Quote :

"A note for our OMFbama fans: According to his campaign, dope should still put you in jail. Even though everyone knows he was cool with it back in the day."

and? you say "note" like no one knows that...or rather you think this is a big deal thats being overlooked...either way his campaign has the right position in my opinion

5/12/2008 5:45:50 PM

Quote :

"Are you arguing that marijuana was made illegal for health reasons? "

I am arguing that you are exhibiting contradictary signals. You want drugs to become legal, effectively decreasing the governments control. However, you are in favor of the governments social programs, which means you support more of a socialized government...

I personally believe that this should be a state issue and not a federal issue.

5/12/2008 6:15:05 PM

Government control over your body and safety nets are completely different and unrelated subjects.

However, if you're talking about universal healthcare I will give you this:

If someone does something that is detrimental to their health (smoking ANYTHING, drinking alcohol, eating bad food) their premiums should be higher. Preventative care should be lesson number one. Now if someone feels that the risks outweigh the benefits, that is their choice. However, it is not for the government to choose what I put in my body.

5/12/2008 10:19:54 PM

Rat and Ouervre must hate freedom. Through their high support of drug prohibition they restrict people's ability to make their own decisions upon what to put in their own bodies. Ironic is the fact that the neo-con camp repeatedly likes to use "freedom" as their ideal and in speeches to justify the war in Iraq. I guess we are all free in the US except when it comes to freedom to make phone calls w/o an NSA agent potentially listening, freedom to consume plants that contain chemicals the DEA lists as evil, freedom to play card games except if we play them for money online.



[Edited on May 12, 2008 at 11:09 PM. Reason : l]

5/12/2008 11:08:50 PM

Quote :

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. ~ Ben Franklin"

5/12/2008 11:20:26 PM

Quote :

"drunknloaded: and? you say "note" like no one knows that..."

Given that his campaign took steps to "look cool" on the issue first, only to quietly capitulate on his position a short time later, it's pretty fair to assume few do know that.

Not everyone obsessively follows the news chief. Less than one in three people can even name the sitting Vice President.

Quote :

"drunknloaded: or rather you think this is a big deal thats being overlooked..."

It is. Fuck a hypocrite. Hope and change are words. Prison bars and tax dollars are real things. Worth considering, too, IMO, when your country has the highest incarceration rate in the world and is about to start selling pencils to foreign investors. Those prisons don't pay for themselves.

Quote :

"drunknloaded: either way his campaign has the right position in my opinion"

What?

Go directly to jail. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200.

Quote :

"if someone feels that the risks outweigh the benefits, that is their choice. However, it is not for the government to choose what I put in my body."

\/ Any time is the right time to fight tyranny.

[Edited on May 13, 2008 at 12:25 AM. Reason : ...]

5/13/2008 12:18:38 AM

He'll do and say anything that will get him elected. Just like any other politician. It's not even like he would be able to change anything by himself with regards to narcotics laws and whatnot. Congress would have to put a bill through first and then he would have to sign it or not sign it. I think Obama would be the most likely candidate to support favorable drug laws but this is definitely not the right time to be bringing something like that up as a serious issue.

5/13/2008 12:22:31 AM

Aren't they trying to create anti-anxiety drugs that are as effective at reducing anxiety as marijuana is?

Marijuana doesn't worsen depression, they've done fMRI imaging studies that say it lessens it.

5/13/2008 10:38:27 AM

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24594228/

The feds must be starting a new misinformation campaign or something. I'm not saying any of this is necessarily untrue, but imo studies like these can't be taken at face falue until conducted by independent groups w/o a hidden agenda.

5/13/2008 10:55:37 AM

Quote :

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. ~ Ben Franklin"

5/13/2008 11:14:45 AM

^.

5/13/2008 11:17:27 AM

Quote :

"http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24594228/ The feds must be starting a new misinformation campaign or something. I'm not saying any of this is necessarily untrue, but imo studies like these can't be taken at face falue until conducted by independent groups w/o a hidden agenda. "

I was interested in the article until it got to this part:
"The marijuana users in the study averaged smoking 78 to 350 marijuana cigarettes per week, based on self-reported drug history, the researchers said."
"I think the low end was 78 joints a week. That's 10 or 11 joints a day," Mirken said in a telephone interview.

THIS JUST IN, DOING THINGS IN EXCESS IS BAD FOR YOU!

5/13/2008 11:29:32 AM

my point exactly....they won't allow independent, unbiased studies and skew the data from their own studies to fit thier agenda. If anything, they're undermining thier own legitimacy.

5/13/2008 11:39:11 AM

Propoganda Machine . . . . . ENGAGE!!!!



the question is why do they feel the need. What are they afraid is going to happen if we all smoke pot

[Edited on May 13, 2008 at 11:42 AM. Reason : ]

5/13/2008 11:40:56 AM

that it will cut into the profits of budweiser and marlboro

for real though...just tax the people who grow and sell it... just like you would a brewer

[Edited on May 13, 2008 at 11:47 AM. Reason : isn't that their biggest gripe anyhow? that anyone could grow it]

5/13/2008 11:47:20 AM

^actually an excellent idea. just tax it a lot. instead of taxing poor people like me

5/13/2008 11:53:30 AM

Quote :

"my point exactly....they won't allow independent, unbiased studies and skew the data from their own studies to fit thier agenda. If anything, they're undermining thier own legitimacy."

this was what i was trying to draw attention to in this thread.

5/13/2008 12:19:29 PM

I concur....just reiterating the absurdity of the whole policy.

5/13/2008 1:16:28 PM

Quote :

"I guess we are all free in the US except when it comes to freedom to make phone calls w/o an NSA agent potentially listening, freedom to consume plants that contain chemicals the DEA lists as evil, freedom to play card games except if we play them for money online."

Our freedom basically means that we can say "Fuck the government" to anyone without any fear of government persecution. Obviously you can't do that in China, but you can walk down the street drinking a beer and puffing on a joint and the cops probably won't say anything.

5/13/2008 1:24:15 PM

Having the ability to say fuck the government means nothing without having the ability to do something about it. We definitely don't have the latter and are slowly losing the former.

5/13/2008 2:02:53 PM

^^ are you serious??

in china i can smoke up and drink in public? They may have a more planned economy and no democratic institutions to elect its leaders; but if this is true it sounds like the average Chinese person has more freedom to do what they want in their day-to-day lives.

5/13/2008 2:13:26 PM

http://www.thesequitur.com/content/view/2421/43/

american college of physicians supports use of medical marijuana.

5/13/2008 2:43:34 PM

^^ yeah but they have a lot of other shitty stuff goin on.

Like not being able to access certain websites and you cant find some books in the library etc.

5/13/2008 2:54:03 PM

Personal freedoms versus political freedoms.

Quote :

"They may have a more planned economy and no democratic institutions to elect its leaders; but if this is true it sounds like the average Chinese person has more freedom to do what they want in their day-to-day lives."

There are laws on the books, but the cops have to deal with 1.2 billion people and generally won't say anything about mild offenses like that, especially if you're a foreigner.

In the early 90s the Chinese government did a very lengthy study of why european communism collapsed and decided that to stay stable they needed to make sure that economic freedoms surpassed political freedoms at all time. Basically they realized that in Europe people were able to see the higher western standard of living and then get pissed that they couldn't afford something comparable, creating a country full of pissed off people who had poltical power for the first time.

5/13/2008 3:33:45 PM