress to thank for much of the confusion.
As long as the Feds claim the constitutional right to tax under the 16th Amendment and incorporate marriage concerns in taxation, there is going to exist a Constitutional inequality in the tax code.
Taking into account the Equal Protection clause in the 14th Amendment.....I suspect it will be seen as that mandate.
 

retro

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,886
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
True (and it might make for a great thread to discuss the necessity for it today), but it's not a constitutional mandate, as Johnson implies.

If the Federal Government recognizes something for one subset of citizens, like marriage in the area of taxation, then it needs to be recognized for all... according to the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. It's a pretty simple concept. If the Federal Government didn't recognize marriage in any area, then the EPC would be irrelevant... and so would marriage for that matter.
 

Accountable

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,962
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
If the Federal Government recognizes something for one subset of citizens, like marriage in the area of taxation, then it needs to be recognized for all... according to the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. It's a pretty simple concept. If the Federal Government didn't recognize marriage in any area, then the EPC would be irrelevant... and so would marriage for that matter.
Really? Legality is the only thing that makes marriage relevant? Now THAT's a good thread, there.

ETA:
http://www.offtopicz.net/showthread.php?81111-Is-marriage-relevant&p=2071895#post2071895
 

retro

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,886
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Really? Legality is the only thing that makes marriage relevant? Now THAT's a good thread, there.

ETA:
http://www.offtopicz.net/showthread.php?81111-Is-marriage-relevant&p=2071895#post2071895

It's the only thing that makes it relevant in the context of this discussion. The Federal Government recognizes it for one subset of people, therefore under the EPC, they need to recognize it for the other subset. That's what makes it Constitutionally mandated, the legal acceptance by the federal government.
 
79,017Threads
2,187,098Messages
4,974Members
Back
Top