x = true

Do while x

Obama +1

Loop

Is what Jon said what you meant, Mr. P? A do-loop for Obama?

Probably...but there is the bottom line...Romney is as a Big Government Proponent as Obama, Pelosi, and Reed put together...Romney isn't the answer, he isn't even the lesser of two evils...And there is a hidden upside of 4 more years of Obama...and that is the implosion and rebirth of America...and the Liberals exposing themselves for what they really are...and a final burial for the movement...

And the only reason Romney is the nominee of the RNC is because R-party slaves have been convinced that Romney is electable...if your on a see-saw with 6 really, really fat guys, you really should pick the guys who want to stand on the middle

Mr. PheaN......, I respectfully disagree with your assessment of Romney. While not my 1st choice, I think he is a major improvement over Obozo. However I do agree with you that the outcome of another 4 years of Obozo, would likely result in the implosion of America. Ultimately the country will be reborn but unfortunately, not before a lot of blood is spilled in the streets. I would like to avoid that and take the country back incrementally as it becomes obveous to everyone but a few far left ideologues that conservative/libertarian policies work, as opposed to the liberal feel good garbage that doesn't.

The bottom line is, any vote for a libertarian presidential candidate in the general election this November is just another vote for Obozo. As tight as this race will be in many swing states, that could very well be the difference between 4 more years of dope and blame VS the beginning of the slow process to bring America back to it former glory.

Hardtostarboard, who is Obozo? You don't even know the president's name and you expect people to take you seriously on political matters?

He's in the GOP and his anti-choice views in regards to women's rights don't really fly with the LP, neither really do his pro-state's rights views. Liberty is about the individual not about individual states having powers over their residents, being oppressed by a state is no different than being oppressed by the federal state.

ryiann.. Same place he's always been, out there kicking but and winning the real vote.. the delegates.. But the media is scared of liberty and the PEOPLE coming together.. Look here at this video of Rachelle Maddow showing his real victory's..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfEZiL7POZE&feature=related

@Dan,, please give me proof of this antichoice to women you speak of pertaining only to Ron.. Please don't add him into the group called politicians.... As for liberty.. learn what a republic is.. learn what the founders and generations after had described as liberty. Lets get a leader who will give it back. The rules of our true Republic were simple.. No one can tell you what you can or can not do as long as it does not violate the personal rights or personal property of others. The Feds only job is to make the states accountable to uphold this.. Its our document.. we wrote it.. We must uphold it.. Cherish it or it dies.. United we stand divided we fall. The constitution is not all that large.. Its supposed to be simple.. Heres a short documentary on forms of government including a true republic..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

Dan, you are right about that...but Johnson is a REAL Libertarian who is pro-choice. Someone must have told him what Ayn Rand, the mother of libertarianism, had to say: "The enemy of abortion is no friend of capitalism...or freedom."

What happened to Ron Paul? General confusion as to what a libertarian is.

Libertarianism arose in mid 19th century France, and was a sort of anarchist, almost socialist political philosophy that thought workers contribution to production warranted equal if not more of the profits of capitalist enterprises as compared to those who contributed only capital, but no manual labor.

In the 1930s, in the US another brand of libertarianism arose that was popularized by a third rate novelist named Ayn Rand. This is the off shoot that is known as libertarian today, and probably the only one that Ron Paul supporters are aware off. It is a rather inauthentic brand, however, since anarchy is pretty much the defining quality of the original libertarians.

Ron Paul libertarians hate having the facts that the movement was started in France and is anarchistic pointed out to them.

care4, you do need to take some remedial action with regard to your understanding of what the constitution of the united states is. You are making the same mistake that many uninformed poster make, confusing the Articles of Confederation with the Constitution. The Constitution quite clearly and irrevocably establishes the main power of government with the federal, not the state, authority. the Constitution was written when the founders realized that the loose Confederation you describe did not work. The documents they wrote in support of the Constitution were called the Federalist Papers, not the state's right papers. Someone needs to get an education.

@..Jon.. The US Constitution is a legal document created to form the corporation to facilitate trade under the rules of international commerce from the jurisdiction of the district of Columbia.. It did not create the bill of rights (all the amendments 1-10) it CONVEYED them.. I do not know what history teacher taught you but all our American historical records showed we cherished our Republic from the day it began right up till this most previous generation that wishes to support to end the grandest experiment of freedom the world had ever seen. Dont trample the founding document to death. I beg you..For you to ask the American People to place government power OVER the People who gave it,,, Is just tyranny.

Unfortunately, Gary Johnson isn't a real Libertarian. He claims that there were no laws broken by bank executives during the mortgage crisis. This is completely opposite to what Libertarians have been shouting at the tops of their lungs for the past 4 years.

John, "real Libertarians" want to end regulation of the banks and turn that sort of activity into business as usual.

care for, I did not in any way in my defence of the constitution as setting the federal government as sovereign over state government place the federal government over the people. For you to read that proves you to be the person who does not know our constitution. We are a government of, by and for the people. in short, the federal government is the people. And you are right, today, as they always have, they are going about the people's business, legally and morally empowered by the people of this country. It is the duty of the federal government, as empowered by the people, to stand up to states who try to usurp the people's power.

And the constitution is about far more than "a corporation to promote trade". It also provides the common defence, and provides for "the common good" of the people.

John, "real Libertarians" want to end regulation of the banks and turn that sort of activity into business as usual.

Alan, not true. Real Libertarians are for protecting consumers against fraud. Plenty of regulations already exist but the SEC doesn't bother to enforce many of them.

But when asked what a libertarian was, she had no comment....

That's a lie Jon.

She clearly stated that a Libertarian was someone who made sure you properly checked out books from a library.

... and Sarah Palin promptly refudiated that statement. She can see Libertaria from her house, and things don't work like that over there.

and then to drive her point home, Queen Lipstick shot a book.

Jon-1321288

But when asked what a libertarian was, she had no comment....

Has something to do with checking out books or something, doesn't it?

Gary Johnson is not a bad man, but the libertarian, ala Ayn Rand, alternative has already been tried, most recently in Somalia. It simply doesn't work very well. You see, rule by greed has a tendency towards cannibalism and self destruction, which creates a long term forecast that is somewhat "cloudy". I do apologize for reality intruding on mediocre fantasy, but it happens.

They think liberty is the lack of government. They want no governance. Free for all. Everything free, in a happy, singsong world.

Since I love being free, I am going to call them Libs from now on, and see if they appreciate my expression of my freedom.

Is that ok with all you Libs? LOL

Gee, what could possibly be wrong with a tax that has a devastating impact on the people at the lowest end of the economic ladder, but barely has any effect on the wealthiest people?

The stark brutality of Libertarian policies is almost breathtaking, isn't it?

It's just as unlikely as the "1%" turning over 100% of their wealth to the "99%." What a farce. Even if they were forced to do so, it wouldn't make a dent in our 16 trillion dollar debt. Everyone, regardless of whether they may 2 million a year or 20,000 is going to have to fork over more. At this rate, we might has well just change our name to Greece II (we'll wind up being another lousy sequel).

wayfarer- Doesn't it at least make a LITTLE sense though that those making $2 million a year could afford to pay a higher percentage than those making $20K?

30% of $2 million leaves to $1.4 million to try and get by on.

30% of $20K means you're living on the street and probably going to end up losing your job

The 23% sales tax would replace an income tax that is largely already around the same percentage and would encourage saving at lower incomes.

Alan, at 23% percent sales tax - how on earth could those on the lower income afford to save anything? At present, those on the lower rungs pay very little and usually get most of that back. You realize this would leave the person making 20K a year with less than $300 per week to live on? Out of that $300, they would have to buy groceries, gas, pay rent and utilities and somehow get health insurance - incidentals would not exist at all at that level. That is actually not a fair deal at all.

In addition to that, Alan... it would only replace the Federal income tax... not the State income tax. Nor would it replace the sales tax already added at a state level. So, in some states, you are talking about taxing the lower income brackets somewhere near 40%. Mitt Romney and his 1% brothers could afford to keep a residence in some state with no income tax and low sales tax and calling it their "primary residence." People making 20K a year do not have that luxury.

Logic says, even should Johnson or Paul win the presidency, the only drastic change that would take place is republicans and democrats in Congress would be forced to work together to prevent Johnson or Paul from unraveling everything.......I do not know if that would not be the best thing that could happen.

This is exactly what I mean....look into Gary for yourself and don't rely on someone else.

"We need to get rid of the income tax. Giant, slow corporations spend their money on lobbying because tax avoidance is where their profit is. General Electric earned $14.2 billion in 2010 and paid zero taxes on it. Why? Because it has the lobbyists to get subsidies and tax breaks.

But those mom-and-pop stores? The tech startups? The nimble new corporations with new ideas and new visions for our economy? They pay as much as 35 cents on every dollar they earn. When the company pays its employees, the government taxes that money again. We need to stop taxing work, savings and investment. I advocate removing all income taxes, all capital-gains taxes, and replacing them with a consumption tax, kind of a national sales tax called the Fair-tax.

How does Fair-tax fund the government? When anyone purchases a new good or service for personal consumption, be it a DVD or a yacht, the person is taxed. Fair-tax doesn't tax used goods or business-to-business purchases.

Some think the Fair-tax is regressive, but in fact it's progressive--taxing the wealthy more than the poor. Fair-tax issues a "prebate" for families to spend on food, clothing, transportation, medical care or whatever they want to spend it on--it's their money. Undocumented immigrants will pay their taxes if they want to buy anything. They need a Social Security card to receive a prebate, so the incentive is for immigrants to get themselves on the books as fast as possible.

