Gary Johnson

Libertarian Gary Johnson Clarifies Foreign Policy Stances

Anti-Iran deal but pro-trade, wants to encourage China to curb North Korea, and too experienced with the actual complications of governing to want to rethink World War II on the fly.

|

Libertarian Party presidential candidate Gary Johnson (former Republican governor of New Mexico) made various pronouncements about foreign policy at the Libertarian National Convention that seemed outside the general "no intervention outside the national borders ever" Libertarian consensus. Along with that consensus usually comes great doubt about various stories the national security apparatus tells that make foreign intervention seem necessary.

Gage Skidmore via Foter.com/CC BY SA

Johnson's preferred description for his foreign policy outlook has been "skeptic" for at least a few weeks now, certainly in preference to "noninterventionist" or the usual insult of "isolationist" often attached to libertarians.

At the last debate between the Libertarian Party's would-be presidential candidates, Johnson was happy to declare radical Islam a serious threat and merely to say he'd make sure it was fought in collaboration with Congress, not via unilateral executive action, that we "need an open debate and discussion on how we do deal with" the threat, and "that is something that has not happened."

Some of Johnson's positions were read ambiguously or mistakenly, by me or other reporters, after his comments at that C-SPAN aired debate with the other Libertarian presidential contenders that occurred a week ago in Orlando. (His answer about World War II seemed particularly controversial, more on which below.)

I took his precise comments on stage about North Korea—which came unbidden, he was not specifically asked about the rogue nation—to mean that he was prepared to ally with China to quash the threat they pose with military action. "The greatest threat in the world is North Korea," he said at the debate. "At some point Kim will have intercontinental ballistic missiles that work. How about engaging China" to say "let's do something about North Korea, let's do something about Kim, unify the Koreas and be able to withdraw the 40,000 troops in South Korea."

My interpreting that as a call for military action along with China was dead wrong, Johnson said in an interview on the convention floor. He let me know first that he got his ideas about North Korea and how to deal with it from libertarian movement luminary Ed Crane, now-retired longtime chief and co-founder of the Cato Institute. (Crane is now running a SuperPAC supporting Johnson, as I reported yesterday.)

What he really meant, Johnson said, was "we need to ally with China, they recognize how rogue North Korea is" and convince them via diplomacy and negotiation to realize "it is in their best interest to" deal with their own regional threat on their own. Not by helping them with American military might to essentially conquer North Korea, I ask?

"Just the opposite. It was a message of persuading China through diplomacy to deal with what is a regional crisis."

While many libertarians supported the idea of the Iran deal for its hoped-for damping of the chances of another Middle East war waged by us, Johnson is skeptical and at the debate said that he does not support the deal.

"Iran is categorically proven to finance terrorism," Johnson said at the debate. "It's the number one financier of terror around the world" and thus Johnson thinks unfreezing what he thinks is their "$165 billion" in funds was a mistake since "some of this money would go to terrorism. No, we should not have signed the Iran deal. We should not have unfrozen those assets."

He walks a fine middle ground, though. While against the asset unfreezing, he made clear in a later interview from the convention floor that he thinks we can and should have ended the general embargo and "opened up trade with Iran without unfreezing assets."

When I asked if he had an elaborately detailed plan of how to deal with Iran on the international stage, he admitted he did not and that he "did not want to misspeak" on the topic by speculating wildly on the fly. Charmingly, Johnson troubled himself to delicately but firmly correct my own consistent mispronunciations of the former Persia's name. "EE-ran," he kept correcting me whenever I said "I-ran."

The most widely and sillily misunderstood comment on the foreign policy of long ago came when debate moderator Larry Elder, interested in exploring the strangest and most alienating areas where libertarian thought sometimes goes, asked such gotcha questions as, was it wrong to enter World War I? World War II? Was the Hiroshima bombing an act of evil?

The Hiroshima question came first, and Johnson answered that he "didn't want to judge" the actions. "Truman was faced with an obviously difficult situation," and Johnson brought up the usual arguments of the pro-bombers, that hundreds of thousands of American lives would have been lost had we chosen to invade instead of nuke. He did mention that he wasn't entirely sure two nukes were totally necessary.

Not a particularly bleeding heart answer. Yet later, he chose to just not rise to the bait of the World War I and II questions and answered them with a simple, "I don't know." 

This lead some journalists and tweeters to question Johnson's foreign policy competence or sanity. I didn't make much of it as in the context of the debate I interpreted his "I don't know" entirely as "I'm not going to play this gotcha game."

Joe Hunter from Johnson's media team gave this response to the controversy over the World War II answer:

"Having actually governed, Governor Johnson is very conscious of the reality that decisions are made in the context of the times, and based on what is known at the time. He is thus very cautious about speculating as to what he would have done 50, 60, or 100 years ago if presented with the circumstances of the time. Any decision about deploying military force would be based on a fundamental determination of what is necessary to protect the people of the United States, as opposed to unnecessary interventions of recent years." 

NEXT: Is This X-Men: Apocalypse Poster Really Promoting Violence Against Women?

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. “he wasn’t entirely sure two nukes were totally necessary”

    What’s crazy is that they didn’t surrender after the first one.

    1. We might have only had one.

      1. They had already lost before the first one was dropped. Just too psycho to accept it.

        1. “They had already lost before the first one was dropped. Just too psycho to accept it.”

          Midway stopped any advance east, and the Japs could not have supported a garrison on Midway anyhow.
          Attu and Kiska were dead ends; why the US wasted effort retaking them is probably a story about some congress-critter with a constituent who lost a son or husband there.
          By August ’42, the southeast expansion was halted at Guadalcanal. Given the limited Japanese economy, the tradeoffs to defend Guadalcanal meant the New Guinea effort was dead in its tracks by October ’42.
          SE Asia (CBI), was equally blocked by late ’42, regardless of the Indian separatist movement.
          Japan had lost the war by January ’43, as had the Germans. And they both continued to fight.
          So when anyone asks ‘why did the allies demand unconditional surrender?’, just point out that the war was lost by the Axis in 1943, but they kept killing.

          1. Sevo, Excellant post. Your knowledge of WW2 history is spot on.

            To add a little… the Japanese high command attempted a coup that included an attempt on the Emperor’s life AFTER the Nagasaki bomb was dropped. The purpose of the coup was to prevent the surrender speech and to continue fighting. It was only another conventional air attack, note AFTER the Nagasaki bomb, that stopped the coup and enabled the Emperor’s surrender speech.

    2. I read a very long and detailed documentary about this. It seemed that the opinion of the Japanese was that the allies had somehow, maybe having infiltrated the city with many spies and agents planted, managed to douse a lot of things in the city with gasoline prior to dropping a series of conventional bombs. I suppose they needed some more convincing. I guess they figured it out by the 2nd bomb.

      1. Also, as bad as this is for a reason, I think they wanted to show the Russians that, hey we beat you, we have the bomb, so don’t fuck with us in Europe.

        1. There’s no doubt Russian factored into the decision.

          1. Indeed, especially the peoples who natively spoke it at the time. *grins*

            1. +1

              You get a cupcake.

      2. They’re lucky we only had two. You know what? We have a bunch of even better nukes now; we should nuke Tokyo.

        1. They were all hand crafted things back then. We had a 3rd in development, but it would have been a few weeks until it was ready.

          1. “They were all hand crafted things back then.”

            Artisanal nukes?

              1. Cool.

                “Back then, the bomb was a handmade, artisanal product.”

