@MARCO.. +1 his facts were off. But I think Ron Paul having been a Libertarian would at least adopt a more "leave the states to do as they see fit" attitude His quote............... I don't want a gun toting crazy wild west America.. I just want there to be individual state right without federal intervention.. i.e the california dispensaries getting busted by the FEDS.. if one state wants to legalize or even better decriminalize MJ so be it.. I am tired of the Gov't wasting money on the "drug war" what a crock of shit that is.. plenty of folks still doing all kinds of drugs.. still alot of crime.. over a trillion dollars spent.. WHY does it make any sense??
jimi62471 wrote: @MARCO.. +1 his facts were off. But I think Ron Paul having been a Libertarian would at least adopt a more "leave the states to do as they see fit" attitude His quote............... I don't want a gun toting crazy wild west America.. I just want there to be individual state right without federal intervention.. i.e the california dispensaries getting busted by the FEDS.. if one state wants to legalize or even better decriminalize MJ so be it.. I am tired of the Gov't wasting money on the "drug war" what a crock of shit that is.. plenty of folks still doing all kinds of drugs.. still alot of crime.. over a trillion dollars spent.. WHY does it make any sense??
if only instead of burning the 100 000 000 Lb of marijuana they bust at the mexi/american border resell it in californian dispensarie... and then we wont talk about big money in governemnt pocket paying everything and start giving out monkey and free WEED but they dont and wont cause is crimial money and drugs are evil ... american need money for war also soooooooooooo....and then...
jimi62471 wrote: @MARCO.. +1 his facts were off. But I think Ron Paul having been a Libertarian would at least adopt a more "leave the states to do as they see fit" attitude His quote............... I don't want a gun toting crazy wild west America.. I just want there to be individual state right without federal intervention.. i.e the california dispensaries getting busted by the FEDS.. if one state wants to legalize or even better decriminalize MJ so be it.. I am tired of the Gov't wasting money on the "drug war" what a crock of shit that is.. plenty of folks still doing all kinds of drugs.. still alot of crime.. over a trillion dollars spent.. WHY does it make any sense??
I could not agree with you more. The overall drug war is a disaster for America and (even more so) for our neighbors to the south. Consider poor Mexico which is a war zone only because Americans will pay $100 for a gram of white powder which costs maybe 10 cents to make in Columbia. It is absolutely fucked up!!!!!
Whatever happens to the drug war must be done (at the end) on a Federal level. While I understand the argument for state's rights as it applies to the MJ dispensaries, eventually this must be decided on a Federal level, as the borders are federal and the DEA, etc is Federal.
We all know its NEVER going to happen (I mean complete legalization of drugs...not just MJ) because there is are so many hands in the till getting PAID for the drug war...from the Pentagon, to DEA, Border Patrol, the prison system, all the way down to local sheriff who gets to 'keep' any cars, homes, etc. seized in a drug raid.
Back to state's rights...is a slippery slope, because state's rights is the code word for the right wing (extreme)...who use it to justify slavery, Jim Crow laws, restrictive abortion laws, and even modern day succession from the United States (Gov. Perry of Texas). This is the place Paul lives in.
Marco, I'm not normally on the offensive, but I really must insist that you do not tread on me. Let us have civility while we debate? Im just as poor and humble as the next stoner. Implying that I'm dumb while I'm stoned means you don't know the true affects of marijuana and have also fell victim to the drug, as well as political propaganda of the day. That or your just TRYING to be an ass. I have disclosed I'm campaigning here in hopes of a butterfly effect to be perfectly honest.
No one is losing or winning (except Paul I guess, he is not going to win an election). No one is treading on you. I am just pointing out where you are incorrect in fact (sorry, but the typos and factual mistakes makes it very hard to understand. The rest is your opinion, but you provide almost no evidence to back it up.
For example
I always got the felling that the world views us trying to police them and doesn't want us there. We want to switch from war & restrictions to peace, business, and no one trusts us? I guess I could see how that could play out...
Ask the Japanese, Taiwanese, etc if they want US presence in Asia to couter-act China?
Where is your evidence that Americans want to move from war to peace? We are a violent country, we glorify the 'warrior culture' and the majority of Americans supported the attack on Iraq. GWB was re-elected quite comfortably after invading Iraq.
Am I wrong in my understanding that the USSR at its core was a finational problem? When there is long standing evidence that communism (neighbor has 4 cows; neighbor has 0 cows; government takes away 2 from 4; now everyone has 2 cows; more like now everyone has 1 cow while corruption is rapid am I right? This is what has happened because we follow a "newer set of laws" that really make our original set of laws set in the constitution null and void.... basically making us another country......which we dont want to be, we want to be America. Yes.....still...
What is finational problem? This argument makes no sense. If mean financial, it also makes no sense. And what relevance the USSR has to Ron Paul escapes me.
'We' (the people) amended the constitution, 'we' supported certain candidates who made appointments to the Supreme Court, who made rulings about the Constitution. So WE have a set of laws (thankfully) to augment the US Constitution.....a document written by men who owned slaves.
Where is your evidence that Americans want to move from war to peace?
The people we send over to shoot the bad guys don't want to do it anymore. If a civilan doesn't want peace, and thinks we should keep fighting the bad guys, then he should sign up and go do it. Otherwise what he thinks about war doesn't fucking matter.
GWB was re-elected quite comfortably after invading Iraq.
Were you living in Amsterdam in 2004? Everyone knows its the most controversial election to ever take place! GWB was not comfortably reelected in 2004 after invading Iraq, congress made the final decision on the winner because Florida was so fucked up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Unite ... troversies
Am I wrong in my understanding that the USSR at its core was a finational problem? When there is long standing evidence that communism (neighbor has 4 cows; neighbor has 0 cows; government takes away 2 from 4; now everyone has 2 cows; more like now everyone has 1 cow while corruption is rapid am I right? This is what has happened because we follow a "newer set of laws" that really make our original set of laws set in the constitution null and void.... basically making us another country......which we dont want to be, we want to be America. Yes.....still...
[/quote]
What is finational problem? This argument makes no sense. If mean financial, it also makes no sense. And what relevance the USSR has to Ron Paul escapes me.
I do mean financial, and it makes perfect sense if you have and understanding as to how communism works. Also, I think you fully understand it because you in the next paragraph you say you are thankful there are laws offsetting the Constitution. This is the one mistake you could find as you lose your argument so it was a sad attempt to pounce on it.
'We' (the people) amended the constitution, 'we' supported certain candidates who made appointments to the Supreme Court, who made rulings about the Constitution. So WE have a set of laws (thankfully) to augment the US Constitution.....a document written by men who owned slaves.
Are you part of the moral police? Did you move to EU to be a Nazi supporter? Everyone knows that where you live has everything do with how much you believe in the things the nation did in the past. So I guess you moved to be a ?????, and we all want to be slave owners again!!!! Like you I LOVE LAWS that augment the US Constitution! Soon Marco we will get a law passed to repeal slavery just like we have passed laws to repeal our true freedoms. See how silly your argument is? I would never honestly accuse you of wanting to such things, so why do you insinuate we want to be racist and enslave people again? Only the top 1% of people living in America owned slaves. Its not like every Tom, Dick, and Mary had one to pick up shit after their dogs or something. Odd how we are still protesting the top 1% today isn't it? I wonder if man could be tempted with wealth back then like politicians are today? Thomas Jefferson the writer of the constitution did have slaves. He also realized the errors of his ways and did many things in his Presidency to begin to abolish it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jef ... nd_slavery http://millercenter.org/president/keyevents/jefferson
"WE" (the people) can't control what those stupid fucking politicians do once they are in office! And we dont impeach as often as we should because people don't really follow "politricks" because it is so corrupt its hard to handle.
would love to support ron paul but i will never support a pro life candidate. it seems to me if half the population is forced to carry any pregnancy to term then half the population are second class citizens. if a woman does not have the right to control her own body and that which lies within the you don't have a free country, folks. that right kind of takes precedence over the weed issue...and,man, i think the illegality of weed is a ridiculous breach of rights
Deep down RP must be pro-choice, it's in the logic of his discourse, but no candidate for the Republican nomination could ever come close to admitting it.
gimmeshelter wrote:Deep down RP must be pro-choice, it's in the logic of his discourse, but no candidate for the Republican nomination could ever come close to admitting it.
No way, he is an obstetrician so I think that is one of this real core beliefs.
gimmeshelter wrote:Deep down RP must be pro-choice, it's in the logic of his discourse, but no candidate for the Republican nomination could ever come close to admitting it.
No way, he is an obstetrician so I think that is one of this real core beliefs.
Just because you believe in something doesn't mean you don't understand those beliefs aren't accepted by others, and the government can never control free will......People will always do what they want, and usually have no problem doing so. Do you try to force people to smoke pot like drunks do at bars, parties, ect...? This is consistant with his stance against war on drugs. Its their bodies we simply can't control it, so make sure we don't waste money on it.
He can be against it, cut all spending closely related, allow the freedom to have it performed and take on hospital debt yourself in a safe environment. No different than using a needle exchange for addicts to prevent spread of AIDS. There are tons of good ideas in the world if you ask the smart people instead of the people getting paid.
youngian wrote:Not a US citizen but follow the election with great interest. Much as I appreciate Paul's honesty on the insanity of prohibition he is the candidate I would least like to see in the Whitehouse. His economic policies would send the world into a dangerous prolonged depression.
His views on Government spending make Merkel's grim Euro-moneterist treaty look Keynesian.
Another bad argument here.
To vague for me to really understand what the poster is trying to communicate. All that is communicated to me here is he is NOT US citizen, and means no offense. You sound under informed on the big picture topics affecting America I'm sorry to say like many US voters too.
I'll explain a little better. The main interest for a European at the moment is for the world economy not to slip into further decline.
Ron Paul's plan to cut at least $1trillion off federal spending in the first few years of office would see the American economy flat line and that is bad for the recovery of rest of the world's economies.
As for 'big picture topics,' god, guns and abortions or whatever Republican Party wingnuts bang on about is none of my business.
youngian wrote:Not a US citizen but follow the election with great interest. Much as I appreciate Paul's honesty on the insanity of prohibition he is the candidate I would least like to see in the Whitehouse. His economic policies would send the world into a dangerous prolonged depression.
His views on Government spending make Merkel's grim Euro-moneterist treaty look Keynesian.
Another bad argument here.
To vague for me to really understand what the poster is trying to communicate. All that is communicated to me here is he is NOT US citizen, and means no offense. You sound under informed on the big picture topics affecting America I'm sorry to say like many US voters too.
I'll explain a little better. The main interest for a European at the moment is for the world economy not to slip into further decline.
Ron Paul's plan to cut at least $1trillion off federal spending in the first few years of office would see the American economy flat line and that is bad for the recovery of rest of the world's economies.
As for 'big picture topics,' god, guns and abortions or whatever Republican Party wingnuts bang on about is none of my business.
Troll. Most selfish thing I have ever read on here. None of your arguments are qualified. You make it sound like Europeans only care about themselves which I know is NOT true. You also make it sound like every country's government is incapable of handling their own countries economy. You make it sound like USA runs the world. I don't think people are willing to fall for that anymore. They also think they don't want to fall for US occupation. Nor should they on either point!
Ron Paul speaks of peace, and free trade. I'm sorry that hasn't been communicated accurately to you through the mass media. I wonder how much money mass media makes off deciding what does, and what does not go on the air. I wonder if a reporter has ever gotten paid to go away. How corrupt are humans? Does a free market always promote the best and brightest there by making everyones life better? What if Einstein never got away from the Nazi's? What if enough people in a country thought two people fucking making more King's and Queen's for us to support was the stupidest way to run a country ever? We are the ones who took on the risk of leaving "the safty of the kingdom" this is our experiment to see through. Just because we propelled ourselves into this globalization doesn't mean we can take a step back and say "woah! okay lets revaluate what the fuck is going on here!"
@MARCO.. +1 his facts were off. But I think Ron Paul having been a Libertarian would at least adopt a more "leave the states to do as they see fit" attitude His quote............... I don't want a gun toting crazy wild west America.. I just want there to be individual state right without federal intervention.. i.e the california dispensaries getting busted by the FEDS.. if one state wants to legalize or even better decriminalize MJ so be it.. I am tired of the Gov't wasting money on the "drug war" what a crock of shit that is.. plenty of folks still doing all kinds of drugs.. still alot of crime.. over a trillion dollars spent.. WHY does it make any sense?? 
but they dont and wont cause is crimial money and drugs are evil ... american need money for war also soooooooooooo....and then... 
