Gary Johnson makes the GOP nervous..

[Shelzin]

Ron Paul never said he wanted to get rid of the US military or blamed America for 9/11. Nice strawman, but try harder next time.

He absolutely said BOTH, and you're either an uninformed idiot or a liar. Which one is it?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuX73Ixqtbg&sns=em]Ron Paul Blames 9/11 On America - YouTube[/ame]

Is English not your first language?

 

[Wacky Quacky]

I will never, EVER, believe a single word a politician says during an election. And how people can delude themselves into thinking a politician means anything they say during elections is beyond me.

I'm not trying to be insulting, but I think you're being incredibly naive to vote for someone based off of what they say. Especially when what they say flies in the face what they've done.

Well, considering he's NEVER been PRESIDENT before, you have exactly zero track record to grade him on. So there goes your "flies in the face of what they've done before" theory.

Apparently you can't comprehend the difference between STATE and FEDERAL governments? How sad for you....

So, nothing that a politician does in their entire political career can be looked at when deciding to vote for them? What someone does in one position couldn't possibly be any indicator of how they'll do in another?

Did you afford this same luxury to Obama?

 

[P@triot]

No. Mitt Romney could fully repeal Obamacare, allow the free market to operate in health care as much as Congress will cooperate, end the Federal Reserve, return us to a real gold standard, appoint Judge Napolitano to the Supreme Court, and I'll never support him.

Folks, you can't make this shit up. This is how ******* insane these people are. If a GOP president does EVERYTHING the Sovereign Citizen asshole wants, they still won't "support him" simply because his name is not Ron Paul.

Unreal.... These people have gone so far off the deep end, it's very obvious they must be institutionalized. If Mitt Romney does nothing other than institutionalize these bat shit crazy Sovereign Citizen assholes, I will consider him to be among the greatest presidents of all time. Let's hope he throws these numb nuts in a very dark hole of an asylum some where, has them instituted for life, and gets them the therapy they so desperately need.

If a man were to actually implement constitutional government, open up the free-market, and get unemployment low, I'd support Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler, and Barack Obama if they did that. The fact that he's already stating he won't support Mitt no matter what kind of job he does tells you everything you need to know.

That's a pretty weak attempt since anybody can just click the link and see the rest of my post, junior.

I encourage them too! Please, EVERYONE - read his entire post. This is how bad shit crazy these people are. Everything he said there was word for word. He won't support Romney no matter what. Says it all...

 

[Foxfyre]

Why is this thread still around?

nobody knows who this Johnson guy is.

Yes, the educated people here do know who Johnson is and many of them think he would make a fine President. If it was Johnson running vs Obama, I would vote for Gary in a heartbeat. I voted for him twice in New Mexico and would have voted for him a third time if he had been allowed to run.

Mitt Romney was not even among my top five of GOP candidates that I thought should get the nomination.

But between Gary Johnson and Mitt Romney as the best person to lead this nation out of the fiscal crisis it is in, I would vote for Mitt. We need a trouble shooter and problem solver and negotiator at this particular juncture much more than we need an ideologue. And we can't afford four more years of Obama just because we're in a snit because our candidate didn't become a contender.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Folks, you can't make this shit up. This is how ******* insane these people are. If a GOP president does EVERYTHING the Sovereign Citizen asshole wants, they still won't "support him" simply because his name is not Ron Paul.

Unreal.... These people have gone so far off the deep end, it's very obvious they must be institutionalized. If Mitt Romney does nothing other than institutionalize these bat shit crazy Sovereign Citizen assholes, I will consider him to be among the greatest presidents of all time. Let's hope he throws these numb nuts in a very dark hole of an asylum some where, has them instituted for life, and gets them the therapy they so desperately need.

If a man were to actually implement constitutional government, open up the free-market, and get unemployment low, I'd support Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler, and Barack Obama if they did that. The fact that he's already stating he won't support Mitt no matter what kind of job he does tells you everything you need to know.

That's a pretty weak attempt since anybody can just click the link and see the rest of my post, junior.

I encourage them too! Please, EVERYONE - read his entire post. This is how bad shit crazy these people are. Everything he said there was word for word. He won't support Romney no matter what. Says it all...

I'm sure you do encourage them to. That's why you took the time to delete the rest of the post from the quote, right?

 

[Shelzin]

*blink*blink*

So it's ok for a republican do it but not a democrat. Got it.

Take the worst insult you know. And then pretend I said it to you. I would do it myself but I don't know what you find most insulting.

Once again we see the Sovereign Citizen libertarian with ZERO understanding of the US Constitution or the difference between STATE and FEDERAL government. Typical of these anarchist jack-asses...

ROFLMAO... Reread the thread again you dumbass. I agreed the state should be able to do it. You really are that partisan aren't you? This isn't an act... You really are one of the Retarded Tribal Monkeys. I mean I say it in a general sense most of the time... But you... *looks right at Rottweiler* You're one of them.

People who might agree with you may not be... But you certainly are. You are the embodiment of etch-a-sketch where nothing said before matters.

I really want to understand, but I doubt you'll actually answer... Why do you come here?

 

[P@triot]

I will never, EVER, believe a single word a politician says during an election. And how people can delude themselves into thinking a politician means anything they say during elections is beyond me.

I'm not trying to be insulting, but I think you're being incredibly naive to vote for someone based off of what they say. Especially when what they say flies in the face what they've done.

Well, considering he's NEVER been PRESIDENT before, you have exactly zero track record to grade him on. So there goes your "flies in the face of what they've done before" theory.

Apparently you can't comprehend the difference between STATE and FEDERAL governments? How sad for you....

So, nothing that a politician does in their entire political career can be looked at when deciding to vote for them? What someone does in one position couldn't possibly be any indicator of how they'll do in another?

Did you afford this same luxury to Obama?

Yes, it CAN POSSIBLY (quote) be an indicator. But what is ALSO an indicator is that the steps he took at the state level were perfectly constitutional, what his state wanted, and what he needed to do under those circumstances.

God forbid you acknowledge those realities. The man says he will fight to repeal Obamacare and I guaran-damn-tee you he will. What he did in Massachusetts has nothing to do with his plans for the nation as President of the United States. If you guys weren't such blinded radicals, and could actually look at things rationally, perhaps you'd realize that.

 

[Paulie]

anybody who might (theoretically) siphon enough votes to give the incumbent a shot in a close state frightens me.

You realize, gary has no chance whatsoever of winning anything.

But if he has even the slightest chance of playing "spoiler" it goes in the wrong ******* direction.

You assholes who keep pulling for the predetermined fail known as gary johnson might as well suck off the president. You are disgusting. At least liberal democrats actually like the guy.

"wahhhhh! The conservative is going to ruin our liberal republican's chances of winning the election."

i love how you blame the voter and pin no responsibility on your candidate when somebody doesn't want to vote for him. Why do you hate democracy?

Pick a better candidate next time and quit your whining.

boom.

 

[P@triot]

*blink*blink*

So it's ok for a republican do it but not a democrat. Got it.

Take the worst insult you know. And then pretend I said it to you. I would do it myself but I don't know what you find most insulting.

Once again we see the Sovereign Citizen libertarian with ZERO understanding of the US Constitution or the difference between STATE and FEDERAL government. Typical of these anarchist jack-asses...

ROFLMAO... Reread the thread again you dumbass. I agreed the state should be able to do it. You really are that partisan aren't you? This isn't an act... You really are one of the Retarded Tribal Monkeys. I mean I say it in a general sense most of the time... But you... *looks right at Rottweiler* You're one of them.

People who might agree with you may not be... But you certainly are. You are the embodiment of etch-a-sketch where nothing said before matters.

I really want to understand, but I doubt you'll actually answer... Why do you come here?

You're the partisan hack. I look at each issue and each candidate and weigh them individually.

I was a HUGE Ron Paul supporter. The guy would be second to God when it comes to the economy. But then the 77 year old kook suffering from dementia went and opened his mouth about foreign policy/national security and the entire nation cringed. Any asshole who thinks we're to blame for 9/11, who thinks we don't need a military, and who believes in a policy of "wait until American's die until taking any action" has zero prayer to be president and that's why the people sent him home.

As far as why I come here, it used to be to correct the evil propaganda of the idiot liberal dumbocrat Nazi's. But now I have to add, to point out the absurd irrational thought of you dangerous Sovereign Citizen anarchists.

Why do you come here? To prove to the world how bat-shit crazy Sovereign Citizens are?

 

[Desperado]

Well it seems that this thread proves that it is not Gary Johnson that makes the GOP nervous but rather it is the disenfranchised supporters of Gary Johnson and Ron Paul that have the GOP's panties in a wad.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Well, considering he's NEVER been PRESIDENT before, you have exactly zero track record to grade him on. So there goes your "flies in the face of what they've done before" theory.

Apparently you can't comprehend the difference between STATE and FEDERAL governments? How sad for you....

So, nothing that a politician does in their entire political career can be looked at when deciding to vote for them? What someone does in one position couldn't possibly be any indicator of how they'll do in another?

Did you afford this same luxury to Obama?

Yes, it CAN POSSIBLY (quote) be an indicator. But what is ALSO an indicator is that the steps he took at the state level were perfectly constitutional, what his state wanted, and what he needed to do under those circumstances.

God forbid you acknowledge those realities. The man says he will fight to repeal Obamacare and I guaran-damn-tee you he will. What he did in Massachusetts has nothing to do with his plans for the nation as President of the United States. If you guys weren't such blinded radicals, and could actually look at things rationally, perhaps you'd realize that.

I never questioned the legality or constitutionality of what Romney did. I said that what he did is the opposite of what he's telling people now, and for some insane reason people believe him. Liberals guaranteed everything that Obama told them too, look where that got them.

 

[Foxfyre]

I'd want a President who's not afraid to tell "the people" when they're wrong. If Romney believed in free market capitalism he would've told the people of Massachusetts that what we now know as Romneycare was wrong, and vetoed it accordingly.

How do you know that he didn't? But when both the people and the legislature were in favor of a universal healthcare system, then isn't the best course to go to work with them to produce the best one they could come up with? If it hasn't delivered as promised and is now unpopular, that no doubt adds to the majority of the people who want Obamacare repealed too.

No. Gary Johnson, for example, didn't govern with that philosophy in a state that was 2-1 Democrat, and he got reelected. The simple fact is that Romney did what he did because he believed in it. He believed that government run health care was better than the free market. If he didn't, he would've vetoed the bill.

Well I'm not privy to know what Mitt Romney thought. I happen to know Gary Johnson personally and, though I certainly am not one of his close friends, do know that he supported a LOT of legislation in New Mexico that he initially opposed. He didn't approve of a single budget that 2-1 Democratic legislature passed, but he eventually signed them. (The last one the legislature overrode his veto.) He negotiated gambling compacts with the Indians that pretty well gave away the store and effectively decimated our domestic horse racing industry. Under heavy opposition, he signed legislation banning drive up windows at liquor stores. (DUI's went up after that.) He went on 60 minutes to advocate legalization of heroin and cocaine and the very next day, under fire, said he only supported legalization of marijuana. He recruited some pretty questionable appointees to various posts--not bad people, just clueless in how to do their jobs.

This is all amidst a lot of stuff that we all did like and him doing a pretty good job of reining in government excess and balancing budgets and he left office with a decent 45% approval rating. He is an honest, decent man and I share his views probably 90% of the time which is a higher percentage than I share Mitt Romney's views.