                AND IT SUPPORTED GOOD PAYING JERBS FOR HARD WERKIN MERICANZ

                MAKE AMERICAN NUKES GR8 AGAIN

                1. Pure retard from you, as usual. What a wasted link. I mistakenly assumed that was for a sentient.

                  1. It was a joke, and as usual you’re too stupid or humorless to get it.

                  2. Don’t worry, others enjoyed it. Go back to ignoring the screaming perpetual child of the north.

                    1. I enjoyed it as well, which you’d be able to see if you had the reading comprehension.

                2. Aren’t you just some Canadian who voted for Trudeau?

              2. Awesome story. This would make a great movie with Slotin at its center. Thanks for sharing.

                1. Jeff Goldblum as Slotin?

                2. With Rufus as the voice of The Demon Core.

      3. I’ve mentioned this before so apologies for banging on this drum, but Downfall makes it clear why a second bomb was necessary.

        1. “I’ve mentioned this before so apologies for banging on this drum, but Downfall makes it clear why a second bomb was necessary.”

          Thanks, RN.
          If you have not read “Downfall”, you are not qualified to speak on the issue, period.

        2. To stop people from parodying Hitler’s ranting?

          1. No eddie, to keep people from aborting the new savior!!!!!!!

      4. JET FUEL CAN’T MELT TATAMI MATS

      5. I read a very long and detailed documentary about this. It seemed that the opinion of the Japanese was that the allies had somehow, maybe having infiltrated the city with many spies and agents planted, managed to douse a lot of things in the city with gasoline prior to dropping a series of conventional bombs.

        They thought this after the firebombing of tokyo?

        Also, aren’t they called “books” when you read them?

        1. Maybe he watched on mute and read the CC.

        2. “They thought this after the firebombing of tokyo?”

          It wasn’t “they”; that was one of the theories floated to explain how in hell *ONE* bomber caused that amount of damage.
          Lemay wasn’t persuaded that a nuclear weapon was both possible and effective until after Hiroshima. We’re familiar with it now; it was not clear at the time.

          1. One of the rumors/hypotheses at the time according to the book Hiroshima was that the airplane had dusted the city with Mg, and that a spark then ignited the cloud. A flash of Mg can produce UV burns consistent w what was seen.

            1. “One of the rumors/hypotheses at the time according to the book Hiroshima was that the airplane had dusted the city with Mg, and that a spark then ignited the cloud. A flash of Mg can produce UV burns consistent w what was seen.”

              Read that so long ago, I’m not even sure I still have it, or could find it if I did. But it was a dead-end hypothesis regardless.
              The near-post-war literature was full of bullshit; many people read Prange’s “Miracle at Midway” and had hopes they knew what and happened. I did too, until I had suspicions regarding Japanese tactics and found Parshall and Tully’s “Shattered Sword”.
              Wanna know how planes leave and return to a flight deck and why that matters? Read “Shattered Sword”, not “Miracle at Midway”.

    3. “What’s crazy is that they didn’t surrender after the first one.”

      Yeah, if the first one wasn’t enough to make them surrender, then that’s on them, too.

      If they all but consented to the second one, then it’s as much on us as it is on them.

      Meanwhile, having a President who says he’d be reluctant to lay waste to however many civilian casualties isn’t a bad thing–and it’s not like Johnson is going to win.

      It’s hard to imagine Johnson’s position being worse than Clinton’s or Trump’s on any issue. Just give us a protest candidate we can be proud of, Mr. Johnson. Hell, if the other options are Hillary or Trump, I’m happy to settle for the opportunity to vote for anyone who isn’t a total embarrassment.

      1. As opposed to me, who says the most effective way to win at war, & to prevent war, is to be as evil as conceivable, & target civilians primarily.

    4. Actually, not all that crazy.

      The Japanese had a lot of theories about what happened in Hiroshima, some quite insane.

      But on the perfectly sane side, one of the theories accepted that it was a nuclear weapon, but believed that nuclear weapons were so hard to make that the US wouldn’t be able to finish building a second one for months or even years. And Japan had taken the Tokyo fireboming blow; Japan could absorb a hit on that scale every six months and still be ready to resist a ground invasion.

      (And, if the only way we had to make bombs was the way that the Hiroshima bomb had been made, they would have been right. U-235 isotope extraction was slow and costly and difficult, and the US couldn’t possibly have dropped another uranium bomb for quite a while, nor easily increased the production rate. But plutonium? We were on a three/month schedule with plenty of ability to increase production.)

      Hiroshima didn’t actually change the known correlation of forces. But Nagasaki? That where the US demonstrated it could deliver massive devastation from the air faster than Japan could recover between blows.

    5. My neighbor’s half-sister got paid $18590 last month. she been working on the internet and moved in a $397900 home. All she did was get blessed and apply the instructions uncovered on this website..

      browse this site…. Go Here._______________ http://www.earnmore9.com

  2. No, yes, yes on ww1, ww2 and nukes.

    3rd is less clear.

    1. That’s my feeling – he could have simply said that he would not have intervened in WWI and, by not doing so, the war would have been settled more equitably for Germany and WWII would have been unnecessary in Europe. As for the nukes, the case has been made that there never should have been a call for complete, unconditional surrender and that we may have gotten Japan to surrender with limited conditions had we simply rolled back all their territorial gains and isolated the island.

      1. “the case has been made that there never should have been a call for complete, unconditional surrender and that we may have gotten Japan to surrender with limited conditions had we simply rolled back all their territorial gains and isolated the island.”

        Fuck that. The only way to gain peace is with total and absolute victory.

        1. Thank you. All that no nuke surrender shit is debunked Zinn myth.

          1. I’m afraid, in the strict ugly calculation that war is, Cytotoxic is correct in my view. America, rightly or wrongly, was at war. It was engaged. It’s silly to make all this assumptions and conjectures on what the Japanese may or may not have done. The United States did, in my humble opinion and from I’ve learned reading about WWII, the right thing going for total victory. At some point, enough is enough and Japan was one tough, stubborn nut to crack.

            Alas, I do understand why Americans debate it though.

            1. these assumptions…

            2. Are you the type who, when you do an armed robbery, shoot after they give you the $? Don’t state what you want, so they don’t know you just want the $?

      2. “As for the nukes, the case has been made that there never should have been a call for complete, unconditional surrender and that we may have gotten Japan to surrender with limited conditions had we simply rolled back all their territorial gains and isolated the island.”

        The case has been made, robustly, many times, and any connection regardless, Japan wasn’t ready for surrender at all.
        Read “Downfall”, period.

        1. English tis time:
          The case has been made, robustly, many times, and regardless, Japan wasn’t ready for surrender at all.
          Read “Downfall”, period. If there is a later book which can honestly claim that “Downfall” is wrong, I have yet to see it. If someone finds one, please let me know.

          1. And yet they didn’t make the enemy kill every motherfucker in the house. They did surrender. It’s very uncommon for a country to require complete extermination of its people & domestic animals. The point is, there needs to be a carrot along w every stick.

          2. There are plenty of articles debunking this nonsense on The Mises Institute web site. Dropping the nuclear bombs was a crime against humanity. None of your brainwashed apologetics will ever change that fact. This is like a fucking religion for some of you people. The brain washing is deep on this.

            1. “There are plenty of articles debunking this nonsense on The Mises Institute web site. ”

              Oho! Well I am certainly convinced. I bet they even have? opinions in them!!!

              Holy shit why did I ever do my own research and was lots of things not on Mises, WHEN ALL I HAD TO DO WAS GO TO MISES!!!

              What was I thinking!?!?!?

              Thanks buddy!!!

      3. You’re elected president of now, not prez of the past. You need to have an idea of what to do under any circumstances. Yeah, too bad we didn’t elect you back then, but you’re no good to us now.

        I agree on the negotiated surrender, though. If the USA had held out for unconditional surrender of the UK, there’d probably be no independent USA. You make war to get what you want, not go beyond that to what you don’t need. Be as evil as you can be, torturing civilians & their children & puppies, but always with the promise to stop if they do what you want, no further strings.

        1. Robert, you have no clue what you’re talking about.

      4. Any candidate that thinks anything less than unconditional surrender fromJapan was acceptable deserves to lose, and lose hard. What utterly retarded bullshit. This has already been argued to death, with no credence for any other position. It’s just pacifist fan fiction.

        1. Well, Pacifist-Flavoured Slash Fic is always en vogue, reeking of rose scented flatulence.

    2. I fail to see the difference between being barbecued by an atomic bomb and being barbecued by napalm. The firebombings of Tokyo were just as horrific to the people who lived in the city as the atom bombs were to the people who lived around Hiroshima.

      1. And the same for every bullet hole, & every body part blowed up real good.

      2. Agreed.

  3. Let’s see if I can brainstorm…a demilitarized, neutralized Korea – no foreign troops, former North Korean leaders who resign promptly are amnestied and sent off to a private island.

    Thoughts?

    1. Where, in this scenario, is there room for the comic genius of Alan Alda?

      1. he’s talking about solving the issue now, not going back in time and stopping a war and depriving us of a beloved piece of Americana.

        1. Oh, ooh, Oooh.
          /Edith Bunker.

          1. So…Archie was in a Bunker.

            You know who else was in a bunker?

            1. Arnold Palmer?

            2. Mike Stivic?

              1. Stifle!

            3. Coal baron Don Blankenship?

            4. Iranian nooklar scientists?

      2. It was t a chicken! It was a baby! A baby!

    2. How exactly are you going to accomplish this? The people there are completely brainwashed. And Kim is a psychopath. You first have to oust Kim from power, from the inside. Go ahead.

        1. More Tahiti than St. Helena.

          1. Actually, we have a really cool summer camp on Cuba.

      1. Sad as it is to say, The Interview got it right: make the golden child reveal himself to be an idiot. Then the borders will accidentally open. And boom.

        1. Well, I liked the interview a lot. I laughed, it was funny.

          However, you might want to watch ‘Inside North Korea’, a non-fiction window into the insanity that if the PRNK. The people are terrified into a cult like state. They worship Kim like a god on earth because they’re terrified not to.

          There is no easy solution to something like this. Right now, there is no immediate solution that does not involve the death of tens of millions.

          1. I bet I could bargain it down to the death of 5M.

            1. I’m sure you have written some entertaining nonsensical fiction that says so.

              1. He read, “The Art of the Deal.”

        2. Well, I liked the interview a lot. I laughed, it was funny.

          However, you might want to watch ‘Inside North Korea’, a non-fiction window into the insanity that if the PRNK. The people are terrified into a cult like state. They worship Kim like a god on earth because they’re terrified not to.

          There is no easy solution to something like this. Right now, there is no immediate solution that does not involve the death of tens of millions.

          1. Fuck you, squirrels.

          2. Yeah, I don’t know about all that. I suspect that if Kim were to be assassinated, the whole thing would come falling down. Maybe not, maybe one of his generals would take over. But I doubt they’d be as batshit insane as Kim.

            1. I think the regime is ‘way more fragile than, say, the USSR, so I’d tend to agree if Kim (and issue) were removed, a military faction would take over, but it would be similar to China, post Mao.

        3. Hey it worked for the DDR!

      2. The free markets taking root in NK are slowly unbrainwashing the country. It’ll take time but it’s happening.

        Better yet, find a way to persuade China to ‘intervene’.

  4. The libertarian consensus seems to treat the foreign policy between states as equivalent to the interaction between individuals.

    I am unsure of the total validity of that assumption given these state are inherently coercive.

    1. It is an absurd equivalence to make.

  5. This lead some journalists and tweeters to question Johnson’s foreign policy competence or sanity.

    Republican Governor Gary Johnson: “In your guts you know he’s nuts!”

  6. “Did Halsey act stupidly?”

    1. I don’t follow modern singers.

    2. He had to have a berth or he couldn’t get to sea.

    3. Only in October…under a Red moon.

  7. I find it hard to give a fuck about “foreign policy” when “domestic policy” is crushing us all.

    If elected get rid of labor legislation, Obamacare, environmental regs, banking regs, and anything else that gets in the way of business.

    While doing that end the drug war and the war on guns.

    Bring back the gold standard but work on eliminating federal notes altogether.

  8. Should Lee have dug trenches across NoVa?

    1. We should dig trenches across NOVA now to halt the spread of the Borg.

    2. Nah, the canal boom was over.

  9. Donald J Trump: “A non-interventionist candidate who can win”

    1. Cool story monkey aids.

  10. Does GayJay have an interventionist foreign policy, or just an incoherent one?

    Something tells me it is BOTH.

    1. The irony….the retardation…

    2. I’m generally of the opinion libertarians should learn to STFU about “non-interventionism” and just play dumb and go, “I think war is bad and should be avoided” and generally not try and explain some bullshit philosophy which doesn’t actually apply very-well to foreign relations theory or world history.

      i’m not suggesting anyone change their minds or believe anything different! just stop thinking its supposed to be a compelling pitch to anyone.

      Because stupid people hear than and go, “But…. what about the Nazis…”
      and everyone else in the professional foreign policy establishment hears it and goes, “oh fuck, an ideologue”

      and both don’t fucking trust you anymore.

      Just shut up and go, “War is bad! Let’s not do that so much. Let’s try and get rich:”

      1. Trump wins describing a non-interventionist foreign policy. He’s campaigning on abrogating treaties, disentangling alliances and withdrawing much of our foreign-based forces and the voters are eating it up.

        1. Crawl back in your fucking cave. Jesus fucking Christ on a stick, at least Tony didn’t pretend to be a libertarian before he spewed his putrid bullshit. Let me give you some advice, shortbus: you lose any semblance of credibility when you complain about GJ as a candidate because he didn’t pass a libertarian purity test about what he (as the Federal Executive) would do about fucking state laws regarding gay cake baking and then proclaim that Trump is a more libertarian candidate. Trump, a reality TV star who proudly admits he would use executive powers to a)prosecute Snowden b)punish citizens/businesses who criticize him c)expand the drug war d)increase hostility toward China e)stop businesses from outsourcing labor to other countries (just to name a few).

          Seriously, SHUT. THE. FUCK. UP.

          1. Why don’t you shut the fuck up? Your rant was, pretty lame.

  11. University of Miami Establishes Chair for Study of Atheism

    “The chair has been established after years of discussion with a $2.2 million donation from Louis J. Appignani, a retired businessman and former president and chairman of the modeling school Barbizon International, who has given grants to many humanist and secular causes ? though this is his largest so far. The university, which has not yet publicly announced the new chair, will appoint a committee of faculty members to conduct a search for a scholar to fill the position.

    “”I’m trying to eliminate discrimination against atheists,” said Mr. Appignani, who is 83 and lives in [wait for it] Florida. “So this is a step in that direction, to make atheism legitimate.”…

    “”We didn’t want anyone to misunderstand and think that this was to be an advocacy position for someone who is an atheist,” [administrator Thomas J. LeBlanc] said. “Our religion department isn’t taking an advocacy position when it teaches about Catholicism or Islam. Similarly, we’re not taking an advocacy position when we teach about atheism or secular ethics.””

    1. “Mr. Appignani was raised a Roman Catholic in the Bronx by Italian immigrant parents. His father was a clothing presser in the garment district. He attended Catholic schools and said he became a nonbeliever at the City College of New York when he discovered the work of Bertrand Russell, the British philosopher and Nobel Prize winner.”

      1. I wonder what Mr. Appignani thought of this gem from Russell’s Why I am not a Christian:

        “The churches, as everyone knows, opposed the abolition of slavery as long as they dared, and with a few well-advertised exceptions they oppose at the present day every movement toward economic justice. The Pope has officially condemned Socialism.”

        (That part of the book was first published in 1930, when the chief slave-state in the world was the Soviet Union, whose policies Russell supposedly opposed.)

        Opposing socialism! No wonder Mr. Appignani couldn’t be a Christian any more!

        1. That right there is a great argument for Christianity. I’m sure Hank Phillips would agree.

          1. That’s a ringing endorsement; Mr. Phillips’ wholly pathologically obsessive stridency mirror that of a one Micheal Hihn, an equally unhinged and grandiose individual. I suspect they are blood relations. *grins*

    2. I don’t have a problem with this. Skepticism, heathenism, apostasy ? these are historically interesting and florid topics.

      That said, I don’t know what this will add that history and philosophy departments don’t have covered. But *shrug*

      1. Or, as LeBlanc put it in the understatement of the century: “The idea that there are nondeity approaches to explaining our surroundings is not controversial in the academy.”

        But money is money, and if some rich guy living in a time warp thinks colleges aren’t exposing students to enough religious skepticism…well, they may as well take the money before he changes his mind and gives it to someone else.

    3. In other news, L’Oreal to introduce “albino” hair dye.

      Seriously, though, it might be nice to have someone to mythbust all the nuttiness that gets spread about atheism, as long as it does it without simply slotting in lefty articles of faith that are supposedly “inextricably” linked to atheism.

      Although, don’t religion depts. already study atheistic belief systems (like Buddhism)?

      Our religion department isn’t taking an advocacy position when it teaches about … Islam

      It’s cute that you believe that.

  12. Post-hoc what-if questions should always be dismissed contemptuously.

    1. Which is what he should’ve done at the debate in 2012 when asked what TV character he would be, or something funny like that I don’t remember exactly.

  13. For the Life of me, I don’t know why more and more people are not running towards Gary Johnson.
    He’s the most reasonable candidate.
    Call me a hopeless hopeful, but I’m hoping most people in America are reasonable.

    1. but I’m hoping most people in America are reasonable

      Umm, no, they aren’t. Otherwise, why would our top 2 candidates be Clinton and Trump?

      Johnson is just so meh. If libertarians want to win, even if they want to break into double digit votes, they have to do better than that.

      1. He’s an “in the middle” libertarian.

        1. He’s almost an ‘in the middle’ republican. His running mate is a totally NOT libertarian.

          1. “He’s almost an ‘in the middle’ republican.”

            Give me a break no he’s not. Get out and experience real people in the real world sometime.

            1. Shut up, Canuck, you’re only 10 at most.

              1. But I’m still smarter and more articulate than you.

                1. You’re not even smarter and more articulate than my 5 year old grandson. Even he can point out Kentucky and Kansas on a US map and knows the difference between an email account and an email server. But then, he’s capable of learning from his elders and betters.

                  1. “knows the difference between an email account and an email server. ”

                    Whoopee. If there’s a difference made by this distinction, go ahead and make it.

                    Aren’t private email accounts hosted on a different server anyway? My gmail is likely not on the same server as my work address.

                    1. If there’s a difference made by this distinction, go ahead and make it.

                      You just asked me if there’s a difference between a server and email. Go back to elementary school, do not pass go, do not collect the ‘I am not a retard’ certificate.

                    2. Again: is the private email not on a different server from the main one? MAKE. YOUR. POINT.

                    3. Well, sure it’s on a different server. And Google pays lots of people to try to keep that server from being hacked.
                      Also, when Powell was using a private email address, the rules were different. And, he turned all his emails over to the government. HRC set up an insecure private server for the express purpose of evading FOI requests, and compromised U.S. security in her mission to to be uncountable.

                    4. Ah nice someone actually willing to communicate the point.

                      Was her server actually insecure though?

                    5. Yes, it was actually insecure. Which doesn’t matter, because it wasn’t her choice to make. If the gov server got hacked, that not her responsibility.
                      On top of that, either her or her aides took classified information from government computers that are not connected to the internet in order to make them secure and put that information on her server, which is a felony. Actually, several felonies. Like life in Leavenworth kind of stuff.

                    6. “On top of that, either her or her aides took classified information from government computers that are not connected to the internet in order to make them secure and put that information on her server, which is a felony. Actually, several felonies. Like life in Leavenworth kind of stuff.”

                      And she has yet to answer for any of that other than sympathetic interviews regarding why those evil rethuglicans keep harping on her server when she is oh, so generous in her tips, doncha know?!

                    7. Of course she did. She has a lot to hide, and wanted to cover her tracks.

                    8. Wait, you actually think what Powell and Clinton did are the same thing?

                      Hahahahahahahahahaha.

                    9. The derp is strong here… and smells like Timbits.

                    10. Again: is the private email not on a different server from the main one? MAKE. YOUR. POINT.

                      Chain of custody?
                      Transparency?

                      You’re a fucking retard.

        2. If he had more charisma and better political sense, he’d be the perfect model of what the LP should be. It should change its name to ‘Liberty Reform’ or something, build downticket presence, and otherwise emulate not-so-doctrinaire ‘liberal’ parties like Costa Rica’s libertarianish party.

          Looking to the LP to lead libertarianism is like waiting for your car tires to start your car. It is to conflate the movement and the party and that’s just a disaster.

        3. Yep, an “in the middle of the GOP” libertarian
          With an almost “in the middle of the Democrats” libertarian VP

  14. Johnson’s more or less clear-eyed and grounded view of the world and foreign policy is an example for all libertarians.

    1. Like you? Are you an example we all should strive to emulate?

      1. What? You don’t like Hillary?

        1. I’ve ~*~heard~*~ that Colin Powell and other SOS’s did the same thing!

          durrrrr de derpa doo

          1. Well, they did according to this guy: http://www.forbes.com/sites/ch…..a55ac72c7d

            I can totally believe that he got something wrong. Nonetheless I won’t tolerate baseless insinuations.

            1. The IG drew a distinction between Powell and Hillary:
              1. The rules were not the same at the time
              2. Powell’s email was approved
              3. Powell did not conduct all of his business on a private account.

              Your Forbes link is wrong.

              And while other senior officials had used personal email accounts for official business, including Colin Powell when he was secretary, the rules made clear by the time she became the nation’s top diplomat that using a private server for official business was neither allowed nor encouraged because of “significant security risks.”

              “By Secretary Clinton’s tenure, the department’s guidance was considerably more detailed and more sophisticated,” the report concluded. “Secretary Clinton’s cybersecurity practices accordingly must be evaluated in light of these more comprehensive directives.”

              http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05……html?_r=1

              The quotes are from two different articles, can only link one.

              1. ‘Toxic is a fucking idiot who had a mom who said ”toxic was smart”. ‘Toxic is fucking stupid enough to believe what momma said.
                Tony makes ‘toxic look like a genius.

                1. Tony makes tree moss look like geniuses by comparison.

                2. Tony makes Cytotoxic look like Bryant Gumbel.

                  -negrodamus

          2. Yeah, they used personal email, so it’s true. It’s also true that almost everyone on the planet uses personal email. Taking home the State Department’s email server and putting it in your basement, everyone who has ever tried that (Hillary) would be in prison unless they were certain people (Hillary).

            1. Next time, try actually reading the article. You’ll look so much less stupid.

              “Powell did all his email business on a private account. All of his emails on official business were apparently in a private account”

              1. LMAO! You just cannot learn can you?

                1. I need to repeat slowly for the retards:

                  EMAIL…

                  SERVER…

                  NOT SAME THING, DURRR. Google good, grog learn, duh, take long time, but grog learn…

                  1. I think there’s a relation between the account you use and the server it’s on.

                    Hey remember when you had the delusion that you could be a scientist? When you asked about microbiology? I remember telling you not to bother because the pay sucks and the work is tedious. What I should have pointed out is that you are uniquely unsuited because 1) you fucking suck at communicating and 2) you fucking suck even worse at thinking or knowing stuff. Just stick to writing script or whatever it is you do. I’m a mediocre scientist, and next to you I’m an intellectual giant.

