Category Archives: Gary Johnson

A Letter to My Predecessor : Nick Sarwark

Dear Mr. Sarwark,

Thank you, for you have inspired me to usurp your position. Without the corruption and disrepute you have brought to the party, I would not have considered politics; however, by allowing in globalists criminals like William Weld, outright criminals like John Mcafee, and inept ideological criminals like Gary Johnson to take over the party, I have decided that it is necessary for popular reform in the LP.

What was done at the convention with your knowledge was unacceptable, and Ron Paul’s absence should have made that clear to all. Specifically, allowing pollsters and the media to strong arm delegates and candidates like Alicia Dearn into giving the Vice-Presidential nomination to Patriot Act supporting, Neocon, CFR member Bill Weld. And as we will not obtain anywhere NEAR the 5% “WMD”, (aka the great lie) American libertarians are realizing now that this is only a pipe dream, and that you sold out the party  for nothing. You have set the party back four years in what should have been our breakout year.

In fact, had you never allowed ANTI-libertarians to run the party like Bill Weld and the CFR and John Mcafee and his #votedifferent PAC (aka the syndicate), libertarianism could have had as much success as Ross Perot this time around. However, instead, you perverted this party from a populist, patriotic, and constitution loving party into a pro-globalist centrist party like the Tories in England, and Brexit taught us what the people think of that ilk.

Libertarians are populist by nature ; this party was founded on populists who disagreed with certain aspects of the Civil Rights Act in defense of limited government and states rights (Ron Paul said those words, not me, and you have alienated the liberty branch of the GOP, our strongest ally). It is abundantly clear to me that by your support of individuals like Bill Weld and the mainstream political establishment, populism is not your goal.

As a recovering English Major turned living in the flesh PROFESSIONAL anarcho-capitalist, I will tell you now that any third party that discourages populism, discourages patriotism, discourages respect for the Constitution will fail. It will fail not only because it is hollow and without that Principle (like your used car lot), but because such corrupt parties designed to chide and curb populism are market redundancies. The globalists, cake baking parties are already in power—no one cares for a third. That is why our ticket will fail to get not only 5%, not 3%, and maybe not even 2. You have turned this party into a pro-globalist, anti-populist tool of the Clinton Foundation and gave the contract quill to Bill Weld.

I will be running for chair of the LNC to undo the damage that you have done. I intend to make this party a populist one like UKIP that puts American Citizens and their constitutional rights first, forge alliances with out populist, pro-liberty allies like UKIP, Front National, the Ukraine Internet Party, and the Constitution Party. I intend to purge all establishment influences that you have let in. And I intend to lay the groundwork for a COMPETITIVE Libertarian ticket in 2020 that Ron Paul himself will be more than happy to endorse.

I must also give some credit to Charles Peralo. While he might not admit it, I am somewhat of a mentor to him. And if he can pose a mild threat to your reign of terror and the rent-seeking establishment you represent—you ain’t seen nothing yet.

I will see you in New Orleans. Je me souviens un libre America. Do you?

The Great Libertarian Holocaust of 2017

rigged

Libertarianism to put simply, is either committing suicide, or being exterminated.

In the last two years and from working on two political campaigns this years, I believe it is a force that most are not willing to acknowledge, but does in fact exist. And I exist, and am a part of that force, and am here to alert you of its existence ; but, once I, Max Dickstein, begin that campaign, I will reveal them to you.

Whether you like Trump or not, these are the forces at hand we’re dealing with, those desperate to stop him. When you point to who that includes, it’s generally what libertarians have considered arch-nemeses. George Soros, Clinton Foundation, Saudis. The party establishment invited them in on the pretense of 5%, and WHEN THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN, the party will explode like a neutron star. Outlets such as Reason, Being Libertarian, Liberty Republic, etc. they will decline in popularity, traffic, and alexa ratings.

Simply put, the LP is on the wrong side of the playing field. The LP is a populist party and by accepting Clinton foundation money in the form of purchasing a seat for Bill Weld—aka Hilary’s protector in her worst times of need—-the LP has distanced itself from populism. It no longer has that integrity. Simply put, 2017 will be like a Game of Thrones Winter for both the LP and alas, even the Liberty Movement.

If the LP is about motivating the ideology of liberty, it has certainly drained me. This is not enjoyable anymore. And Libertarians are foolish to think they are alone. If the LP does not act soon, it will implode like a neutron star, and will be as relevant as the anti-masonic party. Adam Kokesh is not the answer, and if he even recovers from this recent hit he’s taken, we are more than glad to expose him.

There is only one option that remains, and that is the party RECALLING the ticket. And  despite my battles with both, I believe that should be an Petersen/Invictus ticket. A ticket like that now, while the Clinton campaign is on the major defensive, is the only way 5% is realistically achievable. Gary Johnson has been a historically loser for the 21st century, and I don’t trust him to kick a 3% 20 yard field goal. And Weld turning this into an establishment party has only exacerbated the damage.

LibertyHangout.org Stabs Darrell Castle in the Back

Darrell Castle is No Libertarian

While previously praising Castle as more of a Libertarian than Gary Johnson, LH has appeared to have done a schizophrenic 180.

BUT NO, GARY JOHNSON IS NOT MORE LIBERTARIAN THAN DARRELL CASTLE

And this message from the Castle Campaign will make that ABUNDANTLY self-evident

BREAKING : Weld Abandons Johnson

second-pr-gary-800x0-c-default

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/10/libertarian-vp-candidate-just-wants-to-stop-trump-presidency.html?mid=facebook_nymag

As some presumably small portion of Americans sat through a dull debate between the Republican and Democratic vice-presidential nominees on Tuesday night, a far more interesting drama was unfolding within the Libertarian ticket. VP candidate Bill Weld told the Boston Globe that he plans to focus exclusively on attacking Donald Trump for the remainder of the campaign — essentially admitting that running mate Gary Johnson can not become president.

Trump has Weld’s “full attention,” he explained, because his agenda is so terrible it’s “in a class by itself.” “I think Mr. Trump’s proposals in the foreign policy area, including nuclear proliferation, tariffs, and free trade, would be so hurtful, domestically and in the world, that he has my full attention,” Weld said.

Apparently he avoided acknowledging that his new mission amounts to working to make Hillary Clinton president. He pointed out that he disagrees with Clinton on fiscal and military issues, though last week on MSNBC he said he’s “not sure anybody is more qualified than Hillary Clinton to be president of the United States.”

3rd Party Center to Right Guide

9f2de7_077004ef1f8e46b8a1cddedfffa35b78mv2_d_2560_1440_s_2

3rd Party Center to Right Presidential Guide-From a Constitutional Conservative Viewpoint

The intent of this guide is to assist Constitutional conservatives with their choice for President. Ample research was conducted and an effort was made to use the candidates’ actual interviews, platforms, videos, etc. Any omission of facts was not intentional. Some views had to be surmised due to not finding previously expressed stances or utilizing context historically provided. A pet peeve of mine is when politicians dodge questions or deliberately avoid certain topics in an attempt to avoid giving an inflammatory response.

There are 30 categories that the candidates were graded on order to derive the total points Candidate Viability / Number of State Ballots – 1-20 points

Gary Johnson is on the ballot in 50 States. 20 pts

Jill Stein is on the ballot in 44 States: 11 points
Darrell Castle is on the ballot in 24 States. 10 pts
Evan McMullin is on the ballot in 10 States. 4 pts 
Chris Keniston is on the ballot in 3 States. 1 pt
Tom Hoefling is on the ballot in 2 States. 1 pt

Our Johnson Ultimatum : We are #NeverJohnson

And now I will explain to you why with MINIMAL effort, because I am frankly tired of explaining this to people.

