Paul/Frank co-sponsoring legalization bill
- Thread starter igrowone
- Start date
Bachman - 2.3% ahahhaah!!!!! bruh so glad to see that bitch stay bottom tier. spent all that money in iowa to buy her ass to the front of the line only to get clowned in every debate. i fucking LOVE it.
All that money actually came from her campaign donors.. so, yeah.. this makes me happy.
ozman
Member
I understand what you was saying Bentom,I was referring to all of the millions of people that consume cannabis in a responsible manner.I apologize for not making myself clearer.
If all the responsible cannabis consumers would come together in 1 voice on this issue it would be very hard for anybody to not hear us.
Now if we could get more people across the country involved in this issue it would really help the Bill getting noticed and with the hope of all hopes get passed on down the line,all the way to where Pres.Obama would have to take his liberal self and sign the bill into law.
I have no grandiose idea of putting any of the other drugs in with it,I personally have no problem with those that do,or wish to have legalized as well,but I just dont think I would be able to get behind them like I do for cannabis,I could be convinced tho to maybe get behind mushrooms and maybe lsd,but the meth or crack or heroin I just dont think I could convince myself to get behind them.
GO RON PAUL GO!!!!!!!
If all the responsible cannabis consumers would come together in 1 voice on this issue it would be very hard for anybody to not hear us.
Now if we could get more people across the country involved in this issue it would really help the Bill getting noticed and with the hope of all hopes get passed on down the line,all the way to where Pres.Obama would have to take his liberal self and sign the bill into law.
I have no grandiose idea of putting any of the other drugs in with it,I personally have no problem with those that do,or wish to have legalized as well,but I just dont think I would be able to get behind them like I do for cannabis,I could be convinced tho to maybe get behind mushrooms and maybe lsd,but the meth or crack or heroin I just dont think I could convince myself to get behind them.
GO RON PAUL GO!!!!!!!
Legalize ALL drugs. People are going to use them regardless. Why not have them produced in a safe, regulated enviornment?
+Tax Money
+New Jobs
+Quality Control
People who wont slam heroin, smoke tweek or freebase cocaine arent going to wake up one day and say "you know heroin is legal now - might as well give that a try!!" and if they do so fucking what? We got too many people in this country as it is and i thought this was a country based on FREEDOM. As long as what you do doesnt harm me or my family - I could give a fuck what you put in your lungs or your veins.
Shit ive seen used and been around everything. the only drug more dangerous (to public safety) than alcohol is sherm.
legalize:::
ganja
meth
cocaine
psylicibine
mesciline
mdma
ether
lsd
dmt
heroin
ketamine
crack
+Tax Money
+New Jobs
+Quality Control
People who wont slam heroin, smoke tweek or freebase cocaine arent going to wake up one day and say "you know heroin is legal now - might as well give that a try!!" and if they do so fucking what? We got too many people in this country as it is and i thought this was a country based on FREEDOM. As long as what you do doesnt harm me or my family - I could give a fuck what you put in your lungs or your veins.
Shit ive seen used and been around everything. the only drug more dangerous (to public safety) than alcohol is sherm.
legalize:::
ganja
meth
cocaine
psylicibine
mesciline
mdma
ether
lsd
dmt
heroin
ketamine
crack
heres the 2 new sponsors
Rep. Farr [D-CA17]: New cosponsor.
Rep. Capuano [D-MA8]: New cosponsor.
this is what i hate. even though Paul only spoke for 285 SECONDS in a two hour debate, he beat the establishment so bad they had to take the poll down.
i guess you don't have to say a lot when you only speak the truth.
ozman
Member
Yea just goes to show that the establishment doesnt like anybody rocking the boat.I feel the media is really biased against Ron Paul because he cant be bought and paid for like Rick Perry and the others.If the media would give Ron his coverage that he has earned and won he would be even higher in the polls cause more people would see the truth.
There is just something I dont like about perry to much religion in him,we dont need a david keresh leading this country.
