Third Party Candidate Gary Johnson Speaks in North Carolina
By Craig D. Schlesinger | 07/24/2012 | Elections 2012, Headline, Issues, President | 58 CommentsNASHVILLE (IVN) — Saturday morning in Huntersville, North Carolina, libertarian voters gathered for a “Liberty 5K Fun Run” fundraiser. Then during a packed lunch fundraiser at Fox and Hound in uptown Charlotte, Libertarian Party presidential candidate, Gary Johnson didn’t hesitate to distinguish himself from President Obama and Gov. Romney in an energetic campaign speech. North Carolina’s Libertarian Party gubernatorial candidate, Barbara Howe was present throughout the day’s events.
Speaking to the attentive crowd, Johnson asserted that he will be the only candidate on the ballot that wants to end the wars and bring the troops home, reduce the US military footprint around the globe, employ a noninterventionist foreign policy, eliminate foreign aid, slash federal spending– including the big three: Medicare, Medicaid, and military/defense– and balance the federal budget in year one (entailing a $1.4T or 43% reduction), veto legislation when expenses exceed revenue, repeal the PATRIOT Act and NDAA, abolish the Department of Homeland Security, TSA, and the federal Department of Education, fight for marriage equality, and end the decades-long War on Drugs. Gov. Johnson’s economic plan should also appeal to Ron Paul supporters:
“I’m also the only candidate that’s advocating abolishing the IRS, the income tax and the corporate tax. I am advocating on the part of the Fair Tax […], which I think reboots the American economy. When it comes to American jobs, if the private sector doesn’t create tens of millions of jobs with a zero corporate tax rate environment, I don’t know what it’s going to take to create tens of millions of jobs in this country. I think manufacturing jobs will flock back to the United States. There is nothing in my resume to suggest that I am not going to doggedly pursue this agenda and that it won’t make a huge difference. If I’m in the national debates against Obama and Romney I think anything is possible.”
A resounding ovation followed his remarks, and the enthusiastic crowd proceeded to nearby Midtown Park for Gov. Johnson’s speech at the Conservatives Against Unconstitutional Wars rally. Complete with Goldwater-style conservative Republicans, libertarian Ron Paul supporters, and general antiwar protesters, Gov. Johnson delivered a passionate speech to a crowd of about two hundred. Johnson was visibly fired up with indignation at what he characterizes as politicians’ perpetual, cavalier practice of placing service men and women in harm’s way with little consideration of the unintended consequences:
Ron Paul supporters in attendance were very vocal of their support and determination to ensure Gov. Johnson gets a podium in the national debates. They also pledged their votes to him. “The message of liberty must carry on and be heard,” said one attendee, “Ron Paul supporters need to start contacting polling organizations now. Don’t wait until after Tampa. It only takes a few minutes, and I think we’re smart enough to multitask support for both Gary and Dr. Paul. But after Tampa we need to stay active and focus all of our efforts on supporting Gary Johnson.”
Johnson was quick to credit Paul’s accomplishments and underscore his own support of the Texas congressman:
“Ron Paul has made a huge contribution, bigger than anyone else regarding the liberty movement. I’ve seen Ron Paul supporters throughout the entire three years I’ve been doing this, and [today] isn’t something new. It’s been, ‘Hey if it’s not Ron Paul it will to be you,’ and that’s always been terrific. And I’d just like to reiterate that Ron Paul asked me for my endorsement in 2008 and I readily gave it. When I dropped out of the Republican primary I asked everyone that was going to vote for me to vote for him.”
Following the rally, the Raintree Country Club hosted a cocktail hour and dinner fundraiser. Once again Gov. Johnson delivered his message to a full room of inspired, excited supporters and left feeling energized and encouraged:
“The events here in Charlotte were just terrific. We raised a lot of money and there were a whole lot of people here with a whole lot of enthusiasm. I just think this is a portend for what is going to happen going forward. I’m not the third choice. I’m the only choice.”






Leave Your Comment →
58 Comments
Faith Eischen
07.24.2012
@faitheischen
I’m not sure I agree with Johnson’s point wanting to abolish the department of homeland security…
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@craigschlesinger
We already have one, and it is called the Defense Department
W. E. Messamore
07.24.2012
@W__E__Messamore
Here were my thoughts on DHS when Bush first launched it: His reasoning was that 9/11 happened in part due to an over-complicated national security and intelligence apparatus that could not successfully share information and collaborate to defeat threats. If that was really the problem– and I’d tend to agree that it was a big part of it– then creating an entire new, cabinet level department to throw into the already over-complicated, bureaucratic mess would only exacerbate it. Instead of a new department, post-9/11 reforms should have *streamlined* our national security apparatus, eliminated extraneous bureaucracy, and merged different agencies into the DOD so that national defense could be better coordinated. Since then, DHS activities, such as the ongoing operations of the TSA to give one example, have been constitutionally dubious, established new precedents of concern to civil liberties advocates, and are questionable in terms of cost-benefit efficacy. For all the billions we’ve spent on the TSA, have you heard of a single terrorist attack foiled by the agency? Even though folks like Glenn Beck (with his 912 project) want us to constantly feel like we did on 9/12, I think that is actually the strategic goal of the terrorists who carried out those attacks. I’d like to see America go back to its pre-Bush/Obama roots. Remember the 1990s? Those times weren’t so bad after all, right?
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@craigschlesinger
THIS! I think the only thing TSA hasn’t found yet is a terrorist. Apparently, Gov. Johnson has been detained at least twice by TSA for failure to comply, and everytime he flies he fills out a complaint card against TSA – which is quite often!
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@craigschlesinger
This just in from the Johnson campaign: “Elect one of our own”
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-PeKNXe3ts&w=560&h=315
Kevin MacDougall
07.24.2012
Libertarians have too many of the same ideas that the ugly Republicanism of today holds dear. The ideas are not bad in and of themselves, but present an abuse within today’s context.
The better alternative third party is not Libertarian, it’s GREEN!
Brad R. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@bradschlesinger
Nothing could be further from the truth, libertarians have little in common with Republicans even in economic issues. Republicans seek to perpetuate crony capitalism while libertarians advocate for real free markets. Libertarians have far more in common with liberals — libertarianism is rooted in the enlightenment liberal tradition. Gay equality, anti-war, pro-civil liberties, anti-drug war, anti-executive power, anti-corporate welfare, pro-immigration, anti-eminent domain, pro-free speech…on what planet are these the same ideas Republicans hold?
Brad R. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@bradschlesinger
Anti-bailout, anti-too big to fail…I could go on.
Justin VanHouten
07.24.2012
…except the green party wants rampant government control of almost every aspect of your life. There’s no way a libertarian would support the green candidate.
Fraenza Christopher
07.24.2012
Sounds good,,,
MaryLee Belleville
07.24.2012
I’m 100% against the Fair Tax..Very unfair
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@craigschlesinger
Please present an alternative solution. And no, going from the current system to nothing but user fees is not a solution. It is the scenario i would love to see, however. But we need to be realistic about implementing real tax reform and relief.
Debbie Hatch-Hamelink
07.24.2012
not sure… but I believe it could cost the republicans an election… & give the democrats another win… under the circumstances… I think that would be very bad for the US… just sayin…
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@craigschlesinger
I would counter by saying Democrats and Republicans are both eqaully as bad for the US so instead of picking your poison you can pick the antedote.
Seanathair Browne
07.24.2012
Funny, the Republicans see the Libertarian stance on social issues to be too similar too those the ugly Democrats of today hold dear.
Mike Anderson
07.24.2012
How is it unfair? Most states have a sales tax and no income tax… Seems to work fine.
Lauren Moore
07.24.2012
@laurendimitra
Interesting point but which states don’t have an income tax?
Brad R. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@bradschlesinger
Florida and Virginia are two states with zero income tax.
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@craigschlesinger
Nevada also has no income tax. C’mon, Brad, we only used to live out there! (Ok, so I temporarily forgot too)
Fulton F Fortner
07.29.2012
@Fulton F Fortner
No income tax in Wyoming.
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@craigschlesinger
No state income tax here in good ole Tennessee!
Pam Mercier
07.24.2012
@Kevin MacDougall. The Republicanism of today has nothing in common with Libertarianism. Would the Repubs cut military spending? Would they put an end to crony capitalism? Would they stop trying to be the world’s policeman (an excuse to bully other countries)? Would they opt for a truly free market? Would they overturn the Patriot Act? Would they end the totally useless and failed War on Drugs? Seems that you don’t have very good information.
Richard Imhoff
07.24.2012
Yes really!
Kevin MacDougall
07.24.2012
Would they support the end of net neutrality under the guise of free speech? Yes. And that’s stupid.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/07/libertarians-make-the-case-net-neutrality-is-unconstitutional/
Furthermore, the Ron Paul influx in Republicanism has accounted for things… and certain Libertarian tentpoles like massive deregulation are very “wrong place, wrong time” in a society teetering towards plutocracy.
Green values are actually LESS authoritarian than the status quo in Washington. Going green would mean more personal liberty and less abuse from corporate interest. Government overseeing the big entities and not the small ones. Fairness. Oversight of business, the environment etc for the purpose of bringing MORE freedom to the people.
Brad R. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@bradschlesinger
How can Green values be less authoritative when their solution for pretty much everything is to use the coercive arm of government to get what they want.
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@craigschlesinger
Government oversight of business IS corporatism. The Green Party, with their good intentions no doubt, will only exacerbate the economic/domestic problems they seek to mend.
Aidan King
07.24.2012
libertarians tend to be very right on fiscal issues.That’s why i backed away from the party. I’m conservative in that Keynesian economics won’t work and that we have to cut and reform entitlements, but that’s far from what libertarians want
Aidan King
07.24.2012
And the problem with Fairtax is that it’s easy for politicians to play with. It also places a huge tax on consumer goods, which could discourage buying, which still is what this economy needs for companies to make money. Also, taxes depend on a good amount of revenue. I do like quite a few of Johnson’s views, a libertarian society is just a pipe dream in modern times IMO
Nanson Hwa
07.24.2012
Mr. Johnson’s proposal would bankrupt the American economy by increasing the national deficit, create double digit inflation and add large number of people to the welfare lines.
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@craigschlesinger
Johnson governed New Mexico for eight years and brought the state back from a budget crisis to a $1B surplus under the same platform he is advocating as a presidential candidate. He got reelected by a larger margin in a state that favors Democrats by a 2-1 margin. So it seems to me that the opposite of your comment is true. Just because someone’s implemented solutions work, don’t discard them because it threatens your worldview. Johnson was elected and reelected by Democrates.
Kevin Whitbeck
07.24.2012
There’s a throwaway vote
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@craigschlesinger
I argue that a vote for the political duopoly is a throwaway vote. They’ve been throwing our votes away for decades.
Fulton F Fortner
07.29.2012
@Fulton F Fortner
Support of any status quo that doesn’t support You is a throwaway vote.
Kathryn Dalenberg
07.24.2012
They all advocate abolishing the IRS. Nothing new and different there. I’m voting for Green Party candidate Dr. Jill Stein. What we need is a female president.
Judy Ferro
07.24.2012
Sales taxes are highest for people who must spend all they make in order to stay alive. That $2 trillion in cash businesses are holding on to will stay untaxed. Totally a plan to help the rich stay rich….
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@craigschlesinger
The Fair Tax hits the rich the hardest because they spend the most money. Also, the Fair Tax issues a $200 per month prebate check to every citizen so they can afford the tax burden up to the point of the poverty level. It’s actually progressive, not regressive. See for yourself, use their calculator at FairTax.org and find out the difference between your tax burden now vs under teh Fair Tax.
Fulton F Fortner
07.29.2012
@Fulton F Fortner
I would much rather see a hardcore revision of the income tax system. If ALL income, regardless of source, were taxed at an equal rate we could scrap almost all of our tax code and make a simple, transparent system. Within the current system, the intentional insertion of loopholes for the rich/investment class are what leads to tax sheltering and evasionist behaviors. See ‘Mitt Romney.’ I don’t buy that a prebate is a good idea. It is just another unnecessary government action. The Fair Tax is one of very few parts of the libertarian platform that I can’t get behind.
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.29.2012
@craigschlesinger
I’d love to see ZERO taxes, period. While the FairTax is far from perfect/ideal, it is – at a minimum – a VAST improvement over the current system. By all measurements, flat rate income taxes actually prove to be worse than flat rate consumption taxes (based on the same rate). The income tax, by its very nature, invites cronyism and rent seeking. Again, the FairTax isn’t my perfect solution, but if that remains our only gripe with the LP platform then I’d say we’re in pretty good shape.
Fulton F Fortner
07.29.2012
@Fulton F Fortner
I guess if stocks, stock options, bonds, futures, and other investment instruments are considered ‘consumption’, I have less of a problem with the Fair Tax. But I fail to see how that invites any less cronyism or rent seeking than an income-based tax system. Out of curiosity, why is an income based tax worse than a consumption based tax? In theory you’re just taxing the other side of the buyer-seller relationship, right?
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.30.2012
@craigschlesinger
@Fulton (It wouldn’t let me directly “reply” to your comment)
People will always look to lobby for loopholes inside an income tax. Deductions for anything and everything, much like today. Benefits for some, not for others. For example, single people without children (like myself) are at a disadvantage.
Where the FairTax addresses this is by only taxing new goods and services. So if a poor family shops at Salvation Army or Goodwill, those used goods will not be subject to the FairTax. Same thing applies to a new house. The initial sale of a completed home is taxed, but there is no double taxation on future transactions.
Elimination of the business-to-business tax allows for the FairTax to become cost neutral, if not a net reduction in cost. If manufacturers and producers have no tax burden, as they wouldn’t under the FairTax, their incentive to seek rents from the government mostly vanishes.
It is currently estimated that every dollar of retail cost contains twenty-three cents of embedded tax (accumulated through the various stages of production). So if you remove the tax, the same margins can be achieved at a price of seventy-seven cents. For argument’s sake, say the company charged eighty cents just to squeeze some extra profit. With a twenty-three percent consumption tax, the cost still ends up being ninety-eight cents – lower than the initial dollar cost.
Moreover, the prebate further removes the incentive for rent seeking by covering the dollar amount of tax needed to cover indidividuals up to the point of the poverty level. By issuing the prebate in the form of money as opposed to tax credits, this prevents consumers advocacy groups from successfully lobbying for tax-exempt status of certain goods.
As to income taxes, they restrict the economic liberties of individuals by claiming percentages of earnings prior to individuals exercising their choice of how to allocate such earnings. If you want to save and/or invest 20% of your annual pay, for example, it gets taxed before you can save/invest. Under the FairTax, those taxes would only be consumption.
So if you earn 100,000 at a federal income tax rate of 23%, you have $77,000 after tax to consume, save, and invest with. Allocating 20% for savings/investing, you can put aside $15,400 with $61,600 remaining for consumption.
However, with the same pay and a singular federal consumption tax of 23%, you can put away $23,000 with $77,000 remaining for consumption. Let’s say you spend $61.6K (the amount available under the income tax scenario) at the consumption tax rate of 23%. Your tax burden is $14,168. This means you have an additional $1,232 left over from the $77K you started with.
So under the consumption tax scenario, and remember this is without even calculating the prebate, your effective tax rate is just over 14%. Under the income tax scenario, you effective tax rate is 23%. With the same pay and consumption level under the FairTax scenario, your tax burden is lowered by $8,832. Your savings actually increase by the same amount – $8,832.
Again, although it is not a perfect system it is a dramatic improvement. Sorry for the lengthiness.
Eric Hutchins
07.24.2012
Johnson has my vote. I live in California, so the democrats drown out my vote anyway. Fair Tax is a good way to remind all people just how much our federal government costs, each time they walk up to the cash register.
republocrats.net
07.24.2012
Please sign & share this petition — take action — Tell Congress
End The Middle Class Hostage Crisis Now — Extend The Bush Tax Cuts For The Middle Class
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=448302855203646&set=a.329821520385114.82294.285502824816984&type=3&theater
Debbie Clark
07.24.2012
How could anyone not agree!……….of course except the very wealthy……………..
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.25.2012
@craigschlesinger
Why taxing the wealthy won’t fix the debt/deficit problem: http://ivn.us/2012/07/03/federal-revenues-are-historically-unresponsive-top-marginal-tax-rate/
Lloyd Ritchey
07.24.2012
Not that Johnson or the LP has a chance to get elected, but Johnson’s a FAR better choice that either of the two candidates in the media’s limelight.
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@craigschlesinger
You’d think that would be good for ratings and the media would be reporting on all three candidates on a daily basis. But no. That would require the press to actually do their job.
Kevin MacDougall
07.24.2012
http://static.quickmeme.com/media/social/qm.gif
Greg Jeffery
07.24.2012
I am convinced libertarianism is the way to go. Not sure about the Libertarian Party, but the ideas and philosophy of libertarianism most closely resembles my own values.
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@craigschlesinger
Yes, a libertarian party is pretty ironic!
Lloyd Ritchey
07.24.2012
^ Amen.
Maria Rosario
07.24.2012
It will be impossible.. because where will the money come in from? talk is free, but to act on these .. it will be impossible!!
Greg Jeffery
07.24.2012
LOL, we did it for most of our nation’s history. So obviously it isn’t impossible. People just have to have the courage to live without the safety nets that ensnare us.
John Prewitt
07.25.2012
Ron Paul is saying those things!
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.24.2012
@craigschlesinger
Ron Paul supporters at the anti-war rally in NC came up to Gary one by one to assure him that he had their support going forward. I think we’re experiencing a real “liberty moment” here, and its an exciting notion looking forward.
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.25.2012
@craigschlesinger
All those concerned with scrapping the existing code and replacing it with one federal consumption tax, please read Will Wilkinson’s great piece from The Economist entitled “Tax Policy: In an ideal World.”
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/07/tax-policy
William Gunn
07.25.2012
If the fair tax did not tax the necessary commodities, it would not damage the economy, if it did prices would increase and qges would increase. (see Adam Smith)
Terri Sneeringer
07.28.2012
I applaud his efforts, don’t necessarily agree with all of them, but to stand on your beliefs and be willing to do something about it is to be commended. However, my biggest fear is the end result will be a guarentee for Obama to serve another 4!
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.29.2012
@craigschlesinger
I contend that Romney will be just as bad as Obama and Bush. It seems like the “best outcome” (and I use that term VERY LOOSELY), aside from Gary Johnson or Ron Paul becoming President, will be to have Obama serve four more years and have primaries in every party in 2016. If Romney is elected, the Republicans can’t conceivably run Rand Paul (or another liberty minded candidate like Justin Amash) in 2016. The fears over Obama being in office for four more years as a reason to vote Romney just play into the lesser of two evils narrative and undermine the independent, third party cause.