This is how Johnson looks to the general electorate (props to this montage by Bill Maher)

“He is just another one in my basket of total fucking idiots.” ~Bill Maher~

This is how Johnson looks to 50% of Libertarians.

http://www.funnyjunk.com/Ultra+steve+buscemi+comp/funny-pictures/5488543#20540b_5488099

It does’t matter ; behold my formula, and I have never got a POTUS election wrong in my life (except Gore, but he DID win lol).

1GaryJohnsonPollVote=2GiantMeteorPollVotes=.9 FUCK THESE CANDIDATES, I’M NOT VOTING…..poll votes.

He is likely to perform similarly to Ralph Nader (not Ross Perot). Meaning only .95 percent of the people who voted Johnson in those polls will actually wait in line on election day to vote for him. Although Ralph Nader may not have achieved 5%, at least he had principles like Jill Stein. Gary Johnson will be an sell out Ralph Nader and bring shame to House Libertarian for years to come.

And we SINCERELY hope Jill Stein outperforms him, and that you look at a Libertarian Alternative like Darrell Castle. He is FAR under-appreciated.

~GI~

CNN : Why is Gary Johnson still in the Race?

second-pr-gary-800x0-c-default

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/29/politics/gary-johnson-hillary-clinton-donald-trump/index.html

Didn’t realize he was :)-

Gary Johnson : A Legacy of Shame

Imagine a Christian who went out to promote Christianity without ever mentioning Jesus or God. Instead of discussing central ideas, tenants, and figures, all extremely important to understanding Christendom as a whole, he goes around asking people “aren’t you dissatisfied with other religions” and “don’t you want to live forever in paradise.”

This is exactly what Gary Johnson’s campaign is doing. The liberty movement has, as its figure head, a man who does not seem to know that the liberty movement exists. When was the last time you heard him mention famous libertarian thinkers, like Mises or Rand? When was the last time you heard him mention important principles, like the non-aggression principle? Or even just the constitution of the country he is looking to lead? And what the hell is going on with his running mate, who appears to have not even heard of the word “libertarian” until he was shoved down the throat of the base through Johnson’s weird worship of him?

This would all be forgivable if he was at least bringing in support for the party. But he is not, at least in any substantial way. He is trending downwards in the polls. He keeps making gaffs like being unable to name world leaders or name important locations in the war on terror. Sure, its understandable and everyone makes gaffs, but combine it with his admitting to having had marijuana “edibles” just a few months ago and the announcement that he will not be in the debates, and you have a candidate that screams out irrelevant with every fiber of his being.

He simultaneously scares off angry Berniecrats, with his support of the TPP and insane comments about the sun expanding to swallow the earth, angry conservatives with his anti-gun running mate, pro planned parenthood stance, and even libertarians who’s support he should have universally. One thing I will give Johnson and the party that nominated him is that its an impressive achievement to be out of touch with both your base and the general public. Saying he will get three percent of the vote is a generous forecast, and I do not blame anarcho-capitalists for not voting when they have such bad options.

Needless to say, his supporters will continue to bitch and moan about how he was excluded from the debates, while ignoring his obvious flaws and making excuses for his gaffs. And instead of doing serious libertarian outreach, they will make empty Obama-esque platitudes like “fiscally conservative, socially liberal” and “the two party system is a dinosaur, and we are the meteor”. More accurate would be “visibly stupid, federally unelectable.” The only good argument I have heard for supporting him is to get 5% of the vote and thus secure federal funding for the next election and have a better chance of putting the message out then. This too rings hallow. If they nominated Johnson and Weld and then see success, there is no reason to believe they will not keep nominating him and people like him. What’s the point of getting federal funding for the Jeb Bush/Mitt Romney ticket that will probably be put forward in 2020?

If you are going to vote for an unelectable candidate, it may as well be one with rock solid principles. The GI endorsed Darrell Castle. Other options are Jill Stein, if you are more left leaning, Darryl W. Perry, for the anarchists, and Zoltan Istvan, who is a libertarian leaning transhumanist who wants you to live forever. Ditch Johnson. Death to the system, and death to those who would pander to those in power for the sake of power.

Dear Unhappy Libertarians : Give the CP a Shot!

 
BY : CLINT BISHOP

 

Hey you! Yes you, the libertarian or conservative with libertarian leanings that doesn’t feel quite at home in the Libertarian Facebook groups. You aren’t alone. Most people aren’t comfortable with, nor find amusement in picking fights for fun. Sensible people, regardless of ideology, don’t typically revel in the type of chaos that we witness on a daily basis – the squabble with one goal in mind, to drive each other closer to anarchical views. Who wants to end every discussion being called a ‘statist’ simply because your views aren’t the most radical on the thread, or sacrificing your principles in order to be the one that gets to say it? Of those of us who are Christian or religious, what fun is it to fear literal persecution in groups intended to beget the opposite effect? I suspect that many endure the nonsense because we don’t necessarily mesh with the warmonger neo-conservatives that comprise the Conservative Groups or their hypocrisy of claiming to be for small government while promoting everything that keeps central government strong. On the same token, there’s never really been anywhere else to go that’s remotely viable, particularly as the Libertarian Party has finally garnered long awaited national recognition, despite squandering it away by nominating a moderate Presidential Candidate and a gun-hating, CFR loving VP Candidate, as well as having the Convention tarnished by images of a naked fat guy running across the stage for the world to see. Despite all of this, the LP and the libertarian groups still seem to be where all the ‘cool kids’ hang out.
That being said, I recently interviewed seven individuals from various liberty-minded, closely related philosophies in an attempt to determine a few things:
  1. Has the LP moved too far to the left?
  2. Has the Republican Party moved too far center, becoming too authoritarian foe either paleo-conservatives or libertarians?
  3. Is there room between between those two parties for a another party to become a viable option for the future?
First, neo-cons have altered the path of the Republican Party to an irreconcilable place in terms of interventionism and globalism. Despite their professed views regarding government, they embrace the state and its power structure and propensity for corruption. “Constitutional conservative” is probably one of the most misused terms among the political right. I can vouch for this because just months ago I , myself, was a neo-con who erroneously touted the term to describe myself. After a few months of studying the Constitution and the original intent of the founding fathers, I can honestly say that very few who claim the term for themselves today are deserving of it, rendering it practically useless. They can be educated and guided, but were not practical for the purpose of this article.
 
These dimensions of libertarianism seem to understand, even acknowledge important aspects of our society that their libertarian counterparts discount, or even disregard as views perilous and incompatible with liberty. Common sense and morality guide their reasoning. As Paleo-libertarian Tony Cansoneri, writer for Liberty Hangout, defined it, a Paleo-libertarian is “a libertarian who believes that culture and tradition are key components of freedom and that a free and voluntary society can uphold these and defend these better than state. [Paleo-libertarians] also believe in radical decentralization of government and many, if not most of us, are skeptical of multiculturalism and believe that to the extent it exists today, it is a nasty byproduct of government largess that leads to much turmoil….Paleo-libertarians also believe in radical decentralization of government and many, if not most of us, are skeptical of multiculturalism.” That sounds refreshing for levelheaded libertarians, doesn’t it? He continues, “I would say that a paleo-libertarian is essentially a far right conservative at heart and typically believes in traditional values and western culture as necessary components, seeing social and cultural conservatism as a byproduct of a free society. The more free a society is, the more virtuous it can be. . we hold that the individual is supreme and the extension of the individual (private property) is what all rights truly stem from.”
 

 

Traditionalism (even patriotism) isn’t highly regarded among libertarian circles. They’re believed to be incongruous with individual liberty, yet these are important American ideals, from which liberty itself is derived. One of the most surprising discoveries in my interviews was the fact that ALL SEVEN value patriotism and traditionalism. Likewise, five of seven were religious and only one was agnostic. While I’ve never found solid, scientific polling on the religious makeup of the Libertarian Party, I’ve personally found it to be very unwelcoming to the religious, particularly Christians. The informal polling I have found suggest that a very high percentage of libertarians consider themselves agnostic or atheist – to, the tune  of 40% agnostic within the Partycompared to 7-20% of the national population. Classical liberal Clay Hesketh, one of the Rand Paul supporters interviewed and the only agnostic of the seven, states “I believe that tradition and culture are important on an individual or community level, but not on a state or national level. I’m skeptical about multiculturalism because it can become a veiled form of segregation.”
 
