‘Doobie’ Brothