Ron Paul & B. Frank will Introduce Bill Thurs. 2 Decriminalize Marijuana at Fed level

[cornbread]

well, ihope ron paul decriminalized weed,beings ihave a marijuana cultivation charge pending,set for trial oct.26th.i could get 30 years for grow plants,how stupid is the drug war,when weed shouldnt even be considered a drug any way.thats all i have to say about that,420 people,power to the people.

 

[silentshout]

This is great! Glad he is still sticking to his principles.

 

[KurtBoyer25L]

Great props to those who support Dr. Paul on this.

A) People who would claim to rescind their vote based on this move were not gonna vote for Ron anyway. His basic anti-drug war position is well known. Sarah Palin favors de-facto decriminalization, and I heard she's still popular w/ a few conservatives.

B) This will steer the conversation away from "heroin & hookers" & toward decriminalizing pot. Great! Twitter is exploding with positive tweets about it.

C) Ron needs stuff like this to get an indepdent/crossover-vote snowball rolling for the primary.

 

[moonshineplease]

Great props to those who support Dr. Paul on this.

A) People who would claim to rescind their vote based on this move were not gonna vote for Ron anyway. His basic anti-drug war position is well known. Sarah Palin favors de-facto decriminalization, and I heard she's still popular w/ a few conservatives.

B) This will steer the conversation away from "heroin & hookers" & toward decriminalizing pot. Great! Twitter is exploding with positive tweets about it.

C) Ron needs stuff like this to get an indepdent/crossover-vote snowball rolling for the primary.

Exactly. At least he takes a position on the issue and is int afraid of incorporating into his actual platform. I am reminded of what Tom Woods said about the sheep seeing it as blasphemy when individuals dare to deviate from the three inch, MIT to Hillary political continuum that makes up the status quo policies.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Ron Paul winning the presidency will do nothing for long term prospects of liberty if we cannot get people to accept these ideas. He should be as principled as possible in spreading the message to educate people.

I also think people want somebody who has a principled philosophy. It is very refreshing in a sea of lying, spineless politicians. Many people do want to see radical change.

He should be principled, yes. But, your first statement is full of hot air. It is the same stance that those took who bashed Rand Paul, when he was running for the Senate, for not going into a lot of detail on various issues that they deemed critical. Now, we know that Rand was right. He won the race and therefore has a seat at the table, so now he is in a position to greatly reduce the menu. If he had done as some screamed for him to do, he would have been silenced long ago.

If Ron Paul can somehow manage to get the Republican nomination and go on to win the General, he will be able to end all the wars, I would assume also issue a presidential directive to neuter previous ones issued, and make damn sure that the runaway spending is stopped dead in its tracks. All this while he would have a huge bully pulpit from which to then EDUCATE the American people on the proper role of government.

I realize that some don't really care if he wins the race, as they do not believe in any government at all. But, the latter is not what Dr. Paul's campaign is about.

 

[LibertyEagle]

guess you assume all religious nuts are christians.....I know many religious nuts from all religions. There is no reason that christians cannot be religious nuts. Nutty people have flocked to religions(all of them) since the advent of religion. There are also nutty agnostics and atheists as well.

Nice try, but she was talking about Bachmann's supporters and the majority of people of faith that she would be attracting would be Christians.

cindy was referring to the drug/culture warrior Santorum/Bachmann/statist types, not all Christians.

Okay, but guys, we need to be clear. You guys have to know that a very large number of the people we have to get to vote for Dr. Paul are Christians.

Dr. Paul has made a lot of inroads. Remember the Faith and Freedom conference? Remember the endorsements from Christian leaders that he has gotten?

What do you think a middle-aged or older Christian who googled Ron Paul and found this forum would think if they saw all the Christian-bashing that is on here?

 

[KurtBoyer25L]

He should be principled, yes. But, your first statement is full of hot air. It is the same stance that those took who bashed Rand Paul, when he was running for the Senate, for not going into a lot of detail on various issues that they deemed critical. Now, we know that Rand was right. He won the race and therefore has a seat at the table, so now he is in a position to greatly reduce the menu. If he had done as some screamed for him to do, he would have been silenced long ago.

