Libertarian prez ticket Johnson / Weld endorse Black Lives Matter, bash “religious freedom”

Capture777I’ve long maintained that the Big-L Libertarians are being hijacked by the Bernie Sanders / Occupy Wall Street crowd.  Look at pizza man Sean Haugh.  When he ran for the US Senate in 2014, he actually siphoned votes from Democrat Kay Hagan.  During the debates, Haugh made SOME good limited government points.  But most of what he said could have easily been uttered by your typical Chapelboro leftist loon.  

People assumed that — because small-l libertarianism and conservatism are so closely related, and the GOP is allegedly the conservative party — a Libertarian candidate would take away from a Republican candidate. But the Big-Ls appear to be going full circle to intersect with the radical left on a lot of points.

This year, we have a watershed election at the presidential level.  We can expect some dramatic change — either way the vote goes.  You’ve got some normally Republican voters who are actually flirting with the idea of lining up behind the Libertarian presidential ticket.  From what I am seeing and hearing, Gary Johnson and Bill Weld are not exactly an ideal conservative alternative: 

In attempt to pull in more Bernie Sanders supporters, Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson has now endorsed the terrorist organization “Black Lives Matter.”

Speaking at a CNN town hall Wednesday, Johnson addressed a “Black Lives Matter” protestor by pandering to his leftist sensibilities and endorsing the ridiculous notion of mass racism against black people. 

“What it has done for me is that my head has been in the sand on this,” Johnson said. “I think that we’ve all had our heads in the sand and let’s wake up. Discrimination does exist, has existed, and for me personally, um, slap, slap, wake up.”

Johnson’s VP nominee Bill Weld continued the same talking points, saying that blacks are more likely to be killed by law enforcement than whites for no reason at all. 

Wait.  The leftist Washington Post would disagree with that statement: libertarians

[…] In 2015, The Washington Post launched a real-time database to track fatal police shootings, and the project continues this year. As of Sunday, 1,502 people have been shot and killed by on-duty police officers since Jan. 1, 2015. Of them, 732 were white, and 381 were black (and 382 were of another or unknown race).[..] 

Yep, 732 IS bigger than 381.    That’s not exactly something to stand up and cheer about.  But it illustrates how ridiculous the BLM crowd and their driveby enablers are with the facts.  In the same article, The Post tries to spin that data back to the left:

[…] But as data scientists and policing experts often note, comparing how many or how often white people are killed by police to how many or how often black people are killed by the police is statistically dubious unless you first adjust for population.

According to the most recent census data, there are nearly 160 million more white people in America than there are black people. White people make up roughly 62 percent of the U.S. population but only about 49 percent of those who are killed by police officers. African Americans, however, account for 24 percent of those fatally shot and killed by the police despite being just 13 percent of the U.S. population. As The Post noted in a new analysis published last week, that means black Americans are 2.5 times as likely as white Americans to be shot and killed by police officers.

U.S. police officers have shot and killed the exact same number of unarmed white people as they have unarmed black people: 50 each. But because the white population is approximately five times larger than the black population, that means unarmed black Americans were five times as likely as unarmed white Americans to be shot and killed by a police officer. […] 

*Got that?* (Talk about a streeeeeeeeeeeeeetch.)

Weld kept going: jon_lovitz-devil-snl-46_2

[…] “(Young black men) are four times as likely to be incarcerated if they have intersection with law enforcement as white people are, their educational opportunities are not there, we have to get them into education and concentrate the power of the government to make sure there are jobs available for them,” Weld said. “When there’s a national emergency the government has to respond, libertarian or no libertarian.”[…] 

Wow.  “Concentrate the power of the government to make sure there are jobs available.”  What do you limited government folks think about THAT?  Bernie Sanders would approve of a statement like that.  (He’s probably said it — or something like it — more than once on the campaign trail.)

And what does the Johnson / Weld ticket think of The First Amendment’s protections for religious freedom? :

[…] Many conservatives have vowed to vote for Johnson over Trump on “principle,” ignoring that Johnson has proven himself more of a leftist than a libertarian on the issues of abortion and religious liberty. Speaking of religious liberty, here’s what the supposed “libertarian” had to say on the matter:

“I mean under the guise of religious freedom, anybody can do anything,” said Johnson. “Why shouldn’t somebody be able to shoot somebody else because their freedom of religion says that God has spoken to them and that they can shoot somebody dead … I just see religious freedom, as a category, as just being a black hole.”

And this little gem on Christians being forced to service same-sex weddings:

“[T]hese religious freedom laws are really just a way to discriminate against gay individuals, the LGBT community,” he said. “That’s what they are about. I don’t think that the Libertarian Party should be engaged in any way in endorsing discrimination.”

Here’s Johnson from his campaign website: Hillary-Clinton-hereicome

[…] Gary Johnson believes that people, not politicians, should make choices in their personal lives. Responsible adults should be free to marry whom they want, arm themselves if they want, and lead their personal lives as they see fit — as long as they aren’t harming anyone else in doing so.[…] 

Unless, of course, you happen to be one of those “black-hole,” church-going types.

How libertarian is it to use bureaucrats to beat down ONE baker who refuses to cater a gay wedding, when there are a multitude of other bakers to choose from? 

Folks, Trump is not perfect.  Neither Reagan nor Goldwater nor Helms were perfect.  .  But, face it — Our next president will be named either Clinton or Trump.  Under Trump, conservatives will get a much better deal than they would under the pants-suited one. Don’t let the emotions of the moment beat out good old fashioned common sense. 

33 thoughts on “Libertarian prez ticket Johnson / Weld endorse Black Lives Matter, bash “religious freedom”

  1. The Libertarians have become predominantly a party of the loony left, and their current presidential ticket of a pot head and a drunk put that on full display, and you have not even gotten into their nutty open borders ideas on immigration.

    Voting Liberatarian is not even a sensible move for a conservative as a protest vote. Not for President or Senate or any other office. Their candidates are just too far off in left field. For Bernie Sanders voters, they might strike a chord, however..

  2. Trump has flaws, but he is a hell of a lot better than these wackos. Hillary Clinton is a dangerous criminal. So, there we are.

      1. Soooooo, now for the radical progressives they looooove GW Bush people. Guess they are only lying when it comes to being against the progressive narrative. When they are toeing the line then they are highly credible.

  3. Anyone remember when BillWeld gave $200 against Mr Jesse on 96? I do. He was running against Kerry at the time.

    1. Bill Weld is a drunk, but he is also a liberal who thinks more like a Democrat than a Republican.

  4. I generally lean quite libertarian/”classically liberal”… but this Johnson/Weld ticket is worthless. BLM is utter nonsense, and it’s mind-boggling that someone can run on the Libertarian ticket and make that kind of ridiculous, uninformed comment about “religious liberty”. I mean… this is basic stuff he’s failing on there.

    These guys would be a disappointment, if I’d ever had much in the way of expectations.

    Considering the horrible options up and down the ballot this year, there’s an appealing case to be made to dump it and not bother. (I wont, but it’s appealing). 🙂

    it’s a ballot of just horrible choices, all around, state and federal both. Regardless, I’m already pretty guaranteed to get an awful President, Governor, and yet another crappy Senator.

  5. I love being attacked by people who clearly hate freedom. It tells me we are winning.

    Oh my word, to compare Trump to Goldwater in any way shows how little you understand conservatism. The Republican Party has become, and will go the way of, the Know Nothing Party. We Libertarians are here to pick up the pieces. I would be happy to hear from real conservatives who still place any value on truth and/or reason, or from anyone anywhere along the political spectrum who still vales limited government. We have a home for you in the Libertarian Party.

    yours –
    a lifelong “Goldwater Liberal”

    1. As long as you are an open borders amigo, maybe you should run for office in Mexico. The LP tickets stands on open borders, drug legalization, Black Lives Matter, and opposition to religious liberty would appall Goldwater.

    2. I have a great love for limited government….but carrying the water for the BLM terrorist organization makes it a non-starter on that issue alone, at least at the presidential level.

      That being said, Burr is such a liberal weenie who got us in this mess with the 4th circuit that i will be casting my own vote in your direction. It will be a protest vote as he will likely easily beat Chatty Cathy, but that is the best choice I have.

    3. I’ve been looking over some of your online stuff… *thumbs up* most of it is pretty good and I’m in agreement with a lot there. 🙂

      (I do disagree with your “open borders” stance, and I’m “really” not a fan of rewarding people who’ve chosen to break rules and act illegally, just because I (or they) might disagree with the rule itself.

      But this national ticket ?… I’m not all that impressed, and they’ve given me pause. *shrug* Statements like on those issues mentioned here… “religious liberty” and BLM?…that’s not good.

      Btw, nice to see you’re running against Burr…. a decent bright spot in a long ballot of bad choices. 🙂

  6. Can anyone seriously vote for someone who publicly suggests assassinating his opponent, should she be elected President?

    Donald Trump Suggests ‘Second Amendment People’ Could Act Against Hillary Clinton

    1. Yes

      Beats having multiple people “disappear” on a regular basis. As has (again) happened with key DNC people with dirt on Hitlary. More people in the vein Vince Foster and 89 other people.

        1. The bad thing is…so is she. You really have to remove those rose colored glasses and look back at how she has behaved in the past. Besides, the “button” is not literally “pushed” in isolation….if that were the case then Barry would have probably accidentally pushed it while golfing or showing off for some of his terrorist friends….heck if that was the case, do you not think Bubba would have pushed it while diddling some skank with a cigar? Come on out of that whacko progreso shell and use some thought and logic.