And I still think Mitt is the better man for the job at this time.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Once again we see the Sovereign Citizen libertarian with ZERO understanding of the US Constitution or the difference between STATE and FEDERAL government. Typical of these anarchist jack-asses...

ROFLMAO... Reread the thread again you dumbass. I agreed the state should be able to do it. You really are that partisan aren't you? This isn't an act... You really are one of the Retarded Tribal Monkeys. I mean I say it in a general sense most of the time... But you... *looks right at Rottweiler* You're one of them.

People who might agree with you may not be... But you certainly are. You are the embodiment of etch-a-sketch where nothing said before matters.

I really want to understand, but I doubt you'll actually answer... Why do you come here?

You're the partisan hack. I look at each issue and each candidate and weigh them individually.

I was a HUGE Ron Paul supporter. The guy would be second to God when it comes to the economy. But then the 77 year old kook suffering from dementia went and opened his mouth about foreign policy/national security and the entire nation cringed. Any asshole who thinks we're to blame for 9/11, who thinks we don't need a military, and who believes in a policy of "wait until American's die until taking any action" has zero prayer to be president and that's why the people sent him home.

As far as why I come here, it used to be to correct the evil propaganda of the idiot liberal dumbocrat Nazi's. But now I have to add, to point out the absurd irrational thought of you dangerous Sovereign Citizen anarchists.

Why do you come here? To prove to the world how bat-shit crazy Sovereign Citizens are?

And you believe those are Ron Paul's stances? You really do believe every ******* word someone with an R next to their name tells you, don't you? Unless it's Ron Paul, the other R's told you not to believe him.

 

[P@triot]

So, nothing that a politician does in their entire political career can be looked at when deciding to vote for them? What someone does in one position couldn't possibly be any indicator of how they'll do in another?

Did you afford this same luxury to Obama?

Yes, it CAN POSSIBLY (quote) be an indicator. But what is ALSO an indicator is that the steps he took at the state level were perfectly constitutional, what his state wanted, and what he needed to do under those circumstances.

God forbid you acknowledge those realities. The man says he will fight to repeal Obamacare and I guaran-damn-tee you he will. What he did in Massachusetts has nothing to do with his plans for the nation as President of the United States. If you guys weren't such blinded radicals, and could actually look at things rationally, perhaps you'd realize that.

I never questioned the legality or constitutionality of what Romney did. I said that what he did is the opposite of what he's telling people now, and for some insane reason people believe him. Liberals guaranteed everything that Obama told them too, look where that got them.

Are you going to really imply that Obama HASN'T given the liberals everything he promised? Let's recap - shall we?

He promised "energy prices would necessarily skyrocket under my plan".
(Mission Accomplished)

He promised universal healthcare
(Mission Accomplished)

He promised to punish the wealthy
(Mission Accomplished)

He promised to punish Wall Street
(Mission Accomplished)

Obama has done EXACTLY what he said he would do. I believe, to the best of his abilities under the circumstances, Mitt Romney will to. Do you guys no comprehend that they want to get re-elected and thus, will do more of what they claim they will do during their first election?!?!

Why can't you comprehend that what he did at the state level was what his state wanted? He was giving the people what they wanted. What makes you think he won't do the same thing as President?

 

[Shelzin]

Once again we see the Sovereign Citizen libertarian with ZERO understanding of the US Constitution or the difference between STATE and FEDERAL government. Typical of these anarchist jack-asses...

ROFLMAO... Reread the thread again you dumbass. I agreed the state should be able to do it. You really are that partisan aren't you? This isn't an act... You really are one of the Retarded Tribal Monkeys. I mean I say it in a general sense most of the time... But you... *looks right at Rottweiler* You're one of them.

People who might agree with you may not be... But you certainly are. You are the embodiment of etch-a-sketch where nothing said before matters.

I really want to understand, but I doubt you'll actually answer... Why do you come here?