Mm, right, but you know the interesting thing to think about is, is Ron Paul has built a 30 year record as a different kind of politician who has a different style than Rand.

Ron's absolutist style has its strengths over Rand's politically -- more potential crossover votes, a more fervent grassroots following. It also has its weaknesses. Rand's style will get the chance to win in 2016. But Ron has to dance with who brung him. Quickly changing now & going "Uhm, drugs are a health issue and not a criminal issue, did I mention the national debt and Jesus?" would look dishonest, and alienate our libertarian/anarchist support base which *is* sizable/important.

 

[cindy25]

without ron there would be no senator rand

 

[YumYum]

without ron there would be no senator rand

Post of the day.

 

[LibertyEagle]

without ron there would be no senator rand

Very true. I'm not sure who you think said otherwise.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Mm, right, but you know the interesting thing to think about is, is Ron Paul has built a 30 year record as a different kind of politician who has a different style than Rand.

Ron's absolutist style has its strengths over Rand's politically -- more potential crossover votes, a more fervent grassroots following. It also has its weaknesses. Rand's style will get the chance to win in 2016. But Ron has to dance with who brung him. Quickly changing now & going "Uhm, drugs are a health issue and not a criminal issue, did I mention the national debt and Jesus?" would look dishonest, and alienate our libertarian/anarchist support base which *is* sizable/important.

I have no problem with what Ron himself has decided to do. That is his decision alone to make. My comments had to do with the twisting of his positions and the bashing of Christians.

 

[Working Poor]

In the mean time look what Hillary is doing:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/22/us-pledges-foreign-aid-fight-drug-cartels_n_882470.html

 

[musicmax]

Actually everyone's tax payer money is wasted on this useless drug war and everyone is endangered by this war on drugs.

OK looks like the simpletons need ANOTHER analogy, since the McDonald's one was far too intellectually challenging.

The director at the local theater company is staging "Hamlet" and calls in the actors for an audition for the title role. All the actors read for Hamlet except one, who screams at the director, "'Hamlet' sucks - you should be doing 'West Side Story'" and proceeds to sing "I Feel Pretty". Do you think this actor will get the part?

 

[SamuraisWisdom]

Expect more questions about drug legalization at the next debate.

 

[musicmax]

Anything who thinks Ron Paul shouldn't be Ron Paul in order to get elected has no understanding of Ron Paul. Fortunately, Ron Paul not only understands Ron Paul, but is pretty darn consistent at being him.

Flitting about from one obscure issue to another is anything BUT consistent. RP has three winning issues in ending the wars, balancing the budget and restoring sound monetary policy that he gains nothing from floating off into the ether with milk and marijuana.

Sponsoring this bill also provides debate moderators and TV hosts with an excuse to waste Paul's precious airtime on these issues that VOTERS DO NOT CARE ABOUT.

 

[musicmax]

Expect more questions about drug legalization at the next debate.

Exactly. Less time to talk about the budget and Libya, more time wasted on fringe crap like raw fucking milk.

 

[Elwar]

This is great. The way Romney has spun his RomneyCare was to say that states should have the right to decide these things.

Let's see how he gets out of supporting this bill which gives states the right to decide on marijuana.

And then we pull out the video where Romney told the kid in a wheelchair that he didn't support allowing him to have medical marijuana to ease his suffering.

 

[musicmax]

B) This will steer the conversation away from "heroin & hookers" & toward decriminalizing pot.

This will steer the conversation away from Libya and Afghanistan and the Fed and the budget and the debt and the TSA & toward stoners. Brilliant. Not.

 

[SamuraisWisdom]

I support the bill but I have to question the timing. Couldn't he have waited until after the primaries? Or at the very least until he knew he had no shot at winning? I support Ron and hope he wins but he keeps shooting himself in the foot.

 

[musicmax]

It is a priority for me.

And how many others? Show me a poll where it's in the top ten - hell the top TWENTY issues on voters' minds.