R J Harris: Let’s chill on “Gary Johnson Mania”

Hello all,

R J Harris is a candidate for the LP’s presidential nomination. In a preface to his March 7 “Money Bomb” plea, R J Harris said:
Clearly the GOP has screwed us again but even if Ron is not on the ballot in2012, his platform and principles still can be. There is time left to help nominate a Liberty Candidate for President from the Libertarian Party. Please help today.

http://www.rjharris2012.com/blog/defeat-two-party-tyranny-mb/

Contrary to both Ron Paul’s and RJ Harris’ platforms, Gary Johnson supports keeping GITMO open, “humanitarian” war, giving foreign aid to Israel, the “Fair Tax”, accepting federal matching funds for his campaign, aggressive and intrusive regulation of small restaurants, keeping the Federal Reserve system, the death penalty…and the list goes on. HE IS NOT a Libertarian. In the wake of what happened to our Champion Ron Paul on Super Tuesday we have to help RJ stand up and fight for us like never before.

Won’t you please help get the word out about this champion of Liberty? He needs your help right now before its too late to stop the LP from making another Bob Barr mistake.

3/7/12 Money Bomb – Defeat Two Party Tyranny | RJ Harris for President
www.rjharris2012.com

 

I’ve heard Gary Johnson speak several times when he appeared on Fox Business Network and when he was at the Republican debates, the two times he was invited. I also heard him during the February 21 Manhattan LP Convention, which I attended. I think those who met him will agree when I say Gary is an articulate libertarian-like supporter, a sweet, easy going guy who you wouldn’t mind introducing to one of your female kins.

Still, R J Harris accused Gary Johnson of not being a libertarian. Perhaps this is just political posturing on Harris’ part, but I don’t think his accusation should be dismissed. Can we at least take a time out on the veritable “Gary Johnson Mania” and examine the reasons for Harris’ accusation? Perhaps after we examine them we might even decide to put the kibosh on Johnson, himself. (“Beware of false prophets and fake Coach handbags.”)

Harris gave me pause, however, when he faulted Johnson for accepting federal matching funds for his campaign. Frankly, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. I know this stance is both an apostasy and an anathema for most libertarians, but guess what? My stance is supported by none other than the great, prototypical, quasi libertarian, Ayn Rand.

Remember when a student of Rand’s felt badly about receiving a government scholarship? How could the student countenance taking the scholarship and not feel hypocritical? Rand’s answer was, in part:

The recipient of a public scholarship is morally justified only so long as he regards it as restitution and opposes all forms of welfare statism. Those who advocate public scholarships, have no right to them; those who oppose them, have. If this sounds like a paradox, the fault lies in the moral contradictions of welfare statism, not in its victims.

Since there is no such thing as the right of some men to vote away the rights of others, and no such thing as the right of the government to seize the property of some men for the unearned benefit of others—the advocates and supporters of the welfare state are morally guilty of robbing their opponents, and the fact that the robbery is legalized makes it morally worse, not better. The victims do not have to add self-inflicted martyrdom to the injury done to them by others; they do not have to let the looters profit doubly, by letting them distribute the money exclusively to the parasites who clamored for it. Whenever the welfare-state laws offer them some small restitution, the victims should take it . . . .

But the victims, who opposed such laws, have a clear right to any refund of their own money—and they would not advance the cause of freedom if they left their money, unclaimed, for the benefit of the welfare-state administration.

(“The Question of Scholarships,”http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/government_grants_and_scholarships.html)

So, if Ayn Rand were here today, she would no doubt tell Harris to chill on Johnson for accepting federal matching funds for his campaign, and take those funds for himself as restitution, since he opposes all forms of “welfare statism” and especially to advance the cause of freedom by not leaving all that money to those motherfuckers.

Anyhow, on a related matter, I”m not sure, but I think Harris’ “J” don’t mean anything like the “S” in Ulysses S Grant, which Grant admitted didn’t mean anything. (Who’s buried in Grant’s tomb? Ulysses S Grant, of course. Who’d you think? Jimmy Hoffa? JFK’s real trigger man? Obama’s real father?) Harry Truman’s “S” didn’t mean anything either.

I hope Harris’ “J” don’t mean anything, because it would be a nice affectation. You think maybe Harris did one better by not having the “R” mean anything either?

So, please don’t dismiss R J Harris’ accusation that Gary Johnson is not a libertarian. And, just as important, please don’t dismiss R J Harris’ candidacy for the LP’s presidential nomination, because as that great Yankee slugger, Ron Swaboda, once said, “It ain’t over till the sun sets in the East,” or something like that.

Thanks for reading.

Alton

9 comments for “R J Harris: Let’s chill on “Gary Johnson Mania”

  1. March 11, 2012 at 1:17 pm

    This isn’t the first time I’ve seen the anti-Gary Johnson advocacy of R.J. Harris. Let’s take his attacks singly, with MY ANSWER IN CAPS:

    RJ HARRIS: “Contrary to both Ron Paul’s and RJ Harris’ platforms, Gary Johnson supports keeping GITMO open,…”

    INCLUDING IN ONES PLATFORM “CLOSING GUANTANOMO” IS MERE SYMBOLISM. IF A LIBERTARIAN WANTS TO HELP A DETAINEE, FORBID GOVERNMENT DETENTION WITHOUT RESPECTING THE 5TH AMENDMENT’S REQUIREMENT THAT THE PRISONER GET DUE PROCESS, INCLUDING A CHARGE AND A TRIAL. ENEMY COMBATANTS NEED TO BE DETAINED SOMEWHERE, BUT NOT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS.

    RJ HARRIS: “(for) ‘humanitarian’ war”,

    WAR NEVER IS HUMANE, AND GOVERNOR GARY JOHNSON WOULDN’T RESPOND TO A NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT WITHOUT A WAR DECLARATION FROM CONGRESS. IF HALF A MILLION PEOPLE ARE FACING AN IMMINENT GENOCIDE, THE GOVERNOR WOULD INVITE VOLUNTEERS TO GO STOP IT.

    RJ HARRIS “giving foreign aid to Israel,”

    GOVERNOR JOHNSON OPPOSES ALL FOREIGN AID.

    RJ HARRIS: ‘(for) the ‘Fair Tax'”,

    TO OPPOSE THE FAIR TAX IMPLIES SUPPORT FOR THE INCOME TAX. NO LIBERTARIAN SHOULD SUPPORT THE 16TH AMENDMENT WHICH IMPRISONED US IN THE ORWELLIAN GUILTY-UNTIL-PROVEN-INNOCENT INCOME TAX WITH ITS IRS AUDITS. THE FAIR TAX IS A SALES TAX, WHICH FOLKS CAN CONTROL WITH PRUDENT SHOPPING. WITH A ZERO INCOME TAX ON CORPORATIONS, 10S OF MILLIONS OF NEW JOBS WOULD REPATRIATE IN THE USA.

    RJ HARRIS: “accepting federal matching funds for his campaign,”

    ITS NOT COERCED TAXPAYER MONEY, SINCE THE ONLY MONEY INVOLVED ARE DOLLARS INCOME TAX FILERS VOLUNTARILY CHECK ON THEIR FORMS. PLUS, AS AYN RAND WROTE, TAKING WELFARE FOR WHICH ONE DID NOT VOTE IS A GOOD THING, LIKE RESTITUTION. A SIMILAR ARGUMENT COULD BE USED TO JUSTIFY CONGRESSMAN PAUL’S DIRECTING OF EARMARKS IN PROJECT FUNDING FOR HIS DISTRICT.

    RJ HARRIS: “aggressive and intrusive regulation of small restaurants,”

    GOVERNOR GARY JOHNSON GARNERED THE TOP JOB CREATION RECORD AS GOVERNOR, FOR KEEPING REGULATIONS CERTAIN, CHEAP AND EASY TO COMPLY WITH. IF R.J. IS GETTING THIS DISTORTION FROM HIS FOX-EXPRESSED SUPPORT FOR CALORIE COUNTS IN RESTAURANTS, HE CLARIFIED THAT STATEMENT IN HIS NEXT ONLINE TOWNHAL, THAT HE’D NEVER SUPPORT MAKING CALORIE COUNTS MANDATORY. SMALL BUSINESSES IN NEW MEXICO JOINED THE REST OF THE STATE IN MAKING THE GOVERNOR THE MOST POPULAR OF ALL CANDIDATES AMONG HOME-STATE VOTERS. AS PRESIDENT HE’D CUT SMALL BUSINESS REGULATION BY THE 43% OF SPENDING THAT’S BORROWED (TO BALANCE THE BUDGET).

    RJ HARRIS: “keeping the Federal Reserve system,”

    GOVERNOR GARY JOHNSON WOULD SIGN INTO LAW ANY BILL CONGRESS PASSED TO ABOLISH THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM. SHORT OF ABOLITION, THE GOVERNOR HAS EXPRESSED SUPPORT FOR LIMITING THE FED’S MANDATE TO CURRENCY STABILIZATION (WHICH WOULD RAISE RATES), DR. PAUL’S PROPOSALS TO SUBJECT THE FED TO A FULL AUDIT AND EXPOSE THE FED’S MONEY MONOPOLY WITH A COMPETITIVE CURRENCY BILL, UNDER WHICH GOLD AND SILVER WOULD BE LEGALIZED SO THEY COULD WITHOUT COERCION TAKEOVER THE MARKET AS THE STANDARD CURRENCY. ALSO, THE GOVERNOR HAS WARNED THOSE FIXATED ON THE FED THAT EXCESSIVE MONEY PRINTING CAN COME ALSO FROM A GOVERNMENT’S TREASURY. FURTHER, EXCESSIVE DEFICIT SPENDING BY THE GOVERNMENT GIVES THE FED AN EXCUSE TO MONETIZE DEBT, SO THE ONE THING A PRESIDENT SHOULD ACT ON IMMEDIATELY IS BALANCING THE BUDGET, TO REMOVE SPENDING AS AN EXCUSE FOR MONETIZATION.

    RJ HARRIS: “the death penalty”

    GOVERNOR GARY JOHNSON HAS OPPOSED THE DEATH PENALTY SINCE HIS TIME AS GOVERNMENT IN THE 1990S, WHEN HE LEARNED THAT INNOCENT PRISONERS COULD BE KILLED, AND THAT THUS IT WASN’T WORTH RETAINING THE ULTIMATE PENALTY.

    RJ HARRIS: “…and the list goes on.”

    LIKE WHAT, RJ?

    RJ HARRIS: “HE IS NOT a Libertarian. In the wake of what happened to our Champion Ron Paul on Super Tuesday we have to help RJ stand up and fight for us like never before.”

    RJ, YOU EXAGERRATED YOUR ROLE IN GETTING OKLAHOMA ONTO THE BALLOT, AND YOU’RE BORDERLINE LYING ABOUT GOVERNOR GARY JOHNSON’S RECORD. IF THE LP IS GOING TO COME TOGETHER AFTER THE CONVENTION, WE NEED A BIT MORE HONESTY IN OUR DISCUSSIONS.

  2. Alton Yee
    March 10, 2012 at 2:12 pm

    Hello Natalie Ricardo,

    Thank you for your comments. I’m glad you appreciated my “decorum.”

    You said you wanted to “clarify” Harris’ alleged duplicity. Specifically, you said that the acting Chair of the Oklahoma Libertarian Party Clark Duffe called Harris a “liar” for “bragging” that he “gathered over 37,000 signatures for the OKLP.” You also said Harris made this alleged falsehood “following a talk [he] made before the NYLP [convention].” You further said “[Harris’] statement was immediately deemed as false by the OKLP ballot drive coordinator Mr. Richard Prawdzienski.”

    If I may correct you, Harris appeared before the Manhattan LP convention, not the New York LP convention, which will occur on April 21. Anyhow, I attended the MLP convention. While I didn’t hear Harris “brag,” or otherwise, that he gathered “over 37,000 signatures,” I would certainly take such a statement with a huge grain of salt. For him, or any one person to literally gather “over 37,000 signatures” is impossible. Maybe it could be done in 20 years, but in the short time typically allowed for petitioning, no way.

    Still, as you told us, “Prawdzienski stated that the actual number of signatures presented by Harris was 150.” While 150 signatures is probably not something to “brag” about, I do applaud Harris for a job well done because I’ve gathered signatures and I know what the task involves. Indeed, last year I gathered over 300 signatures for LPNY’s petitioning. Although I did this part time, it was still hard work that required persistence, stamina and a thick skin. (BTW, If you want to get the most signatures during a petition outing, I suggest you go to a plaza during lunchtime on a weekday. Many people from nearby offices will be having their lunches, and many will be happy to sign your petition.)

    Natalie Ricardo, it seems to me that Harris’ alleged braggadocio might have been misunderstood, as clearly he cannot literally collect 37,000 signatures by himself. Can we cut him some slack on this matter? Besides, in the article, “Oklahoma Libertarian Party Hands in 51,000+ Signatures,” Harris seems to have “atoned” for his alleged falsehood when he acknowledged the “hard work” done by the “real heroes,” who he named as, among others, Clark Duffe, Richard Prawdzienski and none other than Gary Johnson:

    RJ Harris has stated the following about this achievement: “…the real heroes are the OKLP, Angelia O’Dell, Clark Duffe, Richard Prawdzienski, Aletha Lingo and many others who did the hard work. Giving the effort a face and a local candidate to support was not nearly as difficult as the trench work was for all of them. And thank you Gov. Johnson for putting us over the top in OK and in helping get ballot access for the OKLP for the first time in more than a decade. We are a team and this effort proves that if we can compete in one of the most difficult ballot access states in the Union our team, the Libertarian team, can compete anywhere.”

    (http://www.rjharris2012.com/blog/press/oklp-qualifies-for-ballot-access/)

    Thank you again for your comments and for your clarification, which I hope I had further clarified.

    Alton Yee

  3. James Watson
    March 9, 2012 at 10:19 am

    I am a Gary Johnson supporter and your post caught my attention. In your comments, you seek to contact Harris for his rebuttal to accusations made in this forum? Why would you want to have a liar comment on whether or not he was lying? Talk to the libertarian party in Oklahoma and find out for yourself. You could also contact Gary Johnson and ask him about the accusation that he is not a real Libertarian. I bet he’ll answer you. State after state has overwhelmingly endorsed Gary Johnson over the other choices. R.J. Harris has won the title of the “sour grapes” candidate because he sure hasn’t moved the meter in any straw poll.

  4. Natalie Ricardo
    March 9, 2012 at 9:00 am

    I can see from his comments that Mr. Yee is a gentleman. His decorum is appreciated by this reader. Perhaps I can help clarify the record. The acting Chair of the Oklahoma Libertarian Party Clark Duffe stated that Mr. Harris was a liar following a talk Harris made before the NYLP. Harris bragged that he had gathered over 37,000 signatures for the OKLP. This statement was immediately deemed as false by the OKLP ballot drive coordinator Mr. Richard Prawdzienski. Prawdzienski stated that the actual number of signatures presented by Harris was 150. Prawdzienski was a former candidate for congress and is respected for his integrity. He further praised the Gary Johnson campaign for providing the most help on the ground and also for the money raised for the OKLP. It would seem that R.J. Harris was trying to look like he had a great support base in his home state at the expense of Gary Johnson. This news about Harris is not new and it received press back in February. I hope this helps set the record straight.

  5. Alton Yee
    March 9, 2012 at 5:51 am

    Hi again John and Ling Ling,

    It seems there are glitches to my replies to your comments. The parts of your replies that I quote are supposed to lie between the <>, but they don’t.

    UPDATE: As you can see from my re-edited replies to your comments, I managed to fix those glitches. Hooray for the two of you! And boolie for me!

    I’m afraid this is the first time I’m responding to comments here. In other venues where I replied to comments, I’ve used AOL’s style of quoting passages from someone’s comments by putting them between <>. It worked there, but it apparently doesn’t work here.

    I guess I’m still “learning the ropes.” Hopefully, I’ll get it right the next time I comment. BTW, what I wanted to appear between the were parts of your paragraphs. I’m afraid I don’t seem to have the option to go back and include those paragraphs, but I think you can guess which parts of your comments I replied to, yes?

    Anyhow, I apologize for the glitches.

    Alton Yee

  6. Alton Yee
    March 9, 2012 at 5:34 am

    Hi John Balzer,

    Thank you for your reply, in which you said, partly:

    R.J. Harris’ popularity among New York Libertarians might stem from the fact that he has repeatedly lied to them on his visits to New York. The core of the matter was when he lied about how many signatures he gathered for the Libertarian party in Oklahoma bragging that he had thousands which turned out to be false and almost threatened to keep Libertarians off the ballot altogether in Harris’ own state.

    As did Ling Ling Park, the previous replier, you are accusing Harris of duplicity. I should like to ask Harris to address this accusation. Indeed, he still has on his web site his claim about the LPOK getting 51,000 signatures though I didn’t read the details. [UPDATE: Natalie Ricardo, another commenter, clarified this matter. See my reply above.] Still, I’m glad people like you and Ling Ling Park are putting Harris’ feet to the fire, as we should be doing to all the LP presidential hopefuls, including Gary Johnson, else we could have face another “nominating remorse” as we did in 2008 when Bob Barr was nominated. (BTW, will you be attending the LP nominating convention in Las Vegas?)

    Admittedly, Bob Barr received 523,686 votes, 0.4% of the national vote, which was the second highest number of votes nationwide that a Libertarian Party presidential candidate has received. But given Barr’s “skeletons in his closet” and the “bad taste” he left for many people, we can only wonder how many more votes the LP might had received if Barr weren’t its candidate then.

    You continued:

    The Libertarian party is receiving much press right now but it certainly has nothing to do with R.J. Harris and everything to do with Gary Johnson.

    Perhaps. But if what you say is true, might the “press” take an interest in ALL the LP’s candidates who are hopeful of being the LP presidential nominee? Might the “press” even cover the LP’s nominating convention in Las Vegas? If Johnson could draw the press into our folds, I’m all for it. But, as I previously asked in my article, may we at least suspend the veritable “Gary Johnson Mania,” and dispassionately examine Harris’ reasons for accusing Johnson of not being a libertarian? Indeed, may we dispassionately examine every LP presidential candidate for their “minimum core libertarian values” or MCLV?

    “MCLV” is a construct I just made up. When you consider that its Roman numeric equivalent is 1155, perhaps a new catch phrase heard during the coming convention could be: “What are the guy’s 1155s?” Still, while libertarians agree on the broad “libertarian umbrella platform” of more personal freedom and less government interference with our lives, libertarians give different weight to the many libertarian issues. For example, some libertarians may be more concerned about ending the War on Drugs than ending the Fed; while other libertarians may feel foreign policy should be paramount, other libertarians might put less weight on foreign policy. Each libertarian, nonetheless, can be said to have a set of “minimum core libertarian values” which consists of the issues they personally give the most weight to.

    And based on their personal MCLVs, they could judge how much they favor or disfavor each LP presidential hopeful. For example, I want to see whether a candidates have, to name three of my MCLVs, a desire for: 1) a non-interventionist foreign policy, which includes especially no foreign wars or foreign aid; 2) minimal federal interference with the economy including questioning the role and existence of the Fed; and 3) a strict adherence to the Constitution, especially to the limited, enumerated powers that are allowed to the government.

    John Balzer, what are your personal MCLVs that you want to see our candidates have?

    Thank you again for your reply.

    Alton Yee

  7. Alton Yee
    March 9, 2012 at 5:13 am

    Hi Ling Ling Park,

    Thank you for your reply, in which you said, partly:

    The only reason I’ve been drawn to the Libertarian Party is because of what I heard about Gary Johnson. I have watched the debates when they are available from Florida to Georgia to Califonia and I’ve also read every newspaper/internet article I can find about Libertarian candidates.

    I’m glad you’re interested in the Libertarian Party. While Gary Johnson (who appeared in only two Republican debates) does speak well and pushes certain libertarian buttons, he does not represent the Libertarian Party. He does, however, want to be its Presidential candidate, as do a host of others, as you no doubt are aware. BTW, are you going to Las Vegas to attend the LP’s nominating convention?

    I grew up in China with oppression.

    That is, to say the least, interesting. China has had a long history of oppressive and repressive governments and regimes, going back to the various dynasties, which many Westerners somehow feel were “highly civilized.” Even today, China is still pretty oppressive and repressive. I understand there is no rule of law there, as the Communists are still in power. I’m almost afraid to ask, but when did you grow up in China? Was it during or after Mao? When did you leave China? Are you now an American citizen?

    You know, we hear about the high unemployment in the U.S., with several millions out of work. While that’s unfortunate, people will be shocked to know that China, with three times the population of the U.S., and as the contender to be the world’s #1 economic power, can have upwards of 54 million people suddenly out of work in one month! How can a centrally planned economy, even if it’s not completely centrally planned, deal with this? Very badly, I’m afraid.

    You continued:

    Harris looked OK to me because I could understand how his native american heritage and his military service played into his desire to become president. Nevertheless, there is a serious character issue here. Harris blantantly lied about what he purported to have done in OK and hurt the party. What, is he a little delusional? No he is very delusional. Not presidential material. Sorry R.J.

    You and another replier are accusing Harris of duplicity. I’m uncertain of the details, but I should like to ask Harris to address this accusation. [UPDATE: Natalie Ricardo, another commenter, clarified this accusation. See my reply to her comment above.] Still, I’m glad people like you are putting Harris’ feet to the fire, as we should be doing to all the LP presidential hopefuls, including Gary Johnson, else we could have face another “nominating remorse” as we did in 2008 when Bob Barr was nominated.

    Thank you again for your reply.

    Alton Yee

  8. Ling Ling Park
    March 8, 2012 at 9:57 pm

    The only reason I’ve been drawn to the Libertarian Party is because of what I heard about Gary Johnson. I have watched the debates when they are available from Florida to Georgia to Califonia and I’ve also read every newspaper/internet article I can find about Libertarian candidates. I grew up in China with oppression. Harris looked OK to me because I could understand how his native american heritage and his military service played into his desire to become president. Nevertheless, there is a serious character issue here. Harris blantantly lied about what he purported to have done in OK and hurt the party. What, is he a little delusional? No he is very delusional. Not presidential material. Sorry R.J.

  9. John Balzer
    March 8, 2012 at 6:47 pm

    R.J. Harris’ popularity among New York Libertarians might stem from the fact that he has repeatedly lied to them on his visits to New York. The core of the matter was when he lied about how many signatures he gathered for the Libertarian party in Oklahoma bragging that he had thousands which turned out to be false and almost threatened to keep Libertarians off the ballot altogether in Harris’ own state. The Libertarian party is receiving much press right now but it certainly has nothing to do with R.J. Harris and everything to do with Gary Johnson

Comments are closed.