          The truth is, Trump will have almost the same advisers as have been up in DC since, well, forever. The guy is used to listening to advisers and making the right decision….do you really think he works with no one when making business decisions? He may be blustery on TV, it is a character to be sure, but you have to look at the fact he has run large organizations in the past.

          This whole “button” thing is just more radical progressive hysteria in response to the narrative of the day. Way to be a lemming to the narrative though, they have you right where they want you.

    2. And he said it right here in North Carolina, in Wilmington. Jeez, I wonder what Trump’s Secret Service detail thinks about it?

      “I’m tellin’ ya, some good ol’ boys oughta throw some lead her way, ya know what I sayin’? Just kidding, but still, ya get me?”

      1. Not a bad idea though. I would think you guys would be in favor as it could be another story in the vein of “guns kill people, not the people using them”..

      2. Just like you libs to make up a quote like that, and just like the biased MSM to distort a statement by Trump that clearly dealt with 2nd Amendment supporters taking her out at the ballot box, not with the cartridge box.

        The media has gone overboard in this election to propagandize. I thought it was bad when they had the thrill running up their leg when Obama spoke, but this time it is even worse.

        1. Sure, he meant the ‘ballot box, not the cartridge box’, that’s what he meant.

          I don’t agree with you politically Doug, but I know you’re not stupid. You don’t believe that any more than I do.

          1. TheGatewayPundit is your “source”???
            Even that site can’t do more than use the term “suggest” over and over again to try to make a non-existent link a possible killer. Rather weak.

          2. I find it rather telling that WikiLeaks has offered a reward for information leading to the killer. If he were not WikiLeaks source, why would they do that?

            How much of a coinicidence is it that such an individual just happens to get shot in the back, with no robbery, his wallets, watch, money, and credit cards all still in place, right after that leak? Especially with the other odd trail of bodies connected to Hillary, who were all very convenient to her to have out of the way?

            You may sincerely believe that it is all a huge chain of coincidences, but does one want someone who is the beneficiary of such a chain of ”coincidences” in the White House?

          3. Well, PBJ the interview was not “on” the gateway pundit. I am sure you can find it elsewhere as it was an interview that is out there. Do not have a knee-jerk reaction due to the source….we do not do that when Salon, NYT, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN are linked even though all of them are totally unreliable.

        2. See my comment below. The link to the NY area CBS affiliate covers much of this. He never said anything about shooting up HItlary…just referencing the people who are voting based on being in favor of the second amendment are an important group.

          1. 75,000,000 strong or so it has been estimated by one source. If true, that’s a lot of gun owners, er, voters.

  7. Thank you Doug, for your vote. I appreciate it, no matter the reason.

    GUWonder, I would take issue with you about Goldwater though. I love that guy and describe myself as a ‘Goldwater liberal’ quite seriously. Barry was definitely not a fan of the social conservative wing of the movement.

    If anyone actually listens to what I have to say and recognizes the paleo-conservative logic behind my seemingly liberal stances, you can thank Goldwater’s influence for that. It also helps if one realizes that we Libertarians simply do not fit in with the left-right political spectrum. If I talked more about my economics than my stances on war and violence, I’d be seen as waaaaay out to the right. And yet, my views on limited government – and those of all Libertarians, including most assuredly Gary Johnson and Bill Weld – remain the same no matter what we choose to talk about today.

    1. Goosestepping over religious liberty to forcefeed homosexual dogma to Christians is abuse of the power of big government and hardly a libertarian position. It is a socialist big government position.

      Goosestepping over the rule of law to given arrogant lawbreaking border jumpers amnesty, and giving them a preference over those who obey the law and stay in their home country when their application fails instead of invading ours, is also hardly a limited government position.

      Supporting a terrorist group that opposes law enforcement like BLM is also not a limited government position.

  8. I do see the Republican Party going to pieces. I do not see the Libertarian Party picking up the pieces. This is a disappointment for me; I consider myself a classical liberal.

    The best I can determine, John McAfee is the only Libertarian Presidential candidate that came out in support of Christian business owners. Dag gone. What about the Bill of Rights? What about property rights? There is no reason for Christians or business owners to support the Johnson/Weld ticket. I would study every Libertarian candidate very hard on this one issue.

    The Libertarians are on the wrong side of very key liberty issues, and we have not even yet addressed their wide open borders position that poses a threat to the existence of our Republic as a nation state.

    I do respect the Libertarians for putting in the hard work of getting on the ballot. They are in a great position politically. But, the Libertarians will not fill the void created by an openly socialist Democrat Party and a Republican Party at war with conservatives. We conservatives and libertarians that are willing to fight for the Republic will have to fight within the Republican Party or form our own conservative party. The Libertarian Party is a long way from being a consistently reliable alternative.

Comments are closed.