On today’s edition of The Peter Schiff Show, guest hosted by
the great historian Tom Woods, a caller asked what Tom’s opinion was on Libertarian
party presidential nominee Gary Johnson.
Now, I’m a huge Gary Johnson supporter so I was saddened by Tom’s
answer. Tom basically acted disappointed
in Governor Johnson, saying he was “too wonkish” and needed more charisma…
*sigh*
Maybe, being the kind of person who watches videos of all
the events at the Cato Institute and reads books about monetary policy and
zoning laws for fun, I’m just more of a wonk myself but I tend to identify more
with a guy like Gary than a pitchforks-and-torches kind of candidate. And I think the fact that Gary Johnson has a great record as a former governor is a huge comparative advantage, even if he
doesn’t necessarily have the charisma of a Ronald Reagan or even a Michael
Badnarik. His credentials give him
credibility, and that credibility can hook people who might ordinarily ignore the
Libertarian candidate, assuming he’s a kook.
Think about it. If I
tell one of my non-libertarian fence-sitting friends about Michael Badnarik (a
software engineer who has, for all I and my friend know, never run anything
larger than his own household) and get him to watch a youtube speech or, if I’m
some kind of a miracle worker, get him to come out to a Badnarik event he might
sense the charisma and look more closely into the libertarian principles
Badnarik is talking about. Maybe. Or maybe he’ll realize that Hitler also had
quite a bit of charisma but his ideas were obviously very bad. But either way he’s going to be pretty
hesitant going into the whole thing. A
guy like Badnarik really has not done anything to show that he’s ready for the
job of president, and so his ideas probably won’t get a fair shake.
But with a record like Gary’s, I have ammo to ply my friend’s
sense of logic. I can say, “Look, Gary
Johnson cut 1,200 government jobs and New Mexico did fine. They did better than fine! They created 20,000 private sector jobs, and
had a balanced budget to boot. Let’s bring him to the national government where
he can do the same thing!” From there we
can get into a discussion of the issues, and I can point to a youtube video or
a website once my friend is interested.
I don’t have to drag him around and hold his hand to get him to
come. And once he comes he’s going to be
there because he’s genuinely interested in the ideas, not because he wants to
experience some new and different sub-culture of America; not because he wants
to observe us like he would some kind of strange species at the zoo. On top of that, this is the more likely
scenario. Let’s face it, I’m not going
to be able to get him to watch a speech.
I’m not going to be able to get him to come out to an event. It’s going to be me and him talking about the
issues, and Gary Johnson’s record brings credibility to the ideas I’m going to
put forward. If anything, it's my charisma that's going to matter, not Gary's.
This perception that our libertarian ideas need to be sold by
some charismatic demagogue... I mean,
sure, it would be great if we could have a charismatic candidate who also has a
stellar record of governing as a libertarian, but it would also be great to
wake up and find $50,000 in cash dropped on my doorstep by the tooth fairy. I doubt either scenario is going to happen, so why complain when it doesn't occur? We should be focusing on what we’ve got to
work with here: A stellar record, built
on libertarian principles, that easily beats Mitt Romney’s abysmal record in
Massachusetts and Obama’s appalling record of economic stagnation. Maybe Gary Johnson’s red meat speeches aren’t quite as red and juicy as libertarians would like them to be (although I thought his speech at the convention was pretty good), but I think his record is a much bigger asset than charisma if we choose to use it
wisely.
But anyway, while Tom was on a rant about the kinds of
things he wished Governor Johnson would say, he did come up with an awesome line
that I’ll leave you to ponder:
“The problem is not that the government is 7% too
inefficient, the problem is that the government is composed of sociopaths who
have no sympathy for the average person and who simply want to make a living on
the backs of working people doing jobs that not only accomplish nothing, but
are positive hindrances to growth in this country.”
Amen, Tom.
No comments:
Post a Comment