Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Answering Some of Your Questions Answering Some of Your Questions

09-30-2011 , 05:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elbow Jobertski
I'd like to know what criteria the Gov would apply to choosing a U.S. Supreme Court justice. Would there be litmus tests? If so what? Would he look to general party affiliation, school of jurisprudence, or just someone he thinks is a good judge regardless of the above?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mong
That is a really good question! I honestly don't know.

I'm assuming that he would look for someone who believes in limited government, and in protecting and restoring civil rights. I would think that party affiliation would be very secondary. Beyond that it's very hard for me to say.

I will pass this up to our communications director to find out if he has anything on this. Thanks for the great question!
Here's the response back from our communications team!

Governor Johnson has said he would not apply litmus tests, but would seek justices who appear to understand the original intent of the Constitution (i.e. those who do not believe it is a "living document").

\m

Support Governor Gary Johnson for President! https://donate.GaryJohnson2012.com
Answering Some of Your Questions Quote
09-30-2011 , 10:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by banonlinepoker
You obviously don't know how politics work or understand the electoral map and how it works. This independent voters who decide elections views Libertarians as a fringe element as they do the Bernie Sanders faction of the DNC. Neither will ever be able to get enough states to win. Obama won in a perfect storm of anti-incumbent sentiment and a masterful campaign. Now of course he went bak on just about everything said in that campaign and became a lackey for Pelosi which is why we are in the boat we are in.

You may dislike Romney, Perry and Christie but a 2012 that finds a GOP president and filabuster proof senate means repealing health care and that is our only goal. As it is the only thing keeping unemployment high. Once that burden is lifted from businesses and they feel they have a congress on their side they will hire and we will recover and boom.

We also have a unique situation in that online poker is a way to create jobs and tax revenue. If the economy was booming this wouldn't even be a story and congress wouldn't want to touch this but now even the GOP will get on board for nobody want to be in the way of that.



How when the money isn't even there?
You are seriously lost if you think the health care reform bill is the primary thing, muchh less the only thing, keeping unemployment high. That's really lol braindead stuff.

Also loved the "perfect storm" you described that got Obama elected, when in fact 4 of the last 5 Presidential elections have seem the Democratic President receive more votes than the Republican. Just because all of your inner circle vote Republican doesnt mean the rest of the country does.
Answering Some of Your Questions Quote
10-01-2011 , 04:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mong
I apologize for not being able to get to your question earlier. I just started responding to questions for Governor Johnson here, so I decided to start with the most recent questions and work backwards. Now your question is among the most recent!

1 & 2. To stop jobs from going overseas, Governor Johnson will provide the best corporate environment in the world by enacting the Fair Tax.



Passing the FairTax will make America, arguably, the best place to locate and build a business in the world. This would be a huge boost to companies large, small, and everything in between. In addition, Governor Johnson will reduce to a minimum the regulations businesses, especially small businesses, have to comply with. Regulation compliance is a huge drag on the growth and productivity of businesses, and encourages businesses to locate overseas where compliance requirements are more reasonable.

Governor Johnson will provide further certainty for businesses by at the very least halting recent actions and activity by the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board), such as suing Boeing for planning to build a plant in South Carolina (which is in the United States!) where the new workers wouldn't be members of unions. Actions like this encourage businesses to locate overseas.

Tax breaks would be a moot point, because all American business would be on equal footing with ZERO corporate taxes. Large corporations would no longer have loopholes unavailable to small businesses. Learn more here.

3. Governor Johnson believes that the free market is the most efficient method of eliminating energy dependence. Government interference has severely disrupted energy innovation. For example, we continue to provide oil subsidies that discourage innovations in alternative energy. Perhaps the most unfortunate example is with regards to nuclear energy.

At the advent of research into harnessing nuclear energy, scientists recognized that there were two fuel routes: uranium/plutonium, and thorium. Thorium is inherently safer (runs at normal pressure, and naturally shuts down when power is removed rather than melting down), produces far fewer byproducts which also have half lives orders of magnitude shorter (500 years instead of 10,000+), is far more economic (orders of magnitude cheaper), and far, far more plentiful (thorium could power us for thousands of years instead of one hundred). So, why aren't we using thorium reactors? The government couldn't make weapons out of thorium, so they blocked research. So, who's researching it? China and India. Governor Johnson will remove current and future obstacles to this and other innovations, and stop subsidies that give preferential treatment to certain lines of research so that innovations stand on their own. The free-market will naturally self-direct to the most sensible solutions.

4. Governor Johnson believes that military action in Libya was inappropriate. Foreign military action Constitutionally requires congressional approval, which hasn't been granted nor sought. He will bring home the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as evaluate the numerous bases overseas for closure.

5. To start, Governor Johnson will reduce foreign aid by 43%, the same cut that he will apply to all of government. "Given trillion-dollar deficits, America simply cannot afford to be engaged in foreign policy programs that are not clearly protecting U.S. interests. There is nation-building and rebuilding to be done right here at home" (foreign policy).

6. "Our military should remain the most potent force for good on Earth. To do this, we should resort to military action as the last option and only as provided in the Constitution." (foreign policy) "US military spending is more than that of every other country combined. There's a culture of waste, fraud, and abuse in defense budgeting we simply can no longer tolerate. Defense spending must be subject to the same scrutiny as other areas of the budget." (military)

Thank you!

\m

Support Governor Gary Johnson for President! https://donate.GaryJohnson2012.com
First, thank you for the reply.

Second, wow. I wish he had more national attention. Either way, has my vote.
Answering Some of Your Questions Quote
10-05-2011 , 04:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by arcdog
You are seriously lost if you think the health care reform bill is the primary thing, muchh less the only thing, keeping unemployment high. That's really lol braindead stuff.

Also loved the "perfect storm" you described that got Obama elected, when in fact 4 of the last 5 Presidential elections have seem the Democratic President receive more votes than the Republican. Just because all of your inner circle vote Republican doesnt mean the rest of the country does.
Yes, I would agree that our economic problems are much more complicated than the passage of healthcare reform. Would you agree, however, that the healthcare reform is a burden on the economy, and has likely discouraged hiring by increasing the costs of an employee to the employer? If you were an employer in a shaky economy and it suddenly became much more expensive to cover the costs of the employee, would you become more reluctant to hire?

Here is a report from The Heritage Foundation, showing a remarkable correlation between the passage of healthcare reform, and a 90% drop in hiring (scroll down a page to see pretty graph). The Heritage Foundation is at the very least a pro-conservative group, so the report cannot be considered unbiased. And, correlation does not mean causation. However, it is disturbing at the very least.

Here is what I would expect to be a more unbiased report (but I don't claim that it's completely unbiased). It's produced by the investment house UBS. Reports like these are intended to give their clients and investors insights into the markets, so its in their bests interests to be correct as their credibility as an investment house is on the line. That being said, there are a lot of crappy reports out there, and a lot of conflicts of interest. Most of them, however, are very insightful. Here's a forum discussion about another, similar UBS report that just hits on some key points (admittedly, likely biased selections).

I personally think that it's safe to say that healthcare reform is a drag on the economy, and that it discourages hiring (and may even encourage firing). If that's the case, then it was not wise to pass such legislation until the economy was out of the woods. President Obama should either work to get the legislation repealed once he realized that the economy was not rebounding and the effect that the legislation has had on the economy (hey, one of the reasons we liked President Obama was because it seemed like he could admit when he had made a mistake, which President Bush famously could not), or if he doesn't, then we ought to look for someone who will.

And, I agree, President Obama would have won in 2008, no matter WHO the Republican candidate was (including Governor Johnson). President Obama is eloquent, ran the perfect campaign, and very successfully cast himself as being the anti-Bush (with whom most Americans were fed up, including me). In other situations, he may not have won with such a landslide. President Obama hasn't proven to be what he claimed to be, though. He had the ability and overwhelming support to bring real change, but focused on partisan legislation (like healthcare reform and favoring unions at the expense of the economy), continued the wars, continued failed fiscal policy, continued racking up debt (on OUR credit), renewed the Patriot Act, starting assassinating American citizens (that's wrong, no matter who it is... are we a principled nation who despises tyrants who take for themselves the ability to take our lives without due process, or not?), etc., etc., etc..

Elect Governor Gary Johnson. He has a record that PROVES that he is real change. He isn't some unknown with no political record who can claim that he's whatever the moment needs. He's someone with experience, and he's PRINCIPLED. Almost to a fault. You'll know exactly who you're electing, and what he'll do in office. No questions. No surprises. Honest, principled leadership. Isn't that what we've always hoped for? If you're a Republican, then vote for Governor Gary Johnson. If you're a Democrat or Independent (like me), then declare Republican and vote for Governor Johnson in the primaries, and you can undeclare or switch affiliations after that.

\m

Support Governor Gary Johnson for President! https://donate.GaryJohnson2012.com
Answering Some of Your Questions Quote
10-05-2011 , 04:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelerPower
First, thank you for the reply.

Second, wow. I wish he had more national attention. Either way, has my vote.
That's what I'm talkin' about! Thank you for supporting Governor Johnson!

\m

Support Governor Gary Johnson for President! https://donate.GaryJohnson2012.com
Answering Some of Your Questions Quote
10-05-2011 , 11:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yaqh
what's the word on Governor Johnson being included in the debate next week?
Governor Gary Johnson, the candidate with the best economic and fiscal record, is being excluded from the debate, even though the last time he was included in the polls he outpolled two of the current invitees. Their solution? Just exclude him from future polls so they don't have to invite him to future debates.

Whether you're a Governor Johnson fan or not, this is an injustice. The theme of the next debate is the economy. The American people deserve to hear from him, and to hear his unique plan for addressing the economy and fiscal problems of the nation.

Please contact the debate organizers and ask them to include Governor Gary Johnson:

- Washington Post: Contact information at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...tus/index.html or corrections form at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...y/corrections/ or email: national@washpost.com or Twitter: @washingtonpost or @postpolitics

- Bloomberg: 212-318-2000 (east coast) or 617-210-4658 (Boston) and http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/feedback?site=sales or http://www.facebook.com/bloombergnews or email: release@bloomberg.net or Twitter: @BloombergNews or @BloombergNow or @BloombergTV

- WBIN-TV: (603) 845-1000 or info@wbintv.com

- Peter G. Peterson Foundation: 212-542-9200 or comments@pgpf.org

Thank you!!!

Quote:
If you want to let Bloomberg or The Washington Post know you would like to see Gary Johnson in their debate contact them at release@bloomberg.net or national@washpost.com.

October 5, 2011, Manchester, NH — With the announcement by Bloomberg and the Washington Post of participants in next week’s Republican presidential debate at Dartmouth, Governor Gary Johnson’s campaign is continuing to question the motives of the national media for excluding the two-term New Mexico governor from not only debates, but the polls frequently used to determine who is in their debates.

Senior Johnson campaign advisor Ron Nielson said in a statement released today, “Somewhere, news media executives are sitting around trying to decide for the Republican Party who their choices for President should be. They decide who to include in polls, and then use those polls – presumably, in the case of Bloomberg and the Washington Post – to determine who is allowed on their debate stages. The result is that Gary Johnson, a successful two-term governor, is not heard or seen.

“Next week’s debate is supposedly to focus on the economy and jobs. National publications of all stripes have recognized that, of all the governors running for the nomination, Gary Johnson’s record of job creation and cutting government spending is unsurpassed. Yet, he is excluded. That makes no sense.

“When there are other candidates invited whose performance in the polls are within the margin of error to be at 0% support, by what logic is Gary Johnson not included?

“We have not heard a word from the organizers of next week’s debate. Like everyone else, we simply read in the press that the list of participants does not include Governor Johnson. That’s unacceptable.

“Our efforts to understand what is going on have failed. Perhaps it is time for actual voters to begin asking the questions and letting the national media know that they can make their own choices – they don’t need the folks at Bloomberg or the Washington Post to ‘screen’ the Republican field for them. “
( http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/johns...snubs-continue )

\m

Support Governor Gary Johnson for President! https://donate.GaryJohnson2012.com
Answering Some of Your Questions Quote
10-06-2011 , 06:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FTPisBLM
Governor Johnson,

On behalf of twoplustwo poker forums I would like to thank you for your online poker advocacy. Also, I would like to apologize for your thread being so close in proximity to the "Poker Players Who Look Like Animals" thread on the main page. We can't all be winners.

My sincere apologies,

FTPisBLM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FTPisBLM
Haha.

No disrespect. It's meant to be read: not all twoplustwo'ers are winners.
No worries ; ). Thanks! We'll continue to do what we can!

\m

Support Governor Gary Johnson for President! https://donate.GaryJohnson2012.com
Answering Some of Your Questions Quote
10-06-2011 , 07:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZRocketman
There's a big difference between opposing gay marriage and opposing a federal mandate on gay marriage. Johnson has said that he personally has no problem with gay marriage, but would prefer to see the government get out of the controversial business of defining marriage. He's been very clear about his position in many interviews on this subject.
So, does he support the repeal of DOMA, which is the federal law that prohibits the federal government from recognizing the marriages of same-sex couples who can marry in six states (and DC)? Why should a legally married same-sex couple in Massachusetts not get all of the federal rights and benefits that attach to the marital relationship?
Answering Some of Your Questions Quote
10-31-2011 , 10:19 AM
I , as a european have a question aswell, My apologizie for my bad english grammar