Although possibly not the majority, many agreed with these views of mine. Staunch Rand Paul supporter and a minarchist libertarian, Paul Maurone, says in regards to traditionalism and patriotism, “They are positive. Patriotism should be defined as a vigilant allegiance to our nation and Constitution – NOT to our politicians who are running the show.” Unprovoked invocation of the Constitution is something you’ll rarely see among the libertarian left or anarchists, of whom usually hold our founding document in contempt. 2: Long time Ron and Rand Paul supporter, and libertarian/constitutionalist Susie Clark declares, “I no longer call myself a Libertarian. They have gone liberal. I am pro-life and not for open borders. I am a little ‘L’ libertarian, but I like Constitutional Conservative. The Libertarian (Party) no longer upholds the Constitution, they worry more about drug policies, they mock Christianity, and stand with the Globalists traitors to humanity.” When asked to what esteem she holds the Constitution, Susie  answered, “(It’s) 2nd below the Word of God. The Constitution was written by men who fought against a King. They gave us the Constitution to make sure it does not happen again.” This is a complaint I hear often relevant to the libertarian left and anarchists. They have no respect for the Constitution and consider the parchment barrier a failure, rather than grasping the concept that it can never serve its purpose without us doing our part.
 
An interesting and informative interview was one conducted with Michael Stevens, a fusionist. Fusionism is a philosophy popularized by Frank Meyer in the mid to late 1900’s. Many say that it has faded out of existence, while others claim that politicians such as Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are modern day, prominent fusionists. The most distinguished fusionists of all were Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater. Describing fusionism, Michael states that “Fusionism is an idea that combines the ideas of libertarianism and conservatism into a pro-liberty and pro-morality philosophy. We are for limited government, economic freedom, individual responsibility, and no gun restrictions. We value federalism on issues like drug legalization or decriminalization. . . Fusionists see that one has to have morality to have liberty. You also cannot have liberty without life. Ronald Reagan said in 1975 that ‘…the heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.’ I believe fusionism is true conservatism. Its roots date back to our founding as a Republic where our roots have both a conservative and libertarian foundation. The individual is the highest form in this philosophy. We believe in reducing the role of government (per) the Constitution. The government’s job is to protect individual rights in the Bill of Rights and (as) outlined in the Declaration of Independence. We believe in a Christian founding but believe in the separation of church and state, as Jefferson intended, not as it is interpreted today. We believe in one where the Federal government is on one side of the divide and the State and local governments, as well as the Churches, are on the other. . . On issues of the economy, leave the government out but enforce a moral compass in the economy. In terms of ideology, between libertarianism and conservatism the thin line on the political ideological scale is where fusionism or libertarian-conservatism lies. It’s more of a balanced philosophy that believes in the idea of liberty that coexists with the rule of law.”
 
Along with other differences I have discussed, I believe that the “balanced philosophy that believes in the idea of liberty that coexists with the rule of law” is an important distinction. The libertarian left and the anarchist purists seem to believe that the ideology of libertarianism, as an absolute, is the only ideology worth advocating. The problem is that the experience that is taken into account by the conservative ideologies and paleo-libertarianism can’t be ignored, especially when compared to an ideology of concept only. When asked whether or not there was room for another party outside of the three largest, I received a wide array of answers. Some were disgusted with partisan politics altogether; one thinks there isn’t room outside the top two, much less three; and a few think there is definitely room for more parties. None seemed privately content with the leftward move of the Libertarian mainstream. From the outside looking in, I’m not sure how the Libertarian Party is amassing so much support since the right side of their base seems so disenfranchised. It’s quite analogous to the Republican Party, to be honest. It, too, has maneuvered leftward, yet misrepresented right-wingers continue to stick around. The contrast with the Republican Party supporters, I suppose, is that they are stationary due to fear or apathy. The Libertarian Party, contrarily, has garnered its latest wave of support due to momentum it has obtained over the past two to four years due to an excited base. It simply seems, now, to be suffering growing pains as its rapid leftward shift is alienating Christian supporters, the right side of the movement, and those who have evolved from their previously neo-conservative views to a more libertarian perspective.
 
Irreconcilable Differences?
The acrimony that many libertarians have with regards to Christianity, traditionalism, patriotism, and even the Constitution, is tough to swallow for many. I’m very fond of the Constitution. To my pleasant surprise, all seven of those interviewed hold the Constitution in high esteem. My personal disdain for the libertarian left is its disregard for the Constitution, in spite of the document’s quintessence of our great core philosophies, such as classical liberalism, paleo-libertarianism, and paleo-conservatism. This unique combination, coupled with our Judeo-Christian founding and principles, has created the greatest nation in human history. These differences don’t include others that many of the aforementioned philosophies hold in direct conflict with the Libertarian Party and it’s platform, such as the damaging consequences of weak border security, the adverse effects that the platform’s (figurative) open border policy would precipitate, the perceived obsession with drug legalization, the perpetual evolution towards the outright promotion of anarchy by the purists, and the widely embraced dogma of the NAP – which along with anarchy, places far too much confidence in and grossly overestimates the goodness of man. We are not benevolent beings by nature. We are very much opportunistic and that leads to greed, violence, etc. What virtue we possess seems to not be ascribed to the proper places by the libertarian left; those consisting of our founding of Christianity, our culture, God’s natural law, etc. These reflect our morals, not humanism or progressivism.
 
So we have a group of mostly Christian, patriotic libertarians and conservatives with no party to closely represent their values. Both no longer acknowledge God (for the religious ones), one wants perpetual war and loves big government, and one doesn’t value traditionalism, patriotism, pragmatism, or the Constitution (in many cases). Many that do value the Constitution in both parties aren’t originalists when referencing it, several only use it where it is deemed beneficial in context to their current argument. One has shared power for far too long, only to become the epitome of corruption from localities and states up to Congress and the Executive Branch. The other, after 45 years has finally reached relevancy nationwide, but seems to only have space for those willing to be stifled in their religious and traditionalist beliefs in exchange for humanism and multiculturalist activism. I have news. There is another choice. It isn’t cool to say I’m a member of the Constitution Party. Your libertarian friends who reside on the left side of the spectrum or who don’t understand the meaning of the word will likely call you a theocrat. You aren’t going to find many college friends rushing to join their campus YAConstitution instead of YAL or YAFJulie Borowski isn’t likely to be caught binge tweeting pro-Darrell Castle tweets. There probably won’t be any Constitution Party hotties featured in Babes for Liberty and it’s doubtful that you’ll find a notification on your Facebook account informing you that Liberty Laura has spontaneously stopped in her car to orchestrate a pro-Constitution Party live stream (as much as we’d all love that!). One thing you will see is people toeing the party line over principle for the Libertarian Party this cycle. 
 
Final Pitch
Finally, for those on the libertarian right, the liberty leaning conservatives, and everything between, you CAN bake your own cake and eat it too! There is a party that holds the founding fathers’ principles, teachings, intent, and vision for our posterity dear. There’s a party that believes in ending the Fed, staying out of other countries’ affairs, ending perpetual war, repealing the 16th and 17th Amendments, leaving the UN and other organizations and treaties that surrender our sovereignty to foreign and international courts and organizations, dissolving the unconstitutional conglomerate of acronym Alphabet Soup federal agencies, that is anti-Agenda 21, and is for small government—and it’s no longer the Libertarian Party. This same party holds our foundation (not establishment of religion) of Christian morals and principles, traditionalism, patriotism, and the importance of the 10th Amendment in high esteem. It holds our Constitution as its namesake and focal point, unlike any other party.Become a Constitutionist, join the Constitution Party @ http://constitutionparty.com

Gary Johnson blows another interview