                    1. Basically, what Clinton did was wrong and likely illegal, but it’s not that unusual. Also, the inability of the office in charge of this stuff to trace her emails and find them is also not unusual. My point still stands: this is never going to move election numbers, and is probably one of the least awful things Trump or Hillary has ever done.

                    2. The fact is, loser, is that I am a scientist, with a lucrative career, and you’re a loser who feels the need to lash out out at people here who are clearly more informed and knowledgeable than you are on a number of subjects, to make yourself feel important. You can’t learn. And if you keep this shit up, I feel sorry for where you are going to wind up in life. Goodbye you dumb fuck, I’m done.

                    3. I don’t do this to feel important, I do this to put know-nothings like you in your place.

                      I’m sure I’ve learned more in the past 10 years than you ever will. You’ve never displayed any penchant for critical thinking while here. You don’t belong here.

                    4. Learning the smug isn’t something to brag about (but I guess it’s inevitable?NOT bragging while being smug seems paradoxical).

                    5. Did they private email account have over 1800 classified emails on it including some with special access program information? Was the account ever hacked? Did Powell order his subordinates to commit a felony by stripping the markings off classified information and sticking it on a unclass system?

                      If so, get back to us about that. Otherwise just shut the fuck up because once again you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

              2. Powell was at State when they had no developed policy.

      2. Yes and yes. Obviously.

    2. Define “libertarian”. If you get it right, then I’ll take your comment seriously.

    3. Define “libertarian”. If you get it right, then I’ll take your comment seriously.

    4. Define “libertarian”. If you get it right, then I’ll take your comment seriously.

    5. Define “libertarian”. If you get it right, then I’ll take your comment seriously.

      1. One who commands the squirrels with his mere thoughts.

      2. Is it “cuckslayer”?

      3. “Somebody who wants to take over the world and leave everyone the hell alone “

      4. A statist who argues with other statists about what size the government should be.

  15. OT: I saw the worst thing ever on the cover of Time Magazine today: “Markets are strangling the economy. How to fix it”

    1. I just skimmed through it, and it wasn’t as bad as I thought it would be, but there was no exposition on “how to fix it” (which is maybe a good thing ? “more regulation” is of course implied). It’s just a lot of diagnosis. Whatever.

      1. The sheeple’s mind is easily molded. There’s a reason that cover says what it does.

    1. There’s a sappy country music dirge in this story.

    2. and he was shipped South by mistake to be buried as a Confederate.

      I presume this is the premise for the new upcoming film, a cross between “Ghost”, “Enemy Mine”, and “Poltergeist”…

      …where a southern family buys an old-plantation-home to refurbish, and discover the plot haunted by spirits which keep switching the TV to “Yankee Woodcutter” and changing the radio to “All Things Considered”…

      …during which time the young girl falls in love with the young yankee-undead’s spirit, only to provoke the wrath of her father who won’t never have no daughter of his a’foolin around with no Yankee Ghost, and calls in the local Daughters of the Confederacy(Exorcism Unit) to De-Spookify the home in a thrilling last-act, where there’s a showdown between the Ghost and the revived spirit of General Clevon P. Beauregard, former plantation owner and slavemaster.

      Yeah, that’s been done before.

      1. Probably better than The Exorcist.

        1. The Exorcist was awesome, I just hope the author is able to exorcise Georgetown.

          1. It was boring.

            1. Oh, I see, you have a different definition of “boring” than I do.

              1. Canadian TV must show the edited version

                “Your mother sews socks in Hell” !

                1. Oolong…..beauty, eh?

                2. SNL used Your mama sews socks that smell! The CBC, or at least, SCTV, would use Your mother sews socks in Hull, eh?! – Kevin R

            2. Yeah, Georgetown is awful, but compared to, say, Toledo…

      2. That is a more original idea than I’ve seen from Hollywood in years.

        I know that sounds like damning with faint praise, but I’d watch it.

  16. I was disappointed he didn’t take a stand on WW II – of course we should have entered! Maybe he was still smarting from the drivers license jeers. But now the irony is that whatever he says he’s still the most reasonable one of the bunch. I hope he doesn’t squander this advantage by holding back on common sense answers and being super sensitive to the way people pronounce things and other nonsense.

  17. OT: The left wingers are using Trump’s attack on Curiel as an example of ‘inciting violence’. Sound familiar, Reasonoids?

    1. If Trump were elected President I bet he would criticize the Supreme Court during the State of the Union address. That is totally something a bastard like that would do. No one who would attack the courts for political gain is fit for office.

      Right?

  18. OMG this is the most pathetic kiss-ass trope I’ve ever read. Rivals anything the R’s and D’s have come up with.

    I won’t even waste my time with Reason anymore. You fuck-ups are just pathetically trying to marry R and D evil into one cauldron of confusion. About 20% of me believes you cucks are a psy-op to discredit libertarian philosophy, because that’s the net result of what you do.

    It’s ok. You idiots are rightly perceived as the morons you are. Thus the lp’s pathetic historical performance. Eventually, thinking people will differentiate between people who call themselves libertarian, and libertarian philosophy.

    Until then, enjoy losing, losers.

    Have a nice day!

    1. “cucks”

      Mark of the tard right there.

      1. Stop negging him

      2. Wow. 1 minute after I posted.

        I guess I should be roped into saying something like, “tard” – mark of the cuckold right there.

        But I won’t. Instead I’ll just say: goodbye to establishment libertarians. May your R and D masters treat you well.

        1. It’s one of our resident trolls. Pay no attention to it.

          1. Someone such as myself who consistently dominates you in logic and facts is not a ‘troll’ Hyperion.

          2. A Tulpa sock?

            1. It was lost in the dryer…

          3. perhaps, but he is right.

        2. LOL “establishment libertarians” is almosy as lulzy as “cucks”.

          1. “Establertarians”?

        3. Don’t pay attention to the trolls. Also, you should read the comments here for a while. This is a good community where a lot of good libertarian discussion takes place. The writers are not exactly the commentaiat. I’m not saying we’re always at odds, we’re not. But the commentariat are a lot more libertarian the Reason writers, in general.

          1. “This is a good community where a lot of good libertarian discussion takes place.”

            That was the case but over the past few years there’s been a build-up of know-nothing fucks like you around here. People who just babble about ‘neo-conz’ and who’s the latest person suspected of being a Tulpa-sock. This place needs a purge so it can be a safe space for intellectuals.

            1. Cease the flapping of thy Canadian head!

            2. This place needs a purge so it can be a safe space for intellectuals.

              Agreed. Here, drink this nice Russian tea my wife and I prepared for you…

              PS

              Don’t worry, my wife and I made sure to make it, “extra special” for an alleged man of your stature…

            3. But where would you go then?

          2. THAT is certainly true. The Reason writers are a hodgepodge of folks with various conflicting phobias, fantasy visions, and dementias.

      3. Yup.

    2. ^^this guy really gets it.

    3. a psy-op to discredit libertarian philosophy

      IT would explain a lot.

  19. Nate Silver (PBUH) made an excellent point a while ago: Trump’s campaign has a lot in common with a financial (or any other kind of) bubble. Self-feeding excitement, baseless hype, etc

    1. Nate Silver is a sexually-frustrated ugly homosexual. His sensory functions are probably seriously compromised.

      OK, enough ad-homming.

      Anyway, bubbles can impact other’s (mis)perceptions of their roots, though. “Wow, he’s doing really well. I think I’ll invest.” All that matters is the ultimate vote. Will the bubble?if it exists?burst before then? Or will it survive the vote?

      1. I doubt it. Bubbles burst when scrutiny and/or circumstance prick them.

        I still think Trump might not win a single state.

        1. More like Trump wins 40+ of them. He should take my advice and choose Tulsi Gabbard as his running mate for a “fusion ticket”.

