Coyote is Sad :=(

I was pretty bummed out that Gary Johnson is not to be included in the debate slate for New Hampshire.   I am not one (most definitely not one) to invest all my hopes and dreams in a political candidate, but I really like Gary Johnson and thought he could bring a new libertarian voice (in addition to Ron Paul's) to Republican discussions dominated by statists like Romney and Huckabee.   I have met him once and listening talk about things like the costs of the war on drugs and immigration is just so refreshing from a politician of any sort, particularly a Republican.    And in contrast to Ron Paul, who comes off as a bit wacky (and wonky), Johnson does it all in a very non-threatening way.   Many people in this country self-identify as fiscally conservative and socially liberal -- this is their guy.  They just haven't heard of him yet.

As an ex-governor well respected by independents, he strikes me as infinitely more worthy of a debate spot than, say, Donald Trump, who did receive an invitation.  I wrote a whole column on the importance of being previously famous, rather than experienced, as a qualifier for office nowadays.


  1. a leap at the wheel:

    Well, that's true, but now he's "Gary Johnson, the candidate that CNN DOESN'T WANT YOU TO KNOW ABOUT!!!111eleventy", which I think will play pretty well with (how do I put this delicately) the knuckle dragging, mouth breathing, Bush worshiping, flag waiving, religious right that pronounces America with only one A. And those are the R's that he's going to have the most trouble with.

  2. Don:

    Sorry Leap, but Mr. Johnson never had a chance. The point of him for me was that he was possibly the only person who could actually talk with authority about controlling spending as an executive. Between him and Paul, there might have been an actual meaningful conversation, kind of akin to what happened when Perot ran.

    Oh well, guess Dr. Paul will have to get people talking all by himself (doubtful, but who knows, he might be able to pull it off this time). I hold no hope that he'll win the nomination, much less the general, but at least he's ONE candidate that says the right things.

  3. waxmat:

    For some reason I keep thinking of the phrase, soft racism of low expectations. Only in this case it is soft anarchism I guess. And also entirely justified. The only thing liberty-minded people can look forward to during the next election cycle is that perhaps someone who speaks sense will get a couple sound-bites in before the regular performers take the stage. I recall the last time during one of the "debates" when all the chimps rolled their eyes when Paul was speaking. Thankfully he didn't take much time, so that Guiliani could fit '9/11' into his speech 15 times.

    At least now I have Netflix on demand, should be able to miss the whole charade.

  4. davidr:

    PJTV just asked the same question: