Ron Paulies Rejoice: Gary Johnson Is Coming To Town

by lewwaters

Okay all of you starry eyed Ron Paul worshippers that haven’t heard yet, you have cause for rejoicing as you will soon have the opportunity to see and hear Gary Johnson, popular and well-like former governor of New Mexico and who many Libertarians feel is the “next Ron Paul.”

Johnson is slated to appear at Fort Vancouver High School, 5700 East 18th Street in Vancouver on the evening of February 5, 2010 at 6 PM for a “Training Seminar.”

If you arrive early, you may be able to participate in a “dignitary type reception” of sorts that “costs a bit more than the entry ‘suggested donation,’” as was stated to me by a self described luminary with Campaign for Liberty.

Johnson is billed as “a successful two-term governor who actually cut taxes and shrank state government” by “eliminating New Mexico’s budget deficit and reduced the number of state employees by more than 1,200” during the time he served as New Mexico’s governor, 1995 to 2003, stepping aside due to term limits.

He advocates the legalization of Marijuana and decriminalization of drugs, referring to the War on Drugs as “an expensive bust.” He does not advocate recreational drug use and strongly supports a “don’t do drugs policy,” he being a strong advocate of physical fitness, having climbed Mt. Everest in 2003 at the age of 50 and is also an “avid triathlete who runs extensively and abstains from all recreational drug use, caffeine, alcohol, and some sugar products.”

Johnson early on opposed the invasion of Iraq and now says “the mission in Afghanistan has crept away from finding Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda,” adding, “I don’t believe that our national security interests are being threatened in either location.”

In a very recent interview he said of National Security, “I believe we should pull out of [Iraq and Afghanistan] and return our focus to fighting terrorism. The focus needs to be protecting America.”

Like Paul, he advocates a “noninterventionist national security policy.”

As a Politico profile puts it, “and he shares some of [Ron Paul’s] libertarian alarmist views, but without the penchant for gold standard wonkiness.”

Johnson resisted efforts by Libertarians to draft him for a presidential run in 1999 citing his “political life will end when his second term expires in 2002.”

Johnson has now set up a website, Our America where you may purchase a signed copy of his book, “Seven Principles of Good Government” for $100.00 and another, Gary Johnson for America.

Johnson initiated a separation from his wife of 28 years, Dee in 2005, who died of “hypertensive cardiovascular disease” at the age of 54 the next year, according to an article appearing in the Santa Fe New Mexican, Feb 11, 2007.

The couple had 2 grown children, a son and a daughter.

Although some I have corresponded with see Johnson as the third coming, Ron Paul being the second, it remains to be seen if he can articulate pretty much the same message as Paul did in the 2008 election any better.

If, as Politico says, he doesn’t have the “penchant for gold standard wonkiness” that Ron Paul is noted for, he should fair much better in 2012.

11 Comments to “Ron Paulies Rejoice: Gary Johnson Is Coming To Town”

  1. 1814 characters 314 words
    The only infallible, unstoppable, guaranteed way to get a truly new Congress is :

    The American voter must IMPOSE term limits by NEVER REELECTING ANYONE IN CONGRESS, AND DO IT EVERY ELECTION! In other words, don’t let anyone serve more than one term. That’s the only way to teach them that the voter is boss! The “one term limit” can be eased AFTER citizens get control of Congress.

    Congress will never allow us to constitutionally term limit them by an amendment. Our only choice is to NEVER REELECT them. All of them!

    The number of ‘good guys’ left in Congress is negligible, so if we threw ALL 535 members out, we wouldn’t do as much damage as the good we would gain by turning Congress into a bunch of honest, innocent freshmen.

    Some of the reasons in favor of this approach:

    • It gives us a one-term-limited Congress without using an amendment
    • It encourages ordinary citizens to run for Congress
    • It is supported by 70% of the country (see Rasmussen and Cato polls)
    • It is completely nonpartisan
    • If repeated, it ends career politicians in Congress
    • It opens the way to a “citizen Congress” of guys like you and me
    * It would open a torrent of fresh ideas to improve our government
    • It ends the seniority system that keeps freshmen powerless
    • It doesn’t cost money. But you MUST vote! Just don’t vote for an incumbent
    • It takes effect immediately on Election Day
    • It is the only infallible, unstoppable, guaranteed way to “Throw the Bums Out”
    • When the ‘pros’ stop running, ordinary citizens will run, and win
    • If it doesn’t work, do it again and again! It will work eventually,without a doubt.


    Nelson Lee Walker of
    Email for your free NEVER REELECT bumper sticker


  2. While I can certainly sympathize with the notion, wouldn’t it be better to get people off their duffs and to actually check out candidates for office?

    What we fail to realize in such a “vote ’em out” mentality, is that we could end up electing a succession of dullards that we wouldn’t want for dog catcher.

    You also stand to end up throwing out the baby with the bath water.

    Conservatives played this in 2006 by staying away from the polls and look what we ended up with.


  3. Can you provide any contact information for the visit mentioned in the article. I would very much like to attend Gary Johnson’s event here.


  4. That’s all the information I have on it, RW.

    Maybe check in with Campaign for Liberty.


  5. The information is posted on

    I know that’s a mouthful, but it is the specific website for this event.

    Incidentally, Mr. Walker, I disagree with the absolutist terms of the GOOOH (Get Out Of Our House) agenda. It is easy and tempting to say vote out all incumbents, but wouldn’t that make all congressmen lame ducks? If there were absolutely no way to be re-elected, then wouldn’t the congressmen have free reign to give their buddies goodies from the public trough? If they did that, they wouldn’t have to worry about being re-elected, and could use the position for all sorts of ill-gotten gain.

    However, if the electorate were doggedly kicking out all the incumbents that violated the Constitution… then we would be talking about a new direction for the country.


  6. “However, if the electorate were doggedly kicking out all the incumbents that violated the Constitution… then we would be talking about a new direction for the country.”

    The problem with your comment, Michael, is that we have too many different interpretations of portions of the constitution.

    Look at the recent Supreme Court ruling on campoaign finance. You have several crying that an activist court just opened the flood gates to corporate and foreign interference in our elections and on the other side, you have people saying ‘hurray for free speech rights.’

    Then too, I notice that some constitutionalists I have spoken with seem to forget that we have amendments lawfully and legally added by the procedures set in place by the writers of the constitution.

    If only it were as simple as you indicate.


  7. If I could just take a bit of the spin off this uh – story, the public is
    invited to hear him speak – not for training. The invitation you refer to reads as follows:

    “If someone knows Christine Gregoire, and (while we are dreaming),
    Barack Obama, could you invite them to Ft. Vancouver High School on
    February 5th? Governor Johnson has a couple pointers for them.”
    (Head of State: TRAINING SEMINAR)
    from the Clark County WA conservatives google group


  8. Sorry David, but there was no spin. I quoted your words you left up on the forum, and which you so graciously posted here too.

    As for an “uh – story,” is anything I posted untrue?


  9. My message was to have training for our errant heads of state, if someone could get them to come.
    Your tone implies arrogance on the part of the promoters, in presuming to “train” the public, since you left out “head of state”.


  10. Maybe that is just your perception, David.

    But, anyway you cut it, is his appearance not “instructional” in some manner?

    You take too many ‘macht nicht’ things way to serious, David. And, you read in what you want to see in things.

    Maybe that is how you were so easily sucked in to the cult?

    It’s just politics, David, not life everlasting.


  11. Actually I felt a little responsible for the message, since it was not presented to me as anything but a talk. I was the one who put that
    spin on it for our feckless leaders.


Leave a Reply. Comments are moderated. Spam & off topic comments will not be approved at Blog Author's discretion. THIS IS NOT A FREE SPEECH ZONE!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: