Politics

Gary Johnson on Shariah Panic, Legalizing Marijuana, and "Why the World Doesn't Like Republicans"

|

Mother Jones' Tim Murphy conducted a wide-ranging interview with libertarian former New Mexico governor and Republican presidential candidate Gary Johnson. Let's just say that Johnson doesn't sound like the other GOP hopefuls:

The governor has a knack for spin that's requisite for any candidate for higher office, but he's also got less of a filter, and is noticeably exasperated at some his competitors' antics. For instance, he thinks Herman Cain's fixation on the threat of Islamic Shariah law—and perhaps Herman Cain himself—is a waste of time. "I don't see it happening," he says. "I've never seen or smelled a whiff of it. It's a nonexistent issue as far as I'm concerned. And when Herman Cain answers the first question at the South Carolina debate about what he would do in Iraq and Afghanistan by saying he would consult with his advisers, gosh." Ditto for the party's focus on social issues—the Iowa Family Leader's anti-gay-marriage pledge, he says, "is the reason why the world doesn't like Republicans." I asked about the rise of China, which has prompted some tea partiers, including Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.), to call for an arms race. "When people understand that the United States spends 52 cents out of the worldwide dollar on military spending and that China spends 9 cents, what arms race are we gonna engage them in? I mean really, is China a threat? No, they're not."

Read the whole thing here. For Reason's coverage of Johnson's campaign, start here and then check out this Reason.tv interview:

Advertisement

NEXT: New Witness Testimonies Surface In Kelly Thomas Case: "They Pounded His Face Against the Curb"; "He's Almost Halfway Dead"

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. See, it’s this kind of talk that makes Johnson not a “serious” candidate. The GOP doesn’t want thoughtful people running for office.

    1. Actually, the mainstream media doesn’t want the public to read about a thoughtful GOP candidate, so they don’t write about him.

  2. Man that really does make a lot of sene dude. WOw.

    http://www.privacy-tools.no.tc

  3. Gary Johnson is more a dreadful than a hopeful at this point. His chances might be better if cosmotarians weren’t too cool to vote.

    1. Is there a characteristic of libertarianism that has yet to be derogatorily described as cosmotarian?

      1. It’s only a characteristic of libertarians because most libertarians are cosmos. Paleos are much more likely to vote.

        1. Way more libertarians are fundy Christians than cosmos. Cosmos are a small subset.

      2. Is there a characteristic of libertarianism that isn’t self-destructive?

        1. Don’t you have some crosses that need to be burned?

    2. “Cosmotaraians”? You mean the libertarians who want to know “10 things that will make him think ‘Wow'”?

    3. As far as I’m concerned, the word “cosmotarian” ought only be used in quotation marks.

    1. Huh. That’s disturbing.

  4. That Gary Johnson sounds like a crazy person.

  5. “COFFEE MUGS OF PROTEIN: A COP’S BREAK WITH THE STATUS TOE”

    I WALED THROUGH THE STREETS PAVED WITH JISM.

    IT WAS WONDERFUL. I COULDN’T BELIEVE THE HAPPINESS I WAS IN.

    THE GLOBE TURNED ON ITS AXIS. CHILDREN WERE BUTT-FUCKING ONE ANOTHER. OLD PEOPLE WERE BITING CYANIDE CAPSULES.

    IT WAS FUCKING WONDERFUL.

    BUT THEN I REALIZED THAT DARWINISM DOESN’T GIVE US PURPOSE.

    SO I WALKED INTO A JEWISH ORPHANAGE. I OPENED FIRE WITH MY GUN OF BEAUTY.

    THE TV STATIONS DIDN’T BELIEVE IT.

    NEITHER DID I.

    I WAS SET FREE WITH A WARNING.

    SO I WALKED TO THE CANDY STORE. CAN YOU BELIEVE THE PRICES FOR TURD-FLAVORED CANDY CORN, THESE DAYS? EXPENSIVE!

    I CRIED FOR HELP. BUT THE KLAN WAS DISMANTLED BY THE PC WHORES IN ACADEMIA.

    I WENT LOOKING FOR A HEROIN DEALER, BUT I FOUND GOD.

    THOUGH GOD HAS BEEN IN POWER FOR AN ETERNITY, IT FEELS LIKE AN ETERNITY.

    GOD HELP US ALL, YOU POOR BASTARDS.

    FEEL THE SHOT OF HOT JISM GO UP YOUR BUTT-HOLE.

    FEEL THE LOVE OF THE GREATEST GENERATION.

    BREAK WITH THE PAST, BECAUSE THE PAST WILL BREAK WITH YOU.

    FUCK YOU.

    PALEACRITA

    1. When Freedom Becomes a License for Evil

      BY WAYNE JACKSON

      It has been said that every positive has a negative. That is not true in every case, but it is in many. Surprisingly, the ideal of “freedom,” which we cherish so much, is not without latent liabilities.
      Freedom’s Limitations
      When the colonies won their freedom from British tyranny, it was a new day for America. No longer would there be taxation without representation.
      When Abraham Lincoln signed the “Emancipation Proclamation” (without the approval of Congress), such ushered in a breath of fresh air for African slaves (at least in principle). Freedom will be cherished always.
      But when the leaders of our fledgling nation framed the Constitution, not even they fathomed the implications, much less the potential abuse, that lay in the future.
      For example, they did not at first see certain implications in the words, “all men are created equal”; especially that this equality would include the slaves and women. Slaves were not considered “whole” persons, and women did not have equal rights with men, e.g., the right to vote. This would come in time as the definition of “freedom” was expanded.
      Of course some things they did acknowledge, e.g,, a Creator and His creation, now are outlawed from the educational system. How time does change things! Freedom expanded; freedom repressed!
      A Specific Example
      In the First Amendment of the Constitution, the fathers wrote in part:
      Congress shall make no law ? abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.
      This noble sentiment was designed to prevent a government of tyranny. But the pioneers of the new republic never dreamed where this well-intentioned principle would lead the nation ultimately, when recklessly applied by leaders bereft of common moral intelligence.
      Neither freedom of speech, or press, is absolutely unfettered. Laws against slander and libel restrict both speech and literature. As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once observed, no one has the right to shout “fire!” in a crowded theater. And one is not at liberty to write a death-threat letter to the President.
      Justice Holmes wrote:
      The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to cause a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent (emp. WJ).
      Note the added emphasis. Words must be evaluated not only in terms of “present danger,” but also in view of the evil that ultimately may result. Little weight has been attached to these concluding words.
      Reaping a Whirlwind
      We are seeing an absolute plague of sexual crimes in this country, eclipsing anything our forefathers imagined in their wildest nightmares. Is there any right-mined person who is not alarmed?
      Rape, sexual torture, child molestation, public nudity, spouse-swapping, communal “marriage,” serial “marriage,” homosexual perversion, etc., reflect a societal moral disease that is worse than the “Black Death” that stalked the world from the 14th century onward.
      Whence the origin of this corruption that is consuming the visceral organs of America?
      Jesus declared that such horrible actions as listed (and others) proceed “from within, out of the heart [minds] of men” (Mark 7:20-21). Corrupt the mind of a person, and his body will follow rapidly.
      Since the mid-50s, particularly the Roth v. United States decision (and several rulings subsequent to that), which permitted obscenity to be measured by “community standards”; (cf. 2 Corinthians 10:12b), this nation has been on a free-fall course towards unbridled sexual chaos. Pornographic entertainment (via live shows, literature, movies, video, TV, and the internet) has desensitized society and evolved an insatiable appetite for increasingly depraved interests.
      Virtually anything has become “legal” in its own place. An F.B.I. agent recently stated that federal authorities now are deluged with pedophilia cases!
      Who is responsible for this maniacal degeneracy? Culpability is widespread.
      The aggressive movements of sexual perverts, some judges of lower courts, appellate courts, and the Supreme Court, share a degree of guilt ? as does a sex-drunk society. These, in concert, have stamped a societal “OK” on this immoral malignancy ? all in the name of “freedom.” An inspired apostle warned against using one’s freedom as a license for vice (1 Peter 2:16).
      The Role of Government
      From the divine vantage point, the role of civil government is for the protection of society. Ideally, governmental powers are for the promotion of “good,” and not “evil” (Romans 13:3a; cf. 1 Peter 2:14). Any civil power that promotes evil eventually will fall under the weight of its own foul degeneracy.
      Today in this nation there is a festering imbalance of tolerating evil and opposing good. And it is highly doubtful that such will get better before it gets worse.
      What Can Be Done?
      What can Christians do to help remedy the situation? We can pray that God’s providence may prevail towards a solution. We must commit our lives to purity. It is imperative that we teach the truth regarding sexual chastity, and speak out forcefully and intelligently against the evil of debauchery. And when feasible, a boycott against those who promote filth may well be appropriate.