You're the partisan hack. I look at each issue and each candidate and weigh them individually.

Yeah... You can say it all you want. But unless you actually do it in some visible manner I can see. *shrugs* Sorry. I'm not a believer.

I was a HUGE Ron Paul supporter. The guy would be second to God when it comes to the economy.

Gary Johnson would too.

But then the 77 year old kook suffering from dementia went and opened his mouth about foreign policy/national security and the entire nation cringed. Any asshole who thinks we're to blame for 9/11, who thinks we don't need a military, and who believes in a policy of "wait until American's die until taking any action" has zero prayer to be president and that's why the people sent him home.

I repeat... Is English your first language? He's talking about blowback. And... Well...

As far as why I come here, it used to be to correct the evil propaganda of the idiot liberal dumbocrat Nazi's. But now I have to add, to point out the absurd irrational thought of you dangerous Sovereign Citizen anarchists.

I don't understand the term Sovereign Citizen as you are using it. Is there some movement I'm unaware of that you are using to promote your stance? Because... Um... They normally call that a straw man argument. Retarded Tribal Monkeys such as yourself use them often.

Why do you come here? To prove to the world how bat-shit crazy Sovereign Citizens are?

I asked you first. If you really want to know I've actually said it before on these boards.

But I'll restate it again if you'll tell me your goals here if you like. No shit... I really want to know why you come here.

 

[Bigfoot]

Heh, the idea that Gary Johnson is going to effect the election in any meaningful way is fantasy.

 

[Shelzin]

Heh, the idea that Gary Johnson is going to effect the election in any meaningful way is fantasy.

You don't have anything to worry about then if you aren't voting for him... Right?

 

[Bigfoot]

Heh, the idea that Gary Johnson is going to effect the election in any meaningful way is fantasy.

You don't have anything to worry about then if you aren't voting for him... Right?

I'm not worried at all. I am going to keep on keeping on no matter who wins the election. This thought that the GOP or DEMs are worried about this guy is pretty silly. I don't believe that he will have much if any impact on the elections outcome. Tonight's debate is much more important then everything this guy has or hasn't done or will or will not do. He is completely off the radar.

 

[Shelzin]

Heh, the idea that Gary Johnson is going to effect the election in any meaningful way is fantasy.

You don't have anything to worry about then if you aren't voting for him... Right?

I'm not worried at all. I am going to keep on keeping on no matter who wins the election. This thought that the GOP or DEMs are worried about this guy is pretty silly. I don't believe that he will have much if any impact on the elections outcome. Tonight's debate is much more important then everything this guy has or hasn't done or will or will not do. He is completely off the radar.

OH yeah... Shit... That is tonight isn't it?

 

[P@triot]

Yeah... You can say it all you want. But unless you actually do it in some visible manner I can see. *shrugs* Sorry. I'm not a believer.

I've done it in a VERY visible manner. But like the video of Ron Paul blaming America for 9/11, you see what you want to see instead of what is there.

I repeat... Is English your first language? He's talking about blowback. And... Well...

"He's talking about blowback" - as if that term some how excuses him from blaming America for 9/11. Give me a break you extreme partisan hack. The man is on VIDEO and you can't even acknowledge it.

I don't understand the term Sovereign Citizen as you are using it. Is there some movement I'm unaware of that you are using to promote your stance?

To answer your question - YES, there is a ton that you are unaware of. Which is why you struggle discussing issues. A Sovereign Citizen is an anarchist asshole who believes they are bound by no laws. That a police officer has zero right to stop them under any circumstances. That they don't have to obey speeding laws, that they don't have to comply with anything because they are "sovereign" unto themselves. A libertarian is just a sovereign citizen calling themselves by another name.

But I'll restate it again if you'll tell me your goals here if you like. No shit... I really want to know why you come here.

As far as why I'm here - scroll up. I answered it as clear as possible. You either missed it or you can't read.