      2. At least he is not hiding in the closet like Rush (King of the Rednecks) Limbaugh.

        1. Goldi has the good graces to specifically insult a man as an undersexed and ugly faggot, and you have the temerity to follow on with a meek, euphemised assertion that Rush is a self-hating homosexual.

          You, sir, have no class.

          1. Silver may be a faggot but he is living as a free man whilst Fat Rush is cloaking his Dominican Republic gay sex vacation lifestyle behind a curtain of lies which chain him to a fictional persona isn’t free to leave.

            1. And yet, here you are on Reason, a political backwater, posting trollish posts for 5 cents each to get your next bottle of cheap wine.

              1. PB is just angry that Rush really Sint gay, and especially not gay for him. Denying him that El Rushbo reach around he fantasiss about each morning while dutifully listening to Rush’s radio program.

            2. Much better. Now write it out a hundred times.

            3. Silver is limited by the ugly. Free? I mean, rentboy.com got shut down.

              Maybe he and Rush can bone, for the benefit of mankind.

              1. When the stakes are lowered by no consequent children it’s kinda fun to ship these guys.

                Me next: Hillary and Valerie Jarrett would hatefuck eachother so hard that Huma would get tingles.

            4. The Lithium, takes it, Dr. Maximus and Dr. Zhena Groovova strongly suggest.

              Otherwise, your incessant hammer fucking of your eargina with that freshly broken broom handle will take you down farther and farther that Prospect of Delusional Grandeur…

          2. Why am I reading spittoon’s post with Erlihc Bachman’s voice?

            /Cannot. Stop. Laughing….

            1. “You just brought piss to a shit fight you little cunt/cock.” HAHAH

              Okay, you sold me on the show.

              1. “Why bring sand to the beach? There’s already pussy there.”

        2. I’m not really sure who or what you’re addressing, or why, and I’m OK with that.

  20. This is fun. What to to do about:

    1)Crimea (2014)

    2)Estonia (2018)

    1. don’t bother.

      1. This. Maybe it would behoove Estonia to have an army.

        1. An army versus Russia? Sure. An alliance might be helpful in a pinch.

          1. The Baltics and Scandis and Poles can form an alliance. Send some really nice letters to Germany too.

            1. Dissolving NATO is what Putin wants!

              1. Dissolving NATO is what *I* want.
                I’d suggest the Euros get together and figure out what they ought to do about the bear. As an American taxpayer, I’ll be happy to read about it.

                1. Dissolve NATO, the EU, the UN and all the other bureaucratic nightmares that are being used in place of actually well thought out agreements between sovereign countries.

                2. The are bigger issues involved. Do you want the fair young ladies of a Free Estonia to look upon Americans as the Guarantors of their Liberty, or do you just want them fucking a bunch of Polack conscripts?

                  1. “Do you want the fair young ladies of a Free Estonia to look upon Americans as the Guarantors of their Liberty, or do you just want them fucking a bunch of Polack conscripts?”

                    That’s GOOD, Q!
                    It’s always the ‘fair maidens’, if it’s not ‘for the chillenz!’.
                    BTW, they can screw who they want so long as I’m not paying for their defense; hookers are cheaper, even good ones.

                    1. My work here is done.

                3. Not only that. Only to have to listen them lecture Americans about how dumb they are.

                  I wouldn’t be pleased either.

                  1. “Not only that. Only to have to listen them lecture Americans about how dumb they are.”

                    And what “cowboys” the Amis are for defending their sorry asses.

                4. There’s only one candidate on the ballot for getting the US out of NATO, and it ain’t Gary Johnson.

        2. This is an interesting point. I remember telling folks that Ukraine, and Georgia giving up the old Soviet Union nukes was a mistake. The only effective protection a small state has against a large one is having nukes.

          If I were the leader of a small country, getting nukes would be my number one priority. It even gets Kim Jong Il left alone doesn’t it? Gadaffi would still be around if he had nukes.

  21. What reason would motivate China to muzzle its pet pinscher? Kim must know the only reason the U.S. hasn’t given him the Castro treatment (as ineffective as that was) is because China stands behind him as an older, powerlifting brother. So Kim poses no threat to China and China has no reason not to let their trumped-up little proxy rage incoherently against American imperialism.

    1. I’ve heard China has been really pissed at NK over various things like nuke claims, but they never do anything.

      I read a Cato article that actually had a decent point (unusual for a Cato article on foreign policy). America should just pull out and make clear that they are having a nuke sale for the entire region.

      1. If the U.S. pulled out more we wouldn’t have so many unwanted children dotting the globe.

        1. Paging Swiss, can we get a narrowed gaze over here?

          1. I’m a reasonable facsimile…

            1. Whoops! “less than” sign no workey…

              (narrows gaze)

        2. Pulling out more?

          I don’t know what that means.

          1. Hahaha, damn sloop, that was perfect.

            +1 internets for you!

    2. Our foreign policy on the PRNK is currently influenced by only one thing. They have nukes. Otherwise they would find themselves being the next Iraq. We are not afraid of China, that has nothing to do with it. And yeah, China is not going to rein them in. They are the entity responsible for the PRNK existing, otherwise it would be one big South Korea today.

      1. ” Otherwise they would find themselves being the next Iraq.”

        People say this, and I don’t know why. Iran doesn’t (?) have nukes and they haven’t been liberated by America.

        1. But “we” keep looking for an excuse don’t we? Again, look at Gadaffe (Kadaffe?).

      2. Also, China does not want NK toppled because they would likely have to absorb over a million refugees. That costs money.

  22. Heads up, Peanuts.

    Matt Welch is a guest tonight on Real Time.

    Tune in.

    (if Matt wrote about it earlier and I missed it please refrain from calling me out on it. I can’t spend every hour of every day here like some of you “libertarian” layabouts can. I suspect many of you (like Hyperion and Suthenboy) are on SSDI and food stamps.)

    1. Figures you’d be a fan of that witless, unfunny prig. The man has all the charisma of a slaughterhouse without producing anything worthwhile. He’s the intellectual equivalent of wafting slaughter fumes.

      1. I like Matt for his occasional insight. He has never claimed to have charisma.

        1. That’s low, buttplug. Real low. You know what I meant.

          I would never accuse Matt of trying to be funny.

      2. Oh good I’m not the only one who doesn’t find him funny or insightful. See also ‘John Stewart’

        1. Maher is actually funny several times per show. Stewart almost never is.

          1. Maher’ politics are garbage, and a lot of what drives his show’s agenda is sucking up to the right people to get invited to the right parties. Been that way since ‘Politically Incorrect” when he and Hefner became buddies.

    2. I see your mum paid the intertoobz again.

    3. Palin’s Buttplug|6.3.16 @ 8:59PM|#
      “Heads up, Peanuts.”

      Fuck off, turd.

    4. That eargina of yours is getting a *real* workout, innit?

    5. You pay your bet yet demfag?

  23. Brian, that’s because it *is* pronounced EE-ran. Same with Iraq. Do we say I-taly?

    A former employee of mine from Iran would pronounce it EE-rawn.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIpfWORQWhU

    1. I pronounce it like Flock of Seagulls and don’t care. Fuck them.

      1. Iransofarawayeeay just doesn’t have the same ring.

    2. “E-daho”
      “I-sreal”

      1. EES-LAND!

        1. EE-ray-land

        2. Eye-gypped?

          1. Indeed, sloop! Of the, “bum fucked,” variety, I reckon!-)

  24. “Making Donald Trump our commander in chief would be a historic mistake,” sez Hillary.

    Well, Hill, when we set the bar as low as we did with Obama, it didn’t seem like we could get much worse. But you and Trump made the effort, really picked up the slack for this dismal cycle, and bulled ahead with it. Only now we’ve reached the point that the both of you would be historic mistakes, and it’s up to the electorate to decide which would be worse.