There is just something I dont like about perry to much religion in him,we dont need a david keresh leading this country.
im kinda of dissapointed keth olberman's debate coverage yesterday didnt even mention rp once.
i heard more about some douche bringing out NJ's governor christie(whoever doesnt think hes dicking around with the NJ med law to look better on a national platform is kidding themselves)
i heard more about some douche bringing out NJ's governor christie(whoever doesnt think hes dicking around with the NJ med law to look better on a national platform is kidding themselves)
Democratic coverage of Republican debates isn't likely to concentrate on candidates the Republicans themselves aren't courting. As an independent, RP never received more than 1 to 2% of the national vote. As a Republican his primary bar may be even higher.
IMO, Chris Christie won't run. Whatever he's doing in NJ is for NJ. I recon the guy has presidential ambitions but he's smart enough to wait for a better opportunity. Even if he could win the election he doesn't want this time and this economy. supposition off.
You guys may receive a shot in the election arm. The man partly responsible for bringing you the Patriot Act and preemptive war is back.
That's right. Ralph Nader, the man who helped depose Gore and Kerry in the 00 and 04 elections seeks to field a half-dozen challengers. Apparently, Nader is no longer willing to directly hand elections to the party he most opposes. Yet he'll work to put others on the ballot.
Last edited:
AmeriSkunk
Member
do you guys realize Ron Paul wants all drugs legal, every substance legal.... im sorry to say this but some shit people do not need ever. Meth is the biggest thing i can think of i dont want legalized. id rather the weed stay illegal
Yeah but we don't need laws to tell us not to do meth, nobody wants to do meth in the first place. Not even the traffickers who make millions of dollars selling meth to millions of people.
We could build a wall to keep Mexican meth out but that wall might keep us in.
To get rid of the DEA, we basically have to turn a blind eye to drugs coming into the country. That's ok because before the DEA, churches and charity organizations took care of the dope heads.
Let states decide how they want to handle drugs. If your state is seen as a meth meca, you're free to move to another state if you want more affordable insurance rates. If you can't get a decent price for your home because the whole neighborhood is a giant meth lab, one must take personal responsibility for the bad decision to buy there in the first place.
Never mind we have regulations that actually work in DC, laws that took us decades to develop. Formulas that solve far larger problems than they cause. Just get rid of em. We'll figure out what needs to be done and we'll work with other states so the federal government isn't necessary for anything but the post office and modest defense.
And if we can't work with the other states any better than we did under The Articles Of Confederation, we'll just lay a railroad track through the middle of town. We'll zone all the industrial and airport operations east of the tracks, including cheap residential property. Then we'll price the west side so high we'll never have to mingle with new money.
When we realize there's as many interpretations of the Constitution as there are assholes and we can't legislate, we'll pass an amendment requiring a 98% majority to change anything else. Then we'll cross the next bridge when we come to it, so long as it hasn't already fallen down.
We could build a wall to keep Mexican meth out but that wall might keep us in.
To get rid of the DEA, we basically have to turn a blind eye to drugs coming into the country. That's ok because before the DEA, churches and charity organizations took care of the dope heads.
Let states decide how they want to handle drugs. If your state is seen as a meth meca, you're free to move to another state if you want more affordable insurance rates. If you can't get a decent price for your home because the whole neighborhood is a giant meth lab, one must take personal responsibility for the bad decision to buy there in the first place.
Never mind we have regulations that actually work in DC, laws that took us decades to develop. Formulas that solve far larger problems than they cause. Just get rid of em. We'll figure out what needs to be done and we'll work with other states so the federal government isn't necessary for anything but the post office and modest defense.
And if we can't work with the other states any better than we did under The Articles Of Confederation, we'll just lay a railroad track through the middle of town. We'll zone all the industrial and airport operations east of the tracks, including cheap residential property. Then we'll price the west side so high we'll never have to mingle with new money.
When we realize there's as many interpretations of the Constitution as there are assholes and we can't legislate, we'll pass an amendment requiring a 98% majority to change anything else. Then we'll cross the next bridge when we come to it, so long as it hasn't already fallen down.
Last edited:
