What is happening to the USA??? Give us your input.

[Bi0hazard]

Also, In response to mainstreams false claims that Cannabis is a gateway drug to watch out for:

Alcohol is definitely a greater Gateway drug than cannabis. Matter afact if many opioid users had access to OG Kush and top end Headsmoke when they were younger, I doubt many of them would have felt the need to go further than that. In non medical states, many people binge drink a lot more when all they have is commercial weed or regs - because alone the effects doesn't do it for them. When a lot of them get ECSD, OG Kush, or Chem D when they make the rounds. They drink much less, and some not at all - to preserve as much of the pure cannabis effects as possible. High end strains can be pure bliss.

I've heard many more stories of people trying hard drugs when they were really drunk, not as a result of smoking weed... With cannabis you can actually make decent judgements, maybe outside of depth in some situations, and not engage in things you don't even remember doing or had no thought going into why or why not to try or do something.

Not that I support the BS drug war in any sense, or the unreasonable pressures by authorities - but ask any cop who they would rather deal with, someone who smoked a joint or someone belligerently drunk - I think they would choose the pot smoker who wasn't completely inhibited to the point of not knowing what they were doing to others.

my 2cents

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

OK so I just went to youtube and watched the video straight out. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoD5Yk1imBk

To me his position is very clear. He wants less spending. That is why he does not ask for appropriations. He does not want to request money.

But since money is already being spent, he earmarks for his district for what the people are asking for. His reasoning is that at least the money will go towards something good for the people and can be traced. To me this is admirable imagine this same attitude on a national level.

If you want to say that's being sneaky and going through the back door rather than openly lobbying for money, then we are just going to disagree. It is completely transparent. It's on record and anyone interested can go back and see exactly where it went. He doesn't ask for it because he'd rather it not be spent at all, but earmarks are better than the alternative.

On the previous comment about weed to heroin... I searched for the interview you mentioned and didn't yet find it but in the process found multiple interviews or debate footage where the exact opposite was true.

Paul says he's for ending prohibition on marijuana and the other person/interviewer immediately equates it to heroin. "So then you're for legalization of heroin too?" in an attempt to make him seem foolish. He handles it brilliantly in every case and gets applause. So
he's not trying to distract or confuse anyone.

He wants to end prohibition in the same manner as it ended for alcohol and let the states decide. If it's legal on the federal level it's gonna be legalized on state level.

The dude is 100% real from what I can see. I'm open to being wrong if there is some real evidence that he is just another fake selfish lying through his teeth politician. So far I have yet to see any.

He's playing hide the sausage with appropriations.

He's saying his fed wouldn't tell you no but his fed wouldn't tell you yes. He says he'd leave matters to the states and it would depend on which state you reside.

 

[wantaknow]

the banksters are the problem ,read the book the creature from jekel island ,islam will kill democracy but he republic will live forever,the vatican has just called for a world bank and a world currency wonder who the want as a world leader?the vatican s secret about fatamas third revelation is that neberu will be closeest to the earth on 12 12 2012 ,go to youtube and look at two suns very weird our goverment is doing a news blackout on it ,and keeping the peeps on the tv with iscandales in the media ,martial law is in every airport in the us and nobodys relizes it ,even the fbi cant put the hands down your pants but the tsa can ,the are working under martial law ,lookup jessi ventursa laws suit this week they refused to let him have a trial of his peers over the tsa groping and screwed him of his constitutal rights,we have been userped and dont even now it

 

[dagnabit]

He's saying his fed wouldn't tell you no but his fed wouldn't tell you yes. He says he'd leave matters to the states and it would depend on which state you reside.

what do you want the fed to do exactly?

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

what do you want the fed to do exactly?

Why do you ask? With it up to the states, feds wouldn't be an issue.

 

[zenoonez]

what do you want the fed to do exactly?

Protect the rights that we can execute without harming other citizens from both themselves, other citizens, and any other form of government that seeks to limit our rights unjustly? I know it wasn't being asked of me but thats what I would like the federal government to do.

 

[dagnabit]

Why do you ask? With it up to the states, feds wouldn't be an issue.

as it should be.

but you seem to think this is somehow duplicitous so i ask what would you want?

maybe a constitutional amendment declaring growing marijuana growing and consumption a right?

of course we can't have a deregulated market right?
deregulation is bad remember?

so i ask again(not that you will/are capable of answer)
if ending federal prohibition and allowing states to regulate like alcohol is not far enough for you what do you want the fed to do?

how likely is obusha to do it?

ron paul:

Our drug war is driving our immigration policy. (Sep 2011)
We don't need laws to tell us to not use heroin. (May 2011)
Drug War allows drug lords to make a lot more money. (Apr 2011)
Someday we'll wake up and end the Second Prohibition. (Apr 2011)
War on drugs is out of control; revert control to states. (Dec 2007)
Repeal most federal drug laws; blacks are treated unfairly. (Sep 2007)
Inner-city minorities are punished unfairly in war on drugs. (Sep 2007)
$500B on War on Drugs since 1970s has been a total failure. (Sep 2007)
Legalize industrial hemp. (Jan 2007)
Drug War fosters violence at home & breeds resentment abroad. (Oct 2001)
Societal inconsistency on alcohol contributes to drug use. (Dec 1987)
Voted NO on more funding for Mexico to fight drugs. (Jun 2008)
Voted NO on military border patrols to battle drugs & terrorism. (Sep 2001)
Voted NO on subjecting federal employees to random drug tests. (Sep 1998)
War on Drugs has abused Bill of Rights . (Dec 2000)
Legalize medical marijuana. (Jul 2001)
Rated A by VOTE-HEMP, indicating a pro-hemp voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated +30 by NORML, indicating a pro-drug-reform stance. (Dec 2006)
Allow rehabilitated drug convicts get student loans. (Jan 2008)
Ban federal funding for needle-exchange programs. (Mar 1999)
Distribute sterile syringes to reduce AIDS and hepatitis. (Jan 2009)
Sponsored bill letting states legalize industrial hemp. (Apr 2009)

In Texas, it's common knowledge that the current wars on the Mexico-Texas border are, to a large extent, about drugs. Ironically, the two strongest groups that want to maintain the status quo of prohibition are the drug dealers and Christian conservative --two groups with opposite motivations but who share a common interest in keeping the drug war going. The cost to pursue the drug war in the past 40 years runs into hundreds of billions. The social cost, including the loss of civil liberties, is incalculable. Crime relating to the drug laws far surpasses the crime related to the 15 years of alcohol prohibition. I expect that someday the country will wake up and suddenly decide, as we did in 1933, that prohibition to improve personal behavior is lost cause, and the second repeal of prohibition will occur. This is more likely now than ever before because of the growing perception that the federal government is inept and more Americans are becoming aware of the senselessness of the war on drugs.
Source: Liberty Defined, by Rep. Ron Paul, p.228 , Apr 19, 2011

Q: In your 1988 campaign you said, “All drugs should be decriminalized. Drugs should be distributed by any adult to other adults. There should be no controls on production, supply or purchase for adults.” Is that still your position?

A: Yeah. It’s sort of like alcohol. Alcohol’s a deadly drug, kills more people than anything else. And today the absurdity on this war on drugs has just been horrible. Now the federal government takes over and overrules states where state laws permit medicinal marijuana for people dying of cancer. The federal government goes in and arrests these people, put them in prison with mandatory sentences. This war on drugs is totally out of control. If you want to regulate cigarettes and alcohol and drugs, it should be at the state level. That’s where I stand on it. The federal government has no prerogatives on this.

Q: But you would decriminalize it?

A: I would, at the federal level. I don’t have control over the states. And that’s why the Constitution’s there.
Source: Meet the Press: 2007 “Meet the Candidates” series , Dec 23, 2007

Q: If you are elected president in 2008, what positive and significant legacy, if any, will you leave for Black Americans?

A: I would like to believe that if we had a freer society, it would take care of Blacks and whites and everybody equally because we’re all individuals. To me, that is so important. But if we had equal justice under the law, I think it would be a big improvement. If we had probably a repeal of most of the federal laws on drugs and the unfairness on how Blacks are treated with these drugs laws, it would be a tremendous improvement. And also, I think that if you’re going to have prosperity, it serves everybody. And if this is done by emphasizing property rights and freedom of the individuals, making sure that the powerful special interests don’t control Washington, that the military industrial complex doesn’t suck away all the wealth of the country, and then we would have prosperity.
Source: 2007 GOP Presidential Forum at Morgan State University , Sep 27, 2007

On the issue of drugs, we have spent nearly five hundred billion dollars on the War on Drugs, since the 1970s. Total failure. Some day, we have to admit it. Today, we have the federal government going into states that have legal medical marijuana, arresting people--undermining state laws--arresting people who use marijuana when they’re dying with cancer and AIDS, and it’s done with, as a compassionate conservative. And it doesn’t work.

What it does, it removes the ability to states to do their things, and also introduces the idea that it’s the federal government that will get to decide whether we get to take vitamins, and alternative medical care, or whatever. Most of our history, believe it or not, had no drug laws. Prohibition has been an absolute failure for alcohol. Drug addiction is a medical problem. It’s not a problem of the law.

Paul believes in the legalization of industrial hemp. Paul supported HR 3037 to amend the Controlled Substances Act to exclude industrial hemp from the definition of marijuana. This bill would have given the states the power to regulate farming of hemp. The measure would be a first since the national prohibition of industrial hemp farming in the United States. He favors the legalization of marijuana.
Source: SourceWatch.org , Jan 22, 2007

i could go on....

you can say a lot about the good Dr. but that he is somehow duplicitous on legalization is spin maddow and o'riley's lvoe child couldn't even try to float.

try another tack?

lets look at the moron YOU will likely vote for?

how many patients are going without meds today because of obusha's attack on mmj?

how many bills did the Jr. senator from IL sponsor or cosponsor to decrim?

 

[Bi0hazard]

dagnabit,

Although, I only agree with 70% of Ron Paul stances, I registered as a Republican just to vote for him in the Primaries. Anyone else who supports him, has to do this - otherwise he has no chance running as a write in candidate. You can switch back over to your initial party after the elections.

He is the only true anti-war candidate, anti drug war all together candidate. And he also understands how the Federal Reserve prints money beyond their actual holdings at a 9:1 ratio. This dilutes the value of the money already in circulation while giving congress other money that doesn't exist for the bail outs and wars. This puts us deeper into debt into the owners of the Federal Reserve, and just like the patriot act it is a deceptive labeling strategy. The only thing federal about the Federal Reserve is that the chairman is chosen by the president, other than that all banks and other management are privately owned and run by owners are international bankers who don't even live in America. These international bankers are the actual creditors of all American's debt, and we just bailed them out for scamming the public and crashing the banking system at the same time. The more wars and bailouts we engage in, the deeper and deeper the American public get in debt to this supranational banking structure, that is not national - it's shareholders can live anywhere in the world and directly invest.

Why invading Iraq is deeply linked to protecting the corruption from the Federal Reserve: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMkXA6kqNsw

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Q: But you would decriminalize it?

A: I would, at the federal level. I don’t have control over the states. And that’s why the Constitution’s there.
Source: Meet the Press: 2007 “Meet the Candidates” series , Dec 23, 2007

At least this part of your giant pastie applies to my argument. Only problem, you don't pay enough attention.

He's saying his fed wouldn't tell you no but his fed wouldn't tell you yes. He says he'd leave matters to the states and it would depend on which state you reside.

 

[Dudesome]

see that's what I'm talking about. People wanna vote RP...

The sad thing is that if he gets voted - he gets blamed for the collapse...

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

see that's what I'm talking about. People wanna vote RP...

(Wiki) - In the 1988 presidential election, Paul was on the ballot in 46 States as the Libertarian Party candidate.[39] Paul scored third in the popular vote with 432,179 votes (0.5%).[40]

Paul presidential candidacies are a double edge sword. Running from the Libertarian party nets less than 1% in the general. Running from the Republican Party nets primary losses. The most recent polls average 9%.

http://www.ronpaul.com/2012-ron-paul/ron-paul-polls/

As the Republican electorate begins to lean toward the nominee, Paul's poll numbers will drop to the relative number of Republican-registered libertarian voters.

IMO, Paul would do better in the primaries if the GOP allowed big L Libertarians to primary with Republican candidates. Might be like a McCoy at a Hatfield wedding but I think Paul would score higher percentages in conservative primaries.

 

[Dudesome]

Disco, its very nice to see how you speculate on the info you posses. I wanna see if your predictions hold! I love to test things.
Respect

 

[dagnabit]

At least this part of your giant pastie applies to my argument. Only problem, you don't pay enough attention.

i pay attention to you not saying what more you would want the federal government to do...

so you dont want the federal government to legalize and allow the states to regulate like alcohol..ok then what DO you want?

 

[Scrappy-doo]

I seriously doubt Paul will get the R nomination. They would never let that happen. He's smart to stay with them for now and get as much exposure as possible, but in the end he will run on the Libertarian ticket.

 

[dagnabit]

he won't be running on the LP ticket..

http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/libertarian-presidential-candidates

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

i pay attention to you not saying what more you would want the federal government to do...

so you dont want the federal government to legalize and allow the states to regulate like alcohol..

ok then what DO you want?

For one, I'd like to avoid reinterpretations. Other than waxing the DEA, Paul rhetoric has little to do with (fed) legalization. Based on his rhetoric, states would ultimately decide.

So in that context, wondering what the feds should do? I recon they'd stand back and watch or go on with other business.

Of course, there's an interpretation the executive 'executes'. If Paul adopted this idea... we probably wouldn't be having the conversation.

 

[Scrappy-doo]

Why not?

That's just a list of people who filed so far. RP wouldn't be on there. Can't be in 2 places at once.

 

[Scrappy-doo]

Disco, do you think that the states would not legalize?

I'm not certain on the history, but how did alcohol prohibition end? Was it in the same manner as Paul is proposing, federal and then states followed suit, or was it declared legal in one shot from federal level to state?

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Disco, its very nice to see how you speculate on the info you posses. I wanna see if your predictions hold! I love to test things.
Respect

It's just my lowly opinion. Respect to you, Dudesome.

 

[dagnabit]

So in that context, wondering what the feds should do? I recon they'd stand back and watch or go on with other business.

so federal legalization means an constitutional amendment affirming no state shall in any way regulate marijuana?

because when Dr. Paul says "i would like to see the federal government legalize it and allow the states to regulate it like alcohol" that is somehow inadequate for you?

as for the executive executing many agencies/bureaus have been created and destroyed by the executive(including but not limited to the DEA) it's part of what the executive does.

you really are trying hard to paint the only candidate for either party that supports legalization as some sort of closet drug warrior.

i just can't figure out why?

you wont ever convince anyone the current incarnation of bush is somehow on our side when it comes to MJ or MMJ so why try to paint our only supporter in the race as an anslinger?