Breaking: Jesse Ventura, Howard Stern Set For 2016 Presidential Run

49
1316
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Libertarian duo would shake foundation of White House contest

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Infowars.com
September 29, 2013

Former Governor Jesse Ventura and radio personality Howard Stern are set for a sensational 2016 presidential run.

Ventura will fly to New York this Wednesday to appear on Stern’s Sirius XM show, during which sternVentura will formally request that Stern join him on the ticket.

Ventura told the Alex Jones Show that he is deadly serious about running for the White House with Stern as his VP. Due to Ventura’s refusal to entertain the notion of taking money from special interests, Stern, whose radio show brings in around $100 million a year, will be in charge of fundraising.

Although Ventura had to quit his radio show when he ran for Governor of Minnesota in order to comply with FCC regulations, Stern will not have to quit his current show because satellite radio is not subject to the same rules as terrestrial radio.

However, Stern has indicated he will probably quit his current show in 2015 anyway, leaving the path clear for a presidential campaign to begin the same year.

Off air, Ventura told Jones that Stern is one of the smartest people he knows and that his libertarian mindset make the two a perfect combination. It is likely that Ventura and Stern will attempt to secure the Libertarian Party nomination, which in 2012 was won by former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson.

Stern previously ran for Governor of New York as a libertarian candidate in 1994, promising to fix the roads and repeal the death penalty.

Ventura is about to commence a book tour but confirmed that he would run for president, with Stern as his VP, exclusively with the Alex Jones Show.

Watch the clip below from 42:30 onwards where Ventura discusses the presidential campaign.

Share Button

49 COMMENTS

  1. We could masturbate to this all year and still not get off… It’s a waste of time.

    I would like to see someone try to write an article explaining how a person or a group of people can give a right to someone else or group of people, a right that he/they don’t have to begin with… Howard Stern is who I pick first to attempt this.

    • Rights aren’t given, ooorgle.

      They just are.

      Each of us – by dint of our existence – has the same rights. Put another way, none of us has any right to exercise control over anyone else, to take their things – to do them violence – unless we wish to surrender our own right to be left in peace, provided we respect the peace of others.

      Either we can live – and let live.

      Or we can live off each other – like animals.

      That’s the choice.

      And it’s a simple one.

      • humans are animals. even the more philosophical, more intellectual/conceptualizing, more evolved (more human, if you like) ones…pick your modifier. and if those “mores” conferred real survival benefits, they’d get selected for more often, naturally. there’d be more of them. but it isn’t so.

        as true as innate rights, inherent inalienables, are, its also trumping-ly, true that one is “entitled” to whatever one can defend. the jungle is just beneath “civilization’s” facade, & the “everybody has to make a living” maslow-level (for whatever maslow’s worth) teems with red in tooth & claw life…and life up there at the apex, or lives fancied to be there, are not just out-teamed double or triple, they are out-teamed many orders of magnitude.

        some wild, non-human animal is threatening, on the verge of attack…or a human equivalent has a gun in your face… launching into an exposition on your a coneheadedness, that you live in the apex suites up there at the top of the pyramid, won’t save the minute, let alone the day. yet, so many piggy-characters remain steadfastly blind to the lord of the flies reality & just keep hollering that they’ve got the conch…well, it came as no surprise when piggy, conch in hand & exposition on lips, got himself blunt force trauma murdered.

        that there “should” be more cone-nans does not project away the fact that the gene pool has no use for idealized platonic triangles; instead, it’s home sweet home for conans the barbarians. the heart-shaped triangulars, made of marshmallow, bits that are in lucky charms…conan loves to see those floating in the cereal/gene bowl – for the survival benefits they confer to him.

        • ozy,

          Why is everybody “Hooked On Platonics?” There is no such thing as a triangle sheeple. If only we could stop the bleating and start the thinking!

          Baaaaa. What is the Platonic Fold, Taleb?
          http://jenburkhardt.tumblr.com/platonicfold

          Questions and Answers On Obamacare
          http://www.irs.gov/uac/Questions-and-Answers-on-the-Individual-Shared-Responsibility-Provision

          1. Under the Affordable Care Act, the federal government, state governments, insurers, employers and individuals are given shared responsibility over you.

          2. The provision applies to all 316 million Americans.

          7. For those who will not have coverage, the Health Insurance Marketplace will open. Here you are encouraged to give tons of personal information just for a quote, so when the time comes we can garnish and incarcerate you without hassle.

          12. Expats living abroad must be out of the country for 330 days or else they must get qualifying coverage.

          23. If I’m a deadbeat scumbag with income so low that I am not required to file a federal income tax return, or I snuck into this country using a Coyote, will I need to do anything?

          Of course not, you are obviously a victim, no further action is required. We’re mailing you a free Obamaphone to compensate you for the embarrassment of asking this question.

          25. What happens if I do not have minimum essential coverage or an exemption, and I cannot afford to make a payment?

          Your IRS heroes routinely work with taxpayers who owe amounts they cannot afford to pay. Our for-profit servicers will be sure to concoct some outrageously overstated amount due to scare you into sending in payments as soon as you are able.

          if you, your spouse or a dependent included on your tax return don’t have minimum essential coverage and owe a shared responsibility payment, the IRS will offset your overstated liability against any tax refund you due and bill you for the difference.

          • what about triangulated sheeple? branding? Triangles were frequently used in late 19th-century brands, and an open triangle was a “rafter.” “Branded! Scorned as the one who ran.
            What do you do when you’re branded, and you know you’re a man?” ♪ ♫ ♪

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXlUS5-ag_g

            phonics got me first. not sure that evinces an addictive personality. but there’s nothing addictive, to me, about the our day X will come platon the map…can see it being a hooked on endorphins thing, tho…buncha’ high on endogenous opioid marathoners.

            doc oz dx: go ahead & live ideally. with both hands. millennialism in one hand takes away whatever is in the other hand….

      • Maybe that’s what’s needed. A support group where we each chip in a few dollars and help each other out. Animals Anonymous, it could be called. The worse thing about this social onslaught is the increased degradation and animalization.

        My animal behavior problem? Going off on tangents. A discussion of Jesse & Howard veers off into a discussion about unrelated X, which leads to something else entirely Y, and finally makes an emergency landing at completely unrelated Z.

        The original thread is hijacked. The plane is out of fuel and far from it’s original destination, now the commenters are stranded somewhere with a non-refundable ticket and no way back to their originally scheduled discussion.

        It’s only getting worse as I get older, how does everyone keep their mind confined to the topic at hand, if only I could tame myself and find out.

        Back on Topic, because Jesse Ventura is the least worst politician I can think of:

        Howard Stern: “I don’t know that I would vote for myself and the governor”
        http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/02/howard-stern-humors-jesse-ventura-i-dont-know-that-i-would-vote-for-myself-and-the-governor/

        Jesse Ventura 2016 – Website to get him on the Ballot in all 50 states
        http://jesseventura2016.com/

        I’m gonna say, right here and now, if Ventura runs for President, I would really consider voting for him. I really like what he says. He is completely right. If we stop these insane wars, we would have plenty of money to give people all kinds of free stuff.
        http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=255603

        • i call that organic conversation. ‘course, sometimes it’s just evasive tactics. organic brain disease cannot be entirely discounted, either. ☻

  2. I don’t have an hour to listen to another Alex Jones interview of Ventura.
    However, I’ve heard enough of this sort of talk before and thus IMO It’s just BS. Entertaining to some, but BS.
    Now let’s say if they go ahead with this as a ‘none of the above’ campaign like Montgomery Brewster ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088850/ ). It might be good to make a comedic point that the Ds and Rs both suck,. but that’s the most I would expect. Stern would treat the whole thing as joke, that’s a given, and a joke it would be anyway.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LPdTXRjIKQ

      • I’ve listened to Mr. Jones for some time. He’s far too over the top and sees images in clouds so to speak. However, he finds great source material. I think I’ve commented here before that I use infowars etc as a link library. I skim their stuff for the links. I read the links instead. When I make a cite, I cite the link. Jones and crew being over the top and prone to seeing things that are only appear with their world view is not good for getting people to think. Just dropping the source material most of the time works better than their style IMO. Also the people he brings on are often interesting, Ventura usually is not.

        I put up with Jones’ faults because they aren’t too irritating. I once listened to Limbaugh (and tried various others, usually local as counter parts) for the same basic reason, to get more of the story or where to find more to the story, but Limbaugh got more and more irritating until he became unlistenable. (Only a couple of the local shows could I stomach listening to more than a couple times to give them a shot. Those shows, of course, did not last long) Then there are the others who were always just plain unlistenable, Levin, Beck, etc…. Perhaps it’s the mainstream shallowness that makes it so more than anything else. The only places I know to get long format is Jones and CoasttoCoastAM.

        Basically what it is about Jones that turns most people off turns me off too, but I put up with it for what he offers that most media won’t.

  3. Maybe someone else knows other examples, but as far as I know, Jesse Ventura is the only politician who succeeded in electively shrinking the size of a government. While governor of MN, he discontinued nanny state smog testing, freeway entrance stoplights, drastically cut the state budget, and issued a refund to MN taxpayers of the excess funds.

    Howard Stern is an East Coast Jew, he believes in registering guns, banning guns in NYC, fighting obesity, banning smoking, and outlawing headphones while walking or driving. He sees Bloomberg as a huge improvement over past NYC politicians.

    Howard Stern – “God Bless Bloomberg!”

    Jew or Not Jew – Stern used to lie and say he was half Italian
    http://www.jewornotjew.com/profile.jsp?ID=180

    Elle McPhersons Calls Howard Stern “Absolutely Jewish”
    http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/elle-mcpherson-calls-howard-stern-absolutely-jewish-in-bizarre-chat-2012133

    She told Stern about a photo where she was nude on a beach save for “a gun holster around my waist,” she explained. “I love the image,” she gushed, adding that it was snapped “from behind.”

    – Stern worried that the butt-baring shot could traumatize Macpherson’s sons: “Do your children get upset by that? It’s probably upsetting that his mother’s ass is in the bedroom, and if the kids bring over friend,” he pointed out.

    “No,” Macpherson replied. “I just think youre being absolutely Jewish.”
    “You’re being overprotective,” she joked, like an old “Jewish mother” stereotype. “You sound like a nagging mother, ‘Eleanor, should you have that picture in your room?’ My children are very well-balanced.”

    Quipped Stern: “I once saw my mother come out of the shower, it traumatized me.”

    “I can imagine, if she looks like you,” Macpherson replied.

      • Bevin, I am surprised Stern is pro-Bloomberg, I just reached into cyberspace to see what was there and presented my findings. I had no idea, beforehand.

        With modern technology, all votes could be done on the internet, Why do representative proxies continue to exist?

        Metagovernment – Government of, by, and for all the people
        http://www.metagovernment.org/wiki/Main_Page
        – Each election cycle, the voting would be on who runs the voting protocols and machinery. The standard for actionable votes would be regional unanimity, not simple majority.

        Watch 4 minutes of mind-controlled celebrities pledging their allegiance to Barack Obama in Oprah’s “I Pledge” video. Get ready to puke!
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51kAw4OTlA0

        • I’m a regular Stern Show listener – so I’ve heard his paeans to Bloomberg, his praise of Piers Morgan (and gutting the 2A), of “bombing Iran” (and bombing Arabic/Muslim people generally) – etc.

          He is very much a “yankee” – in that he has that cloying I-Know-Best (and you-should-be-forced-to-do-what-I-think-best) attitude.

          He’s smart, but thoughtless – in that he is very capable of defending, say, the First Amendment – but not the Fourth – because he doesn;t understand (apparently) the concept behind both.

          It would be interesting to talk with him on a personal level, off air. I’d like to know whether he has ever considered the NAP or self ownership.

          I suspect not.

          I find this to be the case with most people who are like him – which is most people.

          • So far, Howard Stern is just fine. He earns his money, and exchanges value for value. I think he’ll develop some manner of rational political theory to guide his actions, were he to enter politics.

            It’s painful to watch a libertine like Stern who enjoys himself and then somehow projects his discomfort with himself onto others. Probably the epitome of the Yankee scum archetype, as you and other describe it from first hand experience.

            Alex Jones describes Jesse Ventura as a human being who is in politics. This is indeed a great rarity. I completely relate to Ventura’s upper midwest ethos, my family is rather similar to his, and I can’t fathom Howard Stern in the slightest.

            That being said, Howard Stern is also a human being. He admires Bloomberg because he feels he uses his political and financial power for good.

            Sadly, an East Coast/Israeli style authoritarian state would be a huge improvement over the UN & Corporate Prole Mob bullshit we’ve endured under Bush & Obama. All in all, Ventura/Stern is an improvement over what we have now.

    • “Quipped Stern: “I once saw my mother come out of the shower, it traumatized me.”

      “I can imagine, if she looks like you,” Macpherson replied.”

      That was a good comeback. I think his fans would do well to prepare themselves for the possibility that Howie sucks.

      • Support (or hostility toward) the 2A is for me a damn-near perfect barometer of a person’s basic philosophy. Those who support the concepts articulated by the 2A implicitly support self-ownership while those who don’t support the 2A implicitly reject self-ownership.

        Stern shares the paternalistic-authoritarian view that only the state’s enforcers (and state officials) can be trusted to freely possess arms. He has contempt for the average person and – like his hero, Bloomberg – believes the average person needs direction, applied at gunpoint.

        He is a collectivist who supports Obamacare, loves Hillary Clinton – whom he repeatedly praises on his show.

        I have no idea how he got a reputation for being a Libertarian.

        I guess because he violently defends his right to say “cunt lips” on-air.

  4. I think you’re right in your assessment of Ventura. Closer to a libertarian than Stern. But I think we know those two well enough. The article reveals more about the interpretive capability of the writers at InfoWars.

  5. Might as well have these two jokers, we don’t have any adults running the place now. At least they know how to promote and make money.

    • Based on what I know about Jesse – which isn’t much – I prefer him as a person to Stern. He seems more genuine; and his political instincts seem to be more in line with Libertarian ideas. It may be a pose, I realize.

      Just my 50 –

      • Yeah, Jesse at least seems to be somewhat pro-freedom. Stern is just a shock jock type character. I hate his show and always have. Where Jesse seems just angry at the government, Stern seems dedicated to being as rude and hateful as possible. That idiot woman he has on his show has one job: to laugh like a hyena at whatever Howie says.

      • Stern is a real piece of work to me. A street pimp shock-joc that knows how to cater to the most base of the simple thinkers. His big claim to fame is getting chicks to undress for the camera. Ventura has always been a self promoting WWF showman who lives in Mexico because he is pouting over some TSA groping. Both together don’t have 2% of the intellectual power of a Ron Paul when it comes to the Constitution and running a nation.

        • “when it comes to the Constitution and running a nation.”

          Running a nation? Who wants anyone to run a nation, anyway? The perfect way for any elected official to behave is to shut up, stay home and collect a paycheck for doing nothing. If they do nothing, at least they would be doing no harm.

          • @Ed – Running was a poor choice of wording. The Prez. is the CEO of the corporation for 4 years.

            Sad day when the A.J. channel even hints that these two should be elected to anything. Ventura was elected Govornor, made some noise and quit the job.

            If that is seriously the best the Idiocracy-U.S.A. a can produce, then we deserve what we get.

        • ah, but when it comes to the constitution, well that was the bloodless phase 2 (or maybe phasers, set to “baffle ’em with bs”) coup-coup-ka-choo…without nary as much as a gesundheit. the walruses got harvested, again, & mrs. robinson got screwed, again….

          to graduate, or not to graduate. that is the question….

      • Dear Eric,

        I second that.

        Ventura seems sincere. Yes, as a former pro wrestler how could he not be prone to theatrics and hyperbole? But he seems genuine when he talks about liberty.

        Stern on the other hand strikes me as a cynical poseur, as an opportunist jumping on the libertarian bandwagon merely because it is currently fashionable. Stern seems not so different from Madonna or Lady Gaga. He’s all about desperately attempting to remain ahead of the curve merely to indulge a “Look at me! Look at me!” narcissism.

        I’m surprised Ventura misjudged Stern and took him as a running mate. He could do much better.

        Of course, running per se is counterproductive, and merely reinforces the Myth of Authority, unless the purpose is to use the bully pulpit provided to spread the word, a la Ron Paul.

        • @Bevin – I listened to his Alex Jones interview Friday. Ventura was more concerned with his golf game then being president. This is all a joke, designed to pump book sales and satellite radio subscriptions.

          • Dear Gary,

            Hopefully the publicity stunt angle is a means rather than an end in itself.

            By “means” I mean I hope that Ventura is using the campaign as a means of getting people to listen to his libertarian arguments. As an “ex-governor” he has much less media access than a “presidential candidate.” That could be his motive.

            Stern I have no expectations from at all.

            It’s hard to know public figures from a distance for certain, so I admit I could be mistaken about Ventura’s sincerity. I hope I’m not.

            Lew and others seem to think he’s the real deal.
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjEV1FRqS_Q

            Well, we’ll know eventually.

          • @Bevin – When they talk seriously about dismantling the Federal Reserve life sucking squid and the funny money I will start listening. Everything else is meaningless BS for public consumption, because they do not have a complete “party” to accomplish anything.

          • Dear Gary,

            I now view campaigns within the existing political framework somewhat differently.

            Over the last couple of years, I finally gave up altogether on any “within the system” improvements.

            I now judge any pro-liberty individuals’ efforts within the system more from a PR perspective than a “wise governance” perspective.

            After all, “wise governance” is part and parcel of the Myth of Authority.

            Ron Paul is the best example. More than one Gen X or Millennial anacap has cited Ron Paul as their minarchist “gateway drug” to the anarchist “hard stuff.”

          • @Bevin -said ” Ron Paul is the best example. More than one Gen X or Millennial anacap has cited Ron Paul as their minarchist “gateway drug” to the anarchist “hard stuff.”

            I have zero faith in the system as currently constructed. I left in 1997 when I started waking up. I have only watched it deteriorate severely since then. It is the epitome of the matrix. It guarantees money flow to the club and will lock out, take over or kill any reform.

            Like George Carlin said A special “club” and we ain’t in it. This video should be mandatory viewing by every high school senior. Because no truer words were ever spoken.

            http://youtu.be/i5dBZDSSky0

            Ron Paul knows it, he is not a minarchist, but it was his parting shot and a wake-up call.

            • I agree, Gary –

              I will, however, also hazard one opinion in defense of RP – and perhaps even Rand Paul:

              There is a political Catch-22 in advocating the NAP/self-ownership without exception. It is that in the current political-social environment, you render yourself unelectable thereby. Very, very few are the people who want nothing from government except for it to go away or at most, confine itself to dealing with violations of the NAP.

              I suspect (again, this is just an observational opinion) that RP does believe in the NAP, would make the government go away – but understands that full monte anarcho-Libertarianism isn’t quite politically viable… yet. So he hems and haws, makes a few exceptions, leaves some things unsaid, others not challenged.

              But, he has opened a door.

              Very much in the way that Hamilton (that bastard) opened the door to unlimited federal authority over us. Whether people realize it or not, if they accept “x” it implies “y” – and may even make “y” inevitable.

              Thus, just as Hamilton got people to accept federal authority to impose virtually unlimited taxation, by legitimating taxes – as a concept – so also RP and the mainstream Libertarian political apparat are perceptibly shifting consciousness, merely by bringing certain ideas to the table.

              They themselves may not even be aware of what they’re doing.

              Regardless, it’s ultimately a good thing as I see it.

          • Dear Gary,

            Good. In that case we are closer than your previous remarks suggested.

            I thought you were saying that you still hoped someone good inside the system could still do some good. I’m glad you weren’t.

            I too finally threw in the towel a few years ago. Ron Paul’s shut out of the GOP nomination was the last straw.

            I’m talking about pragmatically. Theoretically I was already aware that the system was beyond redemption because it was rooted in violation of the NAP from day one.

            I suspect Ron Paul is already an anarchist, who is holding back from saying so outright, in order to maintain appearances, and serve as a “pusher for anarchism.”

          • One thing seems certain, a tag team of Ventura and Stern – will – get people to talking. …And maybe, just maybe, to thinking?

            In about six different ways, at least.

            Also, for some reason when I read what you guys say about Stern, I keep thinking of Caligula’s horse.

      • Ventura strikes me as more of a Gary Johnson type libertarian than an ideological, Ron Paul type libertarian. If given a choice between Ventura and two establishment talking heads, I’d vote for Ventura without a heartbeat. But if the Constitution Party put up a Chuck Baldwin type candidate, or the GOP picked Rand Paul… I’d go there first.

        • Voting for a dead cat is better than voting for two establishment talking heads. I would vote for some homeless guy who listed his address on the election forms as lower wacker drive before one of the usual suspects.

  6. “Ventura told Jones that Stern is one of the smartest people he knows and that his libertarian mindset make the two a perfect combination. ”

    I guess ol’ Jesse doesn’t get out much. Jesse isn’t very bright himself, so of course he thinks Stern is smart. Sheesh. If How Weird Stern is what a “libertarian mindset” looks like, I’ll take mine rare.

    • I enjoy Howard Stern’s show, but he is as much a Libertarian as I am short and fat. He adulates Gruppenfuhrer Bloomberg; cheers for every warmonger neo-con. Reviles “tax cheats,” and defends Obamacare while praising gun control.

  7. What a dumb idea. 1. Howard Stern is an idiot. 2. If Paul can’t do it, they sure as hell can’t, it’s just another black hole fro (L)ibertarians looking for superheroes. 3. Voting is an act of aggression. It is a crime.

    • “libertarians looking for superheroes”. not to mention looking to go supernova. “‘our’ time in the light” must surely come.

      good one, ethan. group dynamics. formatted & copycatted. different results expected. anytime now.

      theme song:

      Little boxes on the hillside,
      Little boxes made of ticky tacky
      Little boxes on the hillside,
      Little boxes all the same,
      There’s a pink one and a green one
      And a blue one and a yellow one
      And they’re all made out of ticky tacky
      And they all look just the same.

      right on voting, too. delegation of action action. talk about dangerous derivatives, the financial “engineers” have nothing (but visibility) on this “clean hands” criminality.

    • Hi Ethan,

      I wouldn’t call Howard an idiot. He’s just not a Libertarian (far from it). Politically, Stern is a strange mix of Hillary Clinton-styles socialism in terms of domestic policy – and John McCain-style warmongering in terms of foreign policy.

      He’s a libertine, certainly – but no Libertarian.

      • limitations of the iq test. he’s not an idiot, basis the test (which was probably generated/fabricated by people who could then conveniently bask in the illumination of their own creature), but iq minus iq (integrity quotient), is still idiocy. small picture, low synthesis, short time preference (in the long run, were all dead ~ keynes), pecuniary pecking order preener….

        pecuniary
        c.1500, from L. pecuniarius “pertaining to money,” from pecunia “money, property, wealth,” from pecu “cattle, flock,” from PIE base *peku- (cf. Skt. pasu- “cattle,” Goth. faihu “money, fortune,” O.E. feoh “cattle, money”). Livestock was the measure of wealth in the ancient world. **credit to “reality seeker”, wherever he is, for this bit.

        peter piper picked a peck of pickled pecu-people…as he too had been picked, pecked, ordered, & possibly, not too extravagant to say, ordained….

        that said, he is entertaining. panem et circenses.

  8. Stern consistently voices support the police state, Obama, and, in New York, supports absurdities like regulation of soft drinks in NYC. He has said that people should not be concerned about NSA surveillance if they have nothing to hide. Stern may have some marginally libertarian positions pertaining to the FCC and gay marriage, but he can hardly be called a libertarian with any credibility. The article, also, is wrong. He did not run on the libertarian ticket to repeal the death penalty, but to reinstate it.

    • Stern crossed the financial Rubicon and thus sits in a catbird seat he has no intention of giving up to dirty noisy proles. He’s as phony as a three dollar bill.

      • Agreed, MoT –

        Stern is a gifted entertainer; I freely admit this. He is a talented interviewer and he has some great back-up (guys like Fred Norris, one of his writers). But when he begins talking politics, his authoritarian inclinations shine through. He is also a fulminating defender of Israel uber alles.

        I take him with the proverbial grain of salt.

LEAVE A REPLY