The Fair-tax replaces employment taxes, payroll taxes, all income taxes, and all capital-gains taxes."

Coppers - you got that right. These people, like Cain (aka The Sperminator) think there are easy solutions out there that will solve everything, and simply haven't been implemented because someone resists change. Simple fixes will not undo all our problems. I hate to ruin your day, but it ain't gonna happen.

Suzi Saul

I think you confuse the power of the president of the US. (or rather, Gary does) He cannot dictate to the states with regard to state income tax, state sales tax or any other state tax (or county and city for that matter). If you propose to rip that authority from each of the sovereign states and place it solely in the hands of the federal government, it would seem to me that the libertarian platform is AGAINST state's rights... and FOR an expanded federal government.

Even if you STILL insist that this 23% would replace all taxes (which even Ron Paul admitted was not true).. it would require every state to amend it's own constitution. Most states use ballot initiative and then 3/4 majority representative in order to change their constitutions, almost every republican, democrat, green party, tea party and independent would have to either abstain or die to get it passed. Good luck with that. lol

There IS already OVER a 23% sales tax, have you ever bought gasoline. By the time you add Federal, State and County taxes, it is well over 23% of the price of the gasoline. We need no taxaholic Democrats nor Libertarians in the Oval Office.

You guys probably should look into the prebate that Johnson proposes to help pay for these taxes for lower income families. Not that this necessarily changes a bad idea into a good idea, but at least get the facts of the proposal before blanketly saying that it sucks.

You do realize that the $20,000 scenario depicted above is ABOVE the poverty level. According to what I read from Johnson's proposal, the "pre-bate" would only be applicable poverty level and below. That is what is classified as "low income." So... now may I say it sucks? lol

ok

seems that little arkie okie & me are withya on that suggestion. anybody else wanna sign in on an idea so goofy it works?

Thanks for an experienced point of view. I get the same impression of Gary from his interviews.

And why can you not work towards a landslide against both Obama AND Romney?

Because I have voted Libertarian for over twenty years and we never get more than 1% of the national vote. We do much better in state and local offices. This November, too much is at stake to vote Libertarian. Obama must go. If President Romney turns out to be just another Bush, I'll vote him out in 2016.

If you live in a non-battleground state, you'd be well to vote for Johnson. Heck, part of Johnson's hopeful appeal is that he pulls votes from both disaffected Republicans AND disaffected Democrats.

I live in NC where Obama won by 0.3% in 2008.

Curveball.

Unfortunately for 3rd Party Libertarian hopes, Ron Paul refuses to sever the umbilical cord connecting him to the GOP, he follows them right off the cliff

I don't think Ron Paul "follows" anybody, he's running as a Republican because it's more cost effective than running as an independant/libertarian.

If you do your research you'll find that Ron's supporters have no more love for the GOP than the Democrats. The GOP does like to parrot some of Ron Pauls ideas, in their own distorted, crony capitalist, way.

Then "Cut the Umbilical Cord"

I don't think Ron Paul "follows" anybody, he's running as a Republican because it's more cost effective than running as an independant/libertarian.

If you do your research you'll find that Ron's supporters have no more love for the GOP than the Democrats. The GOP does like to parrot some of Ron Pauls ideas, in their own distorted, crony capitalist, way.

I am not really a thief. I hate thieves. It is just more cost effective for me to steal someone elses stuff than pay for my own.

Perhaps this time will be different. So many people are unhappy with the choices they face.

I agree that Mittens is what you say but you are a fool if you think Obama is any different.

A lot of independents, that should be the most telling thing about the state of our country and the two parties. There are a ton of them all with more momentum than in a typical year.

Left to left of center:

Rocky Anderson - Justice Party, Americans Elect (My probable candidate)

Jill Stein - Green Party

Right to right of center:

Gary Johnson - Libertarian Party (My second choice if I thought he had a chance to win)

Buddy Roemer - Americans Elect, Reform Party

Those are probably the top four but I'm sure there are/will be others. Anybody who pays attention is disappointed with the state of things whether they are GOP or Democrat, neither party has represented the interests of America.

Regardless of whether or not you believe what Gary says... he may even believe what he says... he will not have the power to do any of it. The POTUS does not have the authority to dictate state taxes. So, go ahead... throw your vote, your time and your money down the rabbit hole. You are sure to be disappointed - whether he wins or loses.

Suzi Saul - Gary is a thinker and has well- formed ideas, and he, like Ron Paul, seems to be an honorable man and terrific person.

Unlike Ron Paul, Johnson actually supports marriage equality and thinks that all Americans deserve equal protection of the law. For example, Ron Paul supports the Jim Crow law we call DOMA, while Johnson opposes it.

Generalize much?