Libertarian Party Pragmatically Nominates Moderates

The Libertarian Party today nominated two former governors, Gary Johnson and Bill Weld for the offices of POTUS and Vice, respectively. While some Libertarians decried this choice (see Ian Freeman’s opinion on the matter) others, myself included, believe that Gary will be a great spokesman for our ideas. He does not agree with me 100% … I’m an Anarchist, he’s a Libertarian, but he does support reducing government to it’s Constitutional role, and that would be a great start.

Gary is socially liberal and economically conservative. In other words, he believes in letting people make their own decisions, and letting them bear the consequences of those decisions. He believes in letting other countries go their own way and do their own thing, and staying at peace with them, until such time as they attack us. He believes in letting people be free, so long as they do not violate the rights of another.

Gary is not a perfect candidate … I disagree with him on the issue of Religious Freedom with respect to bakers being forced to bake cakes for gay weddings against their will. I think he is more fearful of Islam than he needs to be. But I think he is an excellent, mainstream, well-spoken, impressive candidate, all told.

Best of luck, Gary, and bear our message well. The future of America depends on you … not on your election, but on your communication. Run your leg of the relay race to Freedom well.

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


3 Comments

  1. Clearly you don’t understand the ins and outs of discrimination law. No baker is forced to produce wedding cakes. If they do produce them they have to sell them, but they can’t be forced to produce them or write any message on them. And, while you buy the conservative BS about it being Christians and gays, what about the gay bakers who have to sell to Christians. In every state of the union it is illegal for a baker to refuse service to a Christian. In most of the U.S. it is perfectly legal for Christians to refuse service to gay customers. There are more discrimination cases about Christians suing than there are about gay people doing so. But, the Religious Right pretends it’s religious freedom and so many libertarians pick up their talking points from conservatives and do NO research of their own.

  2. It would appear this article is full of frivolous jargon. The libertarian party seems to have a problem of trying to pick up children on the internet for sex

  3. JamesPeron

    The force that you may not be recognizing is the one that is applied BEFORE any cakes are baked or not.

    A person, the ostensible “owner”  of a given piece of property, to be the owner, would have the say over what goes on or doesn’t, on THEIR property, but not the property of others.  That’s a distinguishing characteristic of  “ownership” . 

    For instance your body, nobody else can tell you what you can put in your OWN body, otherwise they’d be assuming some kind of master / slave relationship to be valid.   Hmmm….who would do that ? 

    If another person or entity (government) determines the nature of how the property will be used or not used and that determination by the nonowner is backed by….force.    Force is present in the scenario.

    While I think it’s not very nice to use force anytime, it is always important to recognize the difference between offensive force and defensive force.   Good people might reluctantly use defensive force if there appear to be no other alternatives.   Bad people use offensive force as a means routinely, when those bad people join together and declare themselves a “government” , it doesn’t change offensive force into something good.   Peace.

Care to comment?