    And then vote for that one, as Americans did in 2012.

    1. Remember when the Bushpigs left office in Jan 2009 their approval rating was an all time low of 22%.

      Obama is over 50% at Gallup.

      1. I suspect Obama will climb up to the high 70s by this time next year.

        1. Oh Christ…the republicans have done it: they’ve consecrated Obama.

          1. After a few months of Hillary, Republicans are going to be hated at record levels… for not putting up a stronger candidate.

      2. Incredibly, dumbplug happens upon a good point.

        Obama just isn’t that hated. For someone like Trump to even have a shadow of a chance, the incumbent must be loathed. Obama should be but isn’t.

      3. Remember that one time that you actually addressed a statement with an actually-relevant statement of your own?

        Me neither.

        1. I like this Goldiloxstein fella.

      4. Yeah, makes you wonder what is going on doesn’t it?

        Think about it. The general population of the country is so pissed that Bernie Sanders is upsetting Obama’s Secretary of State coronation. They are so pissed at both parties that they want an outsider (Trump) for the GOP and let’s face it, an outsider for the Democrats.

        And then, these polls tell us how much we love Obama.

        Gotta say the polls look crooked to me since they contradict what is actually taking place.

  25. Cato (in support of Obama’s free trade pacts):

    Despite What Donald Trump Says, Free Trade Benefits Americans

    ……

    The pact eliminates some 18,000 tariffs (99 percent of those currently in existence), reduces non-tariff barriers (which would provide the greatest share of economic benefits), and streamlines customs procedures (which often are used to indirectly protect domestic firms). Those steps would encourage trade all around.


    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..74598.html

    Even Huffpo gets it right once in a while.

    1. Even Shreek gets it right once in a while.

    2. Palin’s Buttplug|6.3.16 @ 9:11PM|#
      “Cato (in support of Obama’s free trade pacts):
      Despite What Donald Trump Says, Free Trade Benefits Americans”

      I’m sure you and that hag’s other fanboys find that interesting.

      1. Soros upped Shreek’s pay to 7 cents a post, he’s all excited. He might yet get a pint of MD 20/20 tonight.

  26. This thread is Hinfected. Thank Bejeebus for the Reasonable block feature.

    1. I laced his Geritol with LSD…

      HIHN-SPIRACY!

  27. Wait, I just read the post.

    Now he’s waffling on World War II?

    Of course, he’s still the most mature and realistic of those who sought the LP nomination.

    But that’s grading on a steep curve.

    The LP is the kind of party where the “serious” “adult in the room,” “electable” candidate is the guy who would intervene to make a Jew bake a cake for a nazi, but won’t commit on whether he’d go to war against nazi germany.

    1. Well, they’re was a lot of disagreement in the U.S. at the time, too. In fact, there was a fairly sizable faction that wanted to join the Axis.
      I remember an alt-history book, that I don’t think I actually read, where Charles Limburg wins the presidency and the U.S. joins the Axis.

      1. Sure, and I actually see where Johnson is coming from on WW2 (as opposed to the cake nonsense).

        But in politics you’re supposed to apply your hindsight in saying what you would have done.

        1. I agree. He’s not losing any votes if he says “Hell yeah! America saved the world!”

      2. Charles Limburg

        the great cheese-pilot.

        1. Figures a cracker like you would take a dig at him for that.

        2. Nice. I didn’t catch that autospell mistake

        3. Well, if he had crashed, all they would’ve had to do was follow the smell to find him…

    1. very soothing, thank you.

      1. I loved their voices, but so far my fav tonight was the wineglass guy.

        1. Hmmm…I’m forced to admit his is the more skilled version.

      2. Also, I’m a steadfast atheist with no illusions about the concept of immanence but I enjoy your posts on Catholicism. I don’t get the haters around here. You’re a man who puts an institution, even one an atheist might decry, ahead of the state. That’s admirable, whatever its flaws. Or yours.

    1. Damnit. I saw “sex quartet” and then had the disappointment.

      1. Then you’re probably going to be disappointed by this aria from Henry Purcell’s Dido and Aeneas.

    2. Why are we repeatedly posting version of one of the worst Baroque/chamber pieces that continues to be played.

      1. I am a simple man with simple tastes. I thought you’d understand.

        1. That’s fine. Like what you want.A lot of people like it. I just really hate that piece.

          I was never a fan of it to begin with; it seems a bit saccharine to my tastes. Then I went to 10 weddings over the course of a summer and I learned I loathed it. Really, no one can come up with a different piece to play at a wedding?

        2. But I’m more of a romantic myself.

          1. it seems a bit saccharine to my tastes

            But I’m more of a romantic myself.

            Glenn Gould weeps.

            1. (Just yanking your chain [pulling your pigtails].)

        1. The short-sleeved t-shirt over long-sleeved t-shirt look! O sweet Nostalgia, embrace me.

        2. Okay, that is brilliant. Good lord.

          1. I have a violin. It’s beautiful. I haven’t played violin in two decades. I was in middle school when I learned to play the instrument. I didn’t go far. And yet there’s something about holding the instrument to my head, even if I can only playact bowing, that takes me back. I wasn’t ever talented, I wasn’t taught well. But I always regretted never learning more. I miss it desperately. I don’t deserve it. I never practiced as much as I should. I never learned to love it, not until I no longer had it. And now I hold it to my head, and I draw the bow over the strings, and I get lovely sounds, but I have no idea whether they’re tuned right. When I bought the thing, a friend tuned them for me. And I played the strings, and I sobbed, because I was drunk and it was lovely. It’s been several months, and I can’t tell you whether the strings are tuned. I play them but I’m no closer.

            1. I am the true vulgarian. I am a man without the redoubt of civilization.

  28. What a stupid handball call. This ref really wants Colombia to win.

  29. if continents were sandwiches I’d eat the fuck outta them all and roll the presidents heads like edamame like cheesy marbles on the tip of my galactic urge

  30. Sadly, I can’t find a cat version.

        1. Dubstep canon in D is… transcendental.

  31. Hillary’s emails contained a number of redacted intelligence officials and assets:
    http://www.breitbart.com/2016-…..te-server/

    1. Trump got slammed for claiming she should be in jail. He’s a blow-hard, but his scatter-shots occasionally hit the target; there’s no way that woman should be running for prez instead of dealing with indictments.

      1. If there is the slightest bit of Justice Cankles will die while rotting away in a Supermax facility. In solitary confinement 23 hours a day.

    2. Oh, come on, like you expect us to believe care about that.

  32. Bricks would be clouds on planets of fuck my spaceship shit

  33. Burrito the worlds and smash that shit into my goddamn teeth for my throat to spit jizz and my esophagus to dance on flesh shadows under disco lights of fucking boring food particles. Fuck being a throat.

    1. True heir to Gertrude Stein, e.e. cummings and the Beats ? only new and improved

      1. Yeah, man, can you dig it, daddy-o?

        1. Hey DJ, I lived a block off Colfax in my early 20s and would walk to a dive bar called The Congress Lounge. Is that still there? Also, I tended bar at El Chapultepec for a while. Ever been there?

          1. I think The Congress Lounge is still there. I seem to recall hearing something… Did you google it?
            No, never been to El Chapultepec. Where is it and is it worth going?

            1. The Pec used to have awesome live Jazz every night. In Lodo, near Coors field. Been there 70? years. I’m worried the hipsters may have taken it over.

              1. The hipsters have taken everything downtown over, especially Lodo. I suspect this is true in most cities. About 5 yes ADP (?) we went to a place in downtown Colorado Springs (we were in town so that I could go to court :). Colorado Springs is a very conservative place, and even their little downtown area has been taken over by the hipsters.
                (I may have misspoke: I don’t remember many hipsters in OKC, but that’s different: OK is like living in the 80’s, only south cell phones.)

              1. Thanks. Having a reception there? Wow. I see hipsters even here once in a while. Skinny jeans and beards. Knee high tube socks and orange Raybans. Look like idiots.

  34. “we need to ally with China, they recognize how rogue North Korea is”

    Thank you, Captain Obvious. Is this somehow different than what the Obummer administration is doing? Why do libertarians state 50-year-old foreign policy ideas as if no one had ever thought of them before?

    1. What has Odumbo done? Tell us about how he’s improved anything about North Korea?

      1. Nearly posted, pointing out commie-kid’s abysmal stupidity when I see you did it for me.
        Yeah, shitbag, what has Obo done, other than involve us in shooting wars left and right, nearly every one a failure that would gladden the heart of some lefty twit had Bush done so…

        1. And yet, Obumbles appears to still be well-regarded in Teh Final Year of His Pestilency’s Reign. He still polls well (for the life of me I am at a loss as to why…)

          1. Dunno. He’s at 51% right now, though was at/near 40% not long ago.

            Still weird, nevertheless. Especially with the economy on the precipice of tumbling further down the shitter again.

            1. Like Obama?

              Donkey: “Yes. Doing a great job. [again showing I’m not racist]”

              It’s all identity politics with those morons.

    2. Ally with the slants to do the dirty ground work, because the inferior races have a tenuous capacity to parse English and are therefore of suitable disposition. Right, racist shitbag?

  35. Since we were talking about it already, this is a beautiful story of how serious people get shit done. You think King Obamatard and his sidekick Cankles could pull this off? Lol!

    You need Amazon prime for this:

    How to win

  36. How about engaging China” to say “let’s do something about North Korea, let’s do something about Kim, unify the Koreas and be able to withdraw the 40,000 troops in South Korea.”

    Thus showing he has all the awareness of Obama when it comes to other countries’ thought process.

    But with the Shangri-La Dialogue, Asia’s biggest security summit starting this weekend in Singapore, Beijing is also sending a message to the U.S. and South Korea that, despite misgivings, it is not abandoning its old ally and all parties are going to have to get used to that.

    1. Some of my co-workers are from South Korea. They are really great people, and man, do they ever despise communists. South Korea is pretty much a first world country and North Korea can’t even qualify as a 3rd world country? What does that say to an intelligent person? And retards talking about the Norks new push towards markets, lol. They got this from their original sponsors, China. China just finally told them, ‘hey, you have to embrace capitalism, because sorry, communism doesn’t work, and soon enough you’re going to starve all the peasants. So you have to get capitalism, so just give your favored party members free rein on the capitalism and pretend, like we’re doing’.

      Commies like the Chinese and Obama are losers and their fate is the dustbin of history.

      1. Adding to that, when Korea was divided, the North was the richer, industrial part, and the South was the poorer, agricultural part.

      2. … soon enough you’re going to starve all the peasants AGAIN.

        It’s already happened several times.

    2. GamerFromJump|6.3.16 @ 11:56PM|#
      “How about engaging China” to say “let’s do something about North Korea, let’s do something about Kim, unify the Koreas and be able to withdraw the 40,000 troops in South Korea.”

      Thus showing he has all the awareness of Obama when it comes to other countries’ thought process.”

      And the alternative might be?
      I’ll be here to listen…

  37. ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI! ALI!

    1. Abe Vigoda?

    2. Yep, he kicked it.

  38. I’m drunk.

  39. I quit my office job and now I am getting paid 90 Dollars hourly. How? I work-over internet! My old work was making me miserable, so I was to try-something different. 1 years after…I can say my life is changed completely for the better! Check it out what i do.E1..

    SEE HERE—-> OmegaJobs.Tk

  40. Gary Johnson is no Libertarian by any stretch of the imagination; but that being said he is a hell of a lot better than Clinton/Trump. The American people are brainwashed from an early age about the glory of war and America’s God given duty to protect the world even if the world doesn’t want to be protected. Unfortunately the majority of our citizens have no concept of what freedom means. If you truly believe in freedom you allow others to believe in whatever form of government or religion they choose. If you truly believe in our style of government you take your complaints to the ballot box and don’t join some irate mob throwing eggs at some poor girl who has a different opinion. Everyone in that crowd lost two things; the right to call themselves an American and the right to call themselves human. I hate Trump with every fiber of my being but that doesn’t me or anyone else the right to act like assholes. Hillary claims Trump may start a war, that coming from a woman who is more hawkish than Lindsey Graham. If the Republicans had a brain they would just drop out of the race and take all that campaign money and just buy Hillary. Everyone in the world knows she is for sale. Just ask the Saudi’s if you don’t believe me. If people would just vote for Gary Johnson they might like the taste of what freedom and vote for a real libertarian in the future. PS if you choose to disc me please shower with fact not emotions. Thanks

  41. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser?

    ???? http://www.selfCash10.com

  42. Baroque or Romantic?

    I side with the Romantics.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmGMzyajA2U

    Kevin R

  43. The great irony is that if Johnson were the Republican nominee, he’s probably have a good shot of winning.

  44. Make 14500 bucks every month… Start doing online computer-based work through our website. I have been working from home for 1 years now and I love it. I don’t have a boss standing over my shoulder and I make my own hours. The tips below are very informative and anyone currently working from home or planning to in the future could use this website…
    ——————————– http://www.earnmore9.com

  45. Make 14500 bucks every month… Start doing online computer-based work through our website. I have been working from home for 1 years now and I love it. I don’t have a boss standing over my shoulder and I make my own hours. The tips below are very informative and anyone currently working from home or planning to in the future could use this website…
    ——————————– http://www.earnmore9.com

  46. I am making $98/hour working from home. I never thought that it was legitimate but my best friend is earning $12 thousand a month by working online, that was really surprising for me, she recommended me to try it. just try it out on the following website…
    _____________________ http://www.earnmore9.com

  47. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.SelfCash10.com

  48. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser?

    ???? http://www.selfCash10.com

  49. 2″My friend just told me about this easiest method of freelancing. I’ve just tried it and now II am getting paid 15000usd monthly without spending too much time.You can also do this.

    >>>>>>> https://www.Cashpay60.tk

  50. I am making $89/hour working from home. I never thought that it was legitimate but my best friend is earning $10 thousand a month by working online, that was really surprising for me, she recommended me to try it. just try it out on the following website.

    ??? http://www.selfcash10.com

  51. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.Reportmax20.com

  52. Commence your Home Business right now. Hang out with your Family and Earn. Start bringing $75/hr just over a computer. Very easy way to choose your Life Happy and Earning continuously. Begin here..

    Copy This Link…

    ===== http://www.maxincome20.com

  53. my friend’s mom makes $73 hourly on the laptop . She has been out of a job for 6 months but last month her pay was $18731 just working on the laptop for a few hours…..

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ???????

    http://www.Reportmax20.com

  54. my friend’s mom makes $73 hourly on the laptop . She has been out of a job for 6 months but last month her pay was $18731 just working on the laptop for a few hours…..

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ???????

    http://www.Reportmax20.com

  55. my roomate’s step-mother makes 60 each hour on the internet and she has been out of work for seven months but last month her check was 14489 just working on the internet for 5 hours a day, look at ..
    Read more on this web site..

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.maxincome20.com

  56. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.selfcash10.com

  57. What’s crazy is that they didn’t surrender after the first one.

  58. Legal experts have suggested that if Congress has the power to require individuals to buy health care insurance, it may also mandate that Americans buy broccoli. Legal experts have suggested that if Congress has the power to require individuals to buy health care insurance, it may also mandate that Americans buy broccoli. Legal experts have suggested that if Congress has the power to require individuals to buy health care insurance, it may also mandate that Americans buy broccoli. – – – – – ????? ???????????? ???????

  59. Individuals use it for organisation being used these days sewingstep.com needed. That consumes a great deal of unneeded time.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.