I can't speak for Republicans as a whole but wait until legalization threatens big pharma's bottom line. The party of big business won't change.
-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
Republicans and marijuana
- Thread starter sandawg
- Start date
- Status
BerndV
Member
By the party of big business, do you mean the party that is overwhelmingly supported by Wall Street, large banks, and trial lawyers, namely the Democratic Party. BTW, so far in 2010, 57% of the pharmaceutical industries political contributions have gone to the Democratic party versus 42% to the Republicans.
according to the BerndV poll
BerndV
Member
No, according to Federal Election Commission statistics, which are available to anyone willing to take the time to do a little research.
When you fund both parties, you don't care who wins or who is in power - they're both gonna make sure they don't do anything to stop the money coming.
Legalization will never threaten big pharmas wallet if that's what you mean. Cannabis helps with some medical conditions but it's not a cure for anything by a long shot. There will always be money for big pharma.
If anything cannabis is a threat to the tobacco and alcohol industry. But i think there is enough room for all three.
The biggest threat to Big Pharma will be people actually caring for their health. Preventive medicine. Healthy lifestyle choices. The main reason these corporations are so rich because Americans treat their bodies like shit. And that's the bottom line..
just to answer the original poster here I have also noticed this. I believe its the christian base that they do these things for. It is a clear betrayal of true conservative principles though.
BerndV
Member
Well said. The irony, if obesity statistics are any indication, is that we are heading in the direction of diminished health and wellness. However, lifespan in developed countries continues to incrementally improve due to advancements in medical technology and yes, pharmaceuticals. Thus the quandary; increasingly expensive, taxpayer funded medical intervention is demanded by a populace that refuses to take personal responsibility for their health and lifestyle choices.
Alright, BerdV. I'll break it down for ya. We've got folks quoting commentators in here that have no validity other than opinion. If you want to quote FEC, do us all a favor and cite the link. If you're bringing it to us from memory, let it be known.
It's interesting you pick pharma who agreed to give lots of money toward healthcare reform. Since dems are pro reform, they're gonna get the most money.
Just in case you're double checking, compare corporate money disparity when Republicans were in power. Unfortunately, money corrupts each side but all you have to do is look at legislators that defend big money. There will always be individuals with a D in their column that accept corporate money to get elected and stay in office. But one of the major planks in the Republican Party platform is pro-business (at the expense of the individual) and the conservative tendency of Republicans means they're typically not receptive to change.
Any Republican arguing for personal freedom, other than guns and religion is a fast dying breed. They'll have to borrow from their libertarian cousins for anything more than that.
In the end, I don't dislike Republicans. I'm just stating my opinion of the party (not the voter) based on what I've seen for close to 50 years.
It's interesting you pick pharma who agreed to give lots of money toward healthcare reform. Since dems are pro reform, they're gonna get the most money.
Just in case you're double checking, compare corporate money disparity when Republicans were in power. Unfortunately, money corrupts each side but all you have to do is look at legislators that defend big money. There will always be individuals with a D in their column that accept corporate money to get elected and stay in office. But one of the major planks in the Republican Party platform is pro-business (at the expense of the individual) and the conservative tendency of Republicans means they're typically not receptive to change.
Any Republican arguing for personal freedom, other than guns and religion is a fast dying breed. They'll have to borrow from their libertarian cousins for anything more than that.
In the end, I don't dislike Republicans. I'm just stating my opinion of the party (not the voter) based on what I've seen for close to 50 years.
Squares man...............Ward and June Cleaver types.
Maybe it wouldn't interest you to know how much of the bottom line goes toward opiates and pain killers. Treatments, not cures. Nobody's dumb enough to say mj will replace cures but it's treatment potential is enormous. I expect to see many industries affected by mj/hemp and they'll respond to the bottom line even if they have to look at the particulars.
BerndV
Member
It's interesting you pick pharma who agreed to give lots of money toward healthcare reform.
I didn't pick pharma, you did. Read your initial post. Regarding the FEC statistics, they are not from memory. I've done some homework for this thread i.e. the Pew study. By forcing you to find these statistics for yourself instead of simply giving you the link, maybe you will learn something.
I didn't pick pharma, you did. Read your initial post. Regarding the FEC statistics, they are not from memory. I've done some homework for this thread i.e. the Pew study. By forcing you to find these statistics for yourself instead of simply giving you the link, maybe you will learn something.
Disco, you are way out of your league Jr. BerndV happens to know exactly what he is talking about, and can site his sources. You, on the other hand, are as clueless as the OP is about the truth behind who backs and who does not back legalization of MJ.
BerndV...bravo sir.
You clueless folks need to realize that any party that backs the taking or lessening of our personal freedoms, in any form, is our enemy. You only have the perception that the left is for your rights as a responsible human, but that is far from the truth. It is only your misguided perceptions, just like the OP's miguided perception of who and what folks on the right side of the coin are.
Bitter and angry? Yes.... at the dumb people for being enablers, and at those who are trying to take our freedoms away.
The only people that will even give us any credence are the ones that back personal freedoms and the rights of responsible humans. All others are doing nothing but pulling your chains and playing a pipers tune for the blind rats to follow.
Man, I love it when the clueless start throwing around baseless charges, and someone who actually knows what he is talking about shows up and owns them. Puts them back in their places.
BerndV...bravo sir.
You clueless folks need to realize that any party that backs the taking or lessening of our personal freedoms, in any form, is our enemy. You only have the perception that the left is for your rights as a responsible human, but that is far from the truth. It is only your misguided perceptions, just like the OP's miguided perception of who and what folks on the right side of the coin are.
Bitter and angry? Yes.... at the dumb people for being enablers, and at those who are trying to take our freedoms away.
The only people that will even give us any credence are the ones that back personal freedoms and the rights of responsible humans. All others are doing nothing but pulling your chains and playing a pipers tune for the blind rats to follow.
Man, I love it when the clueless start throwing around baseless charges, and someone who actually knows what he is talking about shows up and owns them. Puts them back in their places.
BerndV
Member
That must explain the recent Republican election victories in Massachusetts and New Jersey. They are, after all, states well known for being bastions of Republican party electoral success.
He said in another thread that he actually watches Olberman and Maddow, that ought to make it perfectly clear as to where he's coming from.
That's ok. If you don't want to site where you got the info, that's fine. Interesting but fine. I was going to show you whether (or not) your info was objective enough to mention the proposed health care overhaul. Without that, you wouldn't see those numbers IMO.
Like I said earlier, check the disparity in big money donors to the Republican party when they're in power. I don't think today's argument will carry as much weight.
BerndV
Member
He said in another thread that he actually watches Olberman and Maddow, that ought to make it perfectly clear as to where he's coming from.
LOL, like bringing a knife to a gunfight! Well, i'm bored, so off to tend my garden.
hoosier, everybody knows if your pacifier has an R on it, you'll sit in the corner quietly and suck. I'm perfectly capably of debating the other member w/o reducing it to your poo-flinging comments.
Once again, this post has a specific theme. Republicans and marijuana. Your paranoia over "those who are trying to take our freedoms away" has nothing to do with Republicans and marijuana. You've got a hammer called religiopolitics and everything in your view is a nail.
He said in another thread that he actually watches Olberman and Maddow, that ought to make it perfectly clear as to where he's coming from.
I watch Billo, Beck and Hannity too.
- Status
