TheAgitator.com
Run Gary Run
Friday, October 30th, 2009Gary Johnson, the pro-drug legalization, pro-immigration, small government budget hawk and former governor of New Mexico looks to be preparing for a run for president.
Gary Johnson is preparing to launch his Our America PAC shortly, as soon as he gets all of his legal ducks in a row. He will be hitting the trail hard soon, traveling the country to speak in support of issues and candidates, re-immersing himself in the public policy debate.
This December, Governor Johnson will also be releasing a book entitled “Seven Principles Of Good Government,” published by The Heartland Institute (a conservative-libertarian think tank).
It’s hard to see Johnson getting the GOP nomination. But he’d certainly make the primaries interesting.
Let’s be optimistic. He can win.
As a NMican, I would love to see someone from NM in the WH. BUT Governor Johnson proved his lack of integrity by his actions and I would never support him for any office now.
Tiocfaidh ar la!
To what actions are you referring?
fwb,
Please explain. How’d he do your state wrong? I don’t really know anything about him other than what Radley stated.
Hasn’t he been out of office for a long time now? What’s he been doing since being governor of NM?
fwb,
Why would you care if the President is from your home state or not? I hope your second statement holds more true than your first statement, in that you would vote on somebody based on their merits and not on something arbitrary like what state they are from.
As long as he’s denounced by the religious right, I’ll vote for him!
I’m still backing Ahnold on the premise that, as he is not a “natural born” American he can’t be President if elected and the WH would have to sit empty for 4 years.
/wishful thinking mode
I’ll be interested to see how true he stays to his already established stances on several key issues, should he decide to make a formal run: http://johnsonforamerica.com/issues.php
He’s pro-immigration, he ain’t winnin’ nothing.
Regardless of what Radley wants you all to believe, the majority of American’s are NOT in favor of open borders. It’s painfully obvious that Radley has had to live near the Mexican border.
He seems to have squirmed around abortion in an interesting way. Don’t know how this’ll play out with contemporary Republicans. It may be sufficiently soft as to weaken his standing with the hardliners on the anti side.
And his immigration stance seems to me open to some interpretation. Probably for good reason. Yet again, I can’t see this playing in his favor among Republicans, and a good deal of self identifying conservatives as well.
Nonetheless, he’s someone I’d like to see taken seriously on the national level, if for no other reason than to hasten the destruction/rebirth of the Republican party into something better.
Interesting point about pro-immigration people not having lived near the border, etc. I’ve no idea where Radley has lived and I’m sure he’s seen more of the world than I have–and it’s certainly possible one could live around immigrants and still be pro-immigration–but I do think it’s much less likely. Having lived in some very crappy areas in my youth I definitely have a different perspective than many of my raised-upper-middle-class friends. Amazes me how many of them talk of wanting to raise their kids in a multicultural area, etc. Best of luck with that. Maybe their kids will enjoy sitting huddled in their rooms with the helicopter spotlight scanning their backyard and neighborhood, but I never cared for it.
“Regardless of what Radley wants you all to believe, the majority of American’s are NOT in favor of open borders. ”
I don’t recall Radley saying that he thought the majority of Americans agreed with his position on immigration. I’m sure he holds lots of views that don’t currently command majority support. It doesn’t mean those views are wrong.
I’m guessing the integrity issue is not doing anything about the drug issue until he left office. It’s not like he pardoned people or anything.
They might need someone like this to draw votes from Ron Paul, then hit us with media blitz with closet homo and white trash favorite Huckabee. Presidents are selected not elected
The irony of trying to use the “you don’t know what it’s like near the border” argument to justify more restrictive immigration policies is that prohibitions against the free movement of people (in addition to the prohibition against drugs) is the CAUSE of the vast majority of border crime. Desperate people wouldn’t have to throw away their life’s savings to hire violent thugs to spirit them across the desert, through other people’s private property, in the dead of night, if they could freely walk or drive across the border in the middle of the day without fear of the government’s armed goon squads roughing them up and tossing them back. No surprise there – prohibit something and you just drive it underground.
#16
Take off the tinfoil hat. It’s not all about Ron Paul. It’s about 18 months too early to get beamed up onto Mothership rEVOLution.
FYI, I live two blocks from the largest Salvadoran community in the country. Most of them are illegal. And I love my neighborhood.
And I love my neighborhood.
Really? I’ve been reading this blog for years and have read numerous posts by you talking about the crime in and around your apartment complex.
Illegal immigrant’s cause crime (in addition to their original crime of being here illegally). Radley has no problem with open borders and illegal immigrants sucking up our health care and social services, yet is against universal health care that would allow universal coverage for actual Americans. Brilliant logic there.
First, I moved three years ago from an apartment complex that had some vandalism problems, but no violent crime. Second, the one time I was assaulted in my new neighborhood, it was by an American citizen, not an immigrant. Alexandria has almost no violent crime at all, despite having a fairly large illegal immigrant community. I’ve written about this before. Hispanic immigrants (most of whom are illegal) are decidedly not prone to violent crime. Border cities with large immigrant populations are among the safest cities in the country.
Finally, there’s nothing illogical about my position. I think foreign people should be free to come here to work and contribute to our society. I don’t believe they should be able to “suck up” our health care and social services, because I don’t believe in big government health care and social services in the first place.
[...] Gary Johnson is preparing to launch his Our America PAC shortly, as soon as he gets all of his legal ducks in a row. He will be hitting the trail hard soon, traveling the country to speak in support of issues and candidates, re-immersing himself in the public policy debate. Now this is a man who should be president. Gary E. Johnson – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Run Gary Run | The Agitator [...]
“Border cities with large immigrant populations are among the safest cities in the country.”
You been to Brownsville lately? How about Laredo? Either one? Don’t just read “crime statistics”. Go live there for awhile then tell me about how safe it is on the border.
As far as not “believing” in big government health care and social services neither do I. But they’re here and they’re staying and the illegals are indeed sucking them dry.
#22
Radley is absolutely correct, at least that’s been my experience. I’ve lived in Del Rio Texas for over twenty years (I’m about four or five miles from Mexico) and there is very little violent crime here. Of course one must consider that a large portion of the population here is involved with law enforcement of one sort or another.
#22
There are two injustices at play. The first is the coercive redistribution of wealth to compel some people to pay for the health care of others. The second is the coercive enforcement of arbitrary lines drawn into the dirt by violent governments. I must, by virtue of principles of non-aggression, oppose both. That the former exists is no justification for the perpetuation of the latter. It’s a simple exercise in “two wrongs don’t make a right.” Of course, it would be a hell of a lot easier for those who are currently “illegal” to get health insurance if, you know, the government wasn’t busy persecuting them and harassing their employers, landlords, etc.
#20 – (in addition to their original crime of being here illegally)
pssstt – immigration is a civil matter not a criminal one which is why police cannot arrest them until they commit a real crime. Also most social services are paid for through sales and property taxes, which illegal immigrants pay just by living here. Even if they were taxed for their income most earn so little that they would receive the majority of it back as a refund. So the government is out a hundred bucks a year and they don’t get social security or medicare, what a crime.
Its not as cut and dry as legal or illegal.
The second commenter ends his remarks with an Irish Gaelic IRA slogan. How are socialist terrorists connected to libertarianism?
Radley simply saying “I don’t believe in social services, so the fact that illegals suck them dry is a moot point!” doesn’t cut it. Forget social services, what about when an illegal immigrant goes to the nearest ER accross the border and shits out a kid? I wouldn’t consider that “contributing to our society”.
“There are two injustices at play. The first is the coercive redistribution of wealth to compel some people to pay for the health care of others. The second is the coercive enforcement of arbitrary lines drawn into the dirt by violent governments. I must, by virtue of principles of non-aggression, oppose both.”
Ahhh…classic Libertarian masturbation material. Nice goin #25!!
ClassAction says “restrictive immigration policies” are the CAUSE of “border crime”? This is getting good! Our refusal to share state secrets is causing all kinds of espionage too. I call for full and open disclosure.
I really wasn’t referring to “border crime” in such a narrow definition anyway, but instead was talking about living in poor communities that have a lot of first or second generation immigrants. Regardless of statistics trumpeted here, these aren’t the safest or best places to live.
Wow…looks like a couple of bigots showed up for this post.
I think Radley is right. If I want to hire a few people, it’s nobody else’s business whether they are here with “official permission” or not. Unless/until they hurt someone.
“…shits out a kid”?
Really?
No, that’s not dehumanizing, racist invective. Not at all!
Always fun when you “I’m not a bigot, I’m just against illegal immigrants” types let your true colors show.
By the way, Mexican-Americans are assimilating more quickly than any prior class/wave of immigrants. They’re speaking English as their primary language by the second generation. Study after study has also shown that they contribute far more to the economy than they take out of it.
“Study after study has also shown that they contribute far more to the economy than they take out of it.”
Bullshit. And I could link numerous studies that show how much they really do take from our society. And how does having an anchor baby contribute a god damn thing?
And Radley, seriously….you would use the same ‘shits out a kid’ comment if you were talking about welfare moms if they were an American citizen. But when it’s an illegal immigrant, it’s OK for them to suck the life out of social services (which is what having an anchor baby does, btw)
I’ve heard you rant against the evils of welfare, foodstamps, etc. that are ‘handed out’ to women who have kids that they cannot support. Why not show this same discrepancy towards an illegal immigrant women who has a baby on American soil?
I’m with Radley here – I lived in an apartment complex in Arlington VA where I was one of a small handful of natural born US citizens. The remainder were immigrants, legal and illegal, from all over the world. Yes, there was some crime in the area, but mostly the “crime” of possessing pot. I have to say, my neighbors were some of the hardest working, most caring, and genuinely friendly people I have ever met.
We need more people like that, not fewer…
First, I’ve never used the phrase “shits out a kid,” and never would. In fact, I’ve specifically chastised Amy Alkon for using a similar language when referring to a Tarika Wilson.
http://www.theagitator.com/2008/08/11/um-no/
Second, I highly doubt you’ve heard me “rant against the evils of welfare, foodstamps, etc. that are ‘handed out’ to women who have kids that they cannot support.” I’m sure I’ve written about welfare from time to time, but not with that sort of invective. And I know you’ve never “heard” me, because it’s not an issue I cover in any depth, so I’d never have talked about it on radio or TV.
Adultery.
You cannot trust anyone who cannot maintain his/her commitment. Divorce first/ F–k second.
Tiocfaidh ar la!
Home boy 4 Pres!
First, let’s look at the election. It’s bogus. The people are not to elect the president; the electoral college is to choose based on their PERSONAL experience of the person selected or at least so the Framers stated. The current scheme is all BS and a lie to MAKE people think they are involved. The parties decide things outside the Constitution.
Knowing a man personally is a central part of how the US was set up. So voting for someone from your state MIGHT be the best choice.
But then the entire system is so fowled (sic) up that nothing is working as envisioned by the Framers.
Tiocfaidh ar la!
I only have two words for someone who endorses a political candidate:
Mark
Sanford
There are those who would do well to review Einstein’s definition of insanity.
Learn more about Gary Johnson and his stances on the issues at http://www.JohsonForAmerica.com and http://www.OurAmericaInitiative.com