I watched yesterday Zeitgeist - The Addendum

where it says, that a group of bankiers are ruling the US and pushing the Country into useless wars to maximize the profit: can you as a possible new President say if this is a fiction or if this can be true ?
Answering Some of Your Questions Quote
10-31-2011 , 12:09 PM
Mr. Garry Johnson!
I am from Islamic Republic of Iran. I have been prisoned in Evin after the last presidential election.
For me their exists one criterion to evaluate if someone is righteous or not.
The rightous man uses the same norms for his doings as he uses for others. If this is not given, he is not honest. If he is not honest, how can he be rightous?
For example:
Our president lately did boast that U.S. government had contacts with Ghaddafi, while Iran didn't have any with Ghaddafi since 30, 40 years. But if political relationships with a dictator are contemptible, why do they have relationships to other dictators? He is not using the same norms to evaluate dicators with which he has good relations and with those with which he hasn't good relations.
Now I use the same criterion to evaluate your honesty.
Why all this pressure on Iran because of his Atomprogramm and not the same pressure on Israel?
Why USA has atombombs but doesn't want others to have it?
(BTW: It is my opinion, for the dignity of a country it would be better if it would not exist than having weapons of mass destruction, no matter if it would be my own country)
Why USA doesn't apply the same pressure that it does on Iran regarding human rights, than it does apply to Saudi Arabia, China and other dictators and other countries which breach human rights clearly like Israel? What makes them better dictators? What makes them better contemnors of human rights?
The government of G.W. Bush did clearly lie about the existence of mass destruction weapons in Irak. Would you dare to say: Mr. Bush! You are a liar! At least did you ever critisize his dishonety regarding this issue?

Regards and Thank you very much for spending your time to answer our questions.

Last edited by shahrad; 10-31-2011 at 12:23 PM.
Answering Some of Your Questions Quote
11-01-2011 , 04:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by shahrad
Mr. Garry Johnson!
I am from Islamic Republic of Iran. I have been prisoned in Evin after the last presidential election.
For me their exists one criterion to evaluate if someone is righteous or not.
The rightous man uses the same norms for his doings as he uses for others. If this is not given, he is not honest. If he is not honest, how can he be rightous?
For example:
Our president lately did boast that U.S. government had contacts with Ghaddafi, while Iran didn't have any with Ghaddafi since 30, 40 years. But if political relationships with a dictator are contemptible, why do they have relationships to other dictators? He is not using the same norms to evaluate dicators with which he has good relations and with those with which he hasn't good relations.
Now I use the same criterion to evaluate your honesty.
Why all this pressure on Iran because of his Atomprogramm and not the same pressure on Israel?
Why USA has atombombs but doesn't want others to have it?
(BTW: It is my opinion, for the dignity of a country it would be better if it would not exist than having weapons of mass destruction, no matter if it would be my own country)
Why USA doesn't apply the same pressure that it does on Iran regarding human rights, than it does apply to Saudi Arabia, China and other dictators and other countries which breach human rights clearly like Israel? What makes them better dictators? What makes them better contemnors of human rights?
The government of G.W. Bush did clearly lie about the existence of mass destruction weapons in Irak. Would you dare to say: Mr. Bush! You are a liar! At least did you ever critisize his dishonety regarding this issue?

Regards and Thank you very much for spending your time to answer our questions.
Because Iran has natural gas and crude oil, which is locked for the US , thats why they are looking into it to produce confusion all over the world. Than if someone say, we need the natural resources from the Iran ..they can easily come and start the war. This is what happen with Iraq, this is why they hold hands with Israel. Whole World knows, Israel doesnt have the money to keep going this way.
Its truly sad that such a big land is ruled by some economic guys. And I need to say there is no offence to US citizen , we are critizing your government, which most of you also do.

Anyhow all this makes the USA looking bad all over the world, you might say now, Why we do care, we are so or so bigger ..... lets wait some years till the financial sector will collapse and than lets see who is still big. Big Nations comes and they all fall.
Answering Some of Your Questions Quote
11-01-2011 , 05:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaakkang
I personally like Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDND5tcUFoI

This guy is brave, and not so short-minded about global problems.

But I like your stance on UIGEA


and how can Giuliani be so stupid?


anyway, best of luck
Ron Paul may not be perfect,but at least he's honest with a clear and long term vision.We have tried and trusted in the promises of so many presidents to only feel disappointments.Ron Paul is a man who truly believes in liberty,he has a record to prove it.I say,let's give the doctor a chance to operate!
Answering Some of Your Questions Quote

      
m