Saturday, September 22, 2012

Gary Johnson Files Anti-Trust Lawsuit To Get Into Presidential Debates

Is this a libertarian move? I think not.

Buzzfeed reports that Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson filed an anti-trust lawsuit in federal court Friday to try to force his way into next month's presidential debates.

Johnson, who first sought the GOP primary nomination before launching a third-party bid, is suing the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates and both the Democratic and Republican parties, calling the CPD a "conspiracy."

The CPD was founded jointly by the two parties and the nominee, and the lawsuit alleges that they meet every four years to set the rules for the debate to "hoodwink" the American people.

Johnson is asking the courts to force the CPD to allow for all candidates who are on the ballot in enough states to reach 270 electoral votes to have a spot on the debate state.

According to a release, Johnson’s running mate and retired California Superior Court Judge Jim Gray will argue the motion on the campaign’s behalf.

(ht Travis Holte)

14 comments:

  1. It isn't libertarian if we lived in a libertarian system. However as Rand pointed out repeatedly and is 100% correct (and RP agrees implicitly because he takes SS) when living in a corrupt system with cronyism it is absolutely appropriate to take advantage of that corrupt system because to not do so is to artificially disadvantage yourself in the competitive marketplace (to what extent it exists).

    RP's campaign did the same trying to subvert the Republican party from the inside using their own rules against them so I don't know why anyone wouldn't be 100% for this. It's a scam and needs to be taken down.

    GO GARY.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Know what else wasn't a "libertarian move"? The Ron Paul campaign suing youtube to gain the identity of the user who posted an anti-Huntsman video.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Right, and that move was criticized

      Delete
    2. I disagree. The uploader of the anti-Huntsman (really pro-Huntsman) video was contacted by Huffington Post through YouTube and replied (paraphrasing here), "Sorry, the campaign told me not to speak to the press." And because the video uploader had made the (presumably) false claim that he was working in tandem with the official campaign, the campaign had a right to sue. Just as a doctor would have the right to sue if someone was falsely blogging that he had botched their surgery.

      Even Mises agreed with laws against libel and slander, and wrote with satisfaction of how John McNeill Whistler had sued John Ruskin over the fact that the latter had insulted the artwork of the former! That's taking it a bit far for me but I think the Paul campaign was within its rights to sue, given the false and damaging claims of the video uploader. I still believe that video was a Huntsman false-flag.

      Delete
  3. I don't see a problem with it, since the parties, although technically private "clubs" are really public institutions. So in that sense, it's a check on power. That said, it'll probably go nowhere.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I would see this as an effort to educate the public. Like Ron Paul becoming a congressman in the first place.

    This lawsuit (unless it is completely buried by the MSM, which is likely), will educate people on why there are only two parties, and also could increase awareness that someone else is running, besides Obama and Romney. John Stossel took a photo of Gary Johnson to Times Square, and asked people if they recognized him. He only found one person who did.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is being completely buried! This whole system is a fraud.

      Delete
  5. What happened to "be a libertarian bitch?"

    ReplyDelete
  6. Corporations are creations of the state. WhenGJ sues one for not equal treatment, he is attacking the state, a very libertarian move.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So, you're saying that a limited-liability joint-stock company can't exist in a free market? I call bullshit. Also, your conclusion doesn't follow from the premise.

      Delete
  7. The "nonpartisan" Commission on Presidential Debates can't be...if all political philosophies are not represented, "who are on the ballot in enough states to reach 270 electoral votes."

    "nonpartisan" synonyms: detached, equitable, fair, free-wheeling, independent, indifferent, just, middle-of-the-road, neutral, nonaligned, nondiscriminatory, objective, on one's own, on-the-fence, playing it cool, unaffected, unaffiliated, unbiased, unbigoted, uncolored, unimplicated, uninfluenced, uninvolved, unprejudiced

    A declaration is an affirmation. Independence means self-government. They could have called The Declaration of Independence, The Affirmation of Self-Government!

    Gary Johnson and Judge Jim Gray are the only choice to Save the American Dream: Self-Government, freedom from big government tyranny and oppression.... and to Restore Justice, the guardian of Liberty! The people believe in self-government and self-medication.



    ReplyDelete
  8. Was the Boston Tea Party an exercise in libertarianism? Not really, especially if you were the innocent owner of all that tea.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Do you want Gary Johnson to be your president? http://celebrity-plugs.com/t/

    ReplyDelete