Richmond Times-Dispatch: Is Libertarian Gary Johnson "too honest" to be President?

First, A. Barton Hinkle runs over the positions that make former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson a Libertarian:

Last year Johnson ran for the Republican nomination for president. For reasons known only to the organizers, he was shut out of three early debates, which effectively killed whatever chance he had of gaining traction in the primaries. But those chances were slim to begin with, given his views on issues such as abortion (he believes "fundamentally in the right … to choose"), gay marriage ("equal access to marriage for all Americans is a right," he says, blasting President Obama for giving the matter only "lip service") and national defense (he would cut the Pentagon 43 percent, just like every other department — except Education, which he would abolish).

Equally problematic in the GOP these days, he also believes in evolution. To make matters worse, "I believe in global warming and that it's man-made." And even though he does not use tobacco, alcohol or caffeine, he did use marijuana for three years to ease the pain from his paragliding accident.

On the other hand, he is not likely to win over many Democrats with his views on gun control ("I don't believe there should be any restrictions when it comes to firearms. None"), taxes (he cut them 14 times as governor) or Obamacare (he has said it is unconstitutional).

Given those positions, he's a natural fit for the Libertarian Party — whose presidential nomination he won earlier this month. As ABC News put it, Johnson "intends to hit Obama from the left and Romney from the right."

Then he really cuts to the chase:

Johnson has another political Achilles' heel: He is unflinchingly honest. "Always be honest and tell the truth" is one of his Seven Principles of Good Government. A profile in GQ last year put it more bluntly: "There is nothing he will not answer, nothing he will not share. . . . Johnson is fundamentally incapable of bull****ing." Example: When Mitt Romney made a swing through Michigan, he gushed oleaginously about how "I love this state. It seems right here. The trees are the right height. I like seeing the lakes. I love the lakes." By contrast, when a reporter asked Johnson if he would say the same nice things about Michigan that he had said about New Hampshire, he answered: "No, Michigan's the worst."

With those positions and that level of candor, he'll be lucky to get 0.5 percent of the vote. On the other hand, he will probably enjoy the campaign. As he told another newspaper last February, "The endeavor itself is a great adventure. I'm a Zen kind of guy. … You better darn well like the journey, or the destination won't mean anything."

I got to see this for myself last Saturday, when Johnson appeared via skype at the Libertarian Party of Delaware convention. When someone asked him a question about the constitutional authority of the Sheriff in Delaware, he took long enough to insure that they were speaking of the Delaware Constitution, and not the US Constitution. Then he said, "As President I wouldn't get involved in that." Pressed by the speaker, a supporter who obviously wanted him to use "the bully pulpit" on behalf of the Sussex County Sheriff, Johnson stood firm: "The President of the United States has no business telling the people of Delaware how to interpret their own Constitution."

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here: chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.” The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point: Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo: Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1. Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...

Search This Blog