  6. My wife listens to ACLJ. The constant shariah fear-mongering is getting old.

    Demographically speaking, in order to establish shariah law in the USA sometime in the future, the Muslims are going to have to take on the the largely Catholic Hispanics, which far outnumber them. It just ain’t gonna happen. Can we worry about going broke now?

    1. Weren’t people freaking out 100 years ago about how the influx of catholics was going to turn the U.S a subserviant state to the papacy? Oh yeah didn’t happen then, not gonna happen now.

    2. So you don’t see a Popish-Sharia united front as even temporarily possible, say for a century or so?

  7. He’d make a great president, a Coolidge-esque president.

    Unfortunately, this country would never again elect a Coolidge.

    1. He can’t even competently run a campaign. His message to GOP primary voters is basically “You guys suck. Vote for me.”

      1. As we have seen, the skill-set to front a campaign does not noticeably overlap with the skill-set of actually being President.

        1. If you can’t run a campaign you can’t handle the presidency. The inverse implication of course may be false.

          1. The inverse implication of course may be false. has been repeatedly demonstrated to be false.

            FTFY.

          2. But he could handle the Governorship of NM? I call BS.

            1. If Bill Richardson can do it, it’s not a qualification.

              1. Johnson didn’t just handle it, he did a hell of a lot better job at it. Also Johnson successfully built up and ran a large company.

                What part of running his campaign is incompetent?

                1. The only reason Tulpa hates Gary Johnson is because he isn’t beating the “hordes of Islamic fundamentalists and homosexuals are going to ruin America if the government doesn’t get expansive new powers” drum.

    2. And that is so unfair!

  8. wut is cooligde ?

  9. I wouldn’t call Johnson a libertarian. He supports the Fair Tax, doesn’t want to eliminate Medicare (he just wants to block grant them to the states), supports smoking bans, isn’t against “humanitarian wars”. He almost never appeals to individual rights. He’s always making cost-benefit analysis arguments. I think he’s just a sincere fiscal conservative who doesn’t have a nanny-state impulse that other politicians have.

    1. Which still makes him a much more freedom oriented candidate than anyone except possibly Ron Paul.

    2. Good-faith cost-benefit thinking would go a very long way to shrinking the government.

      It might not take us all the way to libertopia, but if you’re waiting for a magic monorail ride there, you’re going to have a long wait.

      Incremental slogging is how things actually get done in a functional democracy/republic.

      1. This. I agree with Ron Paul about 85% of the time, but still voted for him.

      2. Amen. Preach on.

    3. “I wouldn’t call Paul a libertarian. He supports building a wall on the border, wants to eliminate the 14th Amendment, supports states banning certain marriage contracts. He almost never appeals to individual rights. I think he’s just a sincere social conservative who also wants to eliminate all taxes and impose a gold standard.”

  10. That guy’s just gonna split the Libertarian vote and cost us the election!

    1. I’ve got a one ounce gold coin here that says if you combine Johnson’s and Paul’s final results, it still won’t beat the Witch’s or the Mormon’s totals.

  11. I get the feeling Mr. Johnson would lose all his lefty support as soon as he said one disagreeable thing about Obama. Then he becomes just as racist as Newt and Cain.

  12. Johnson is still my favorite candidate for 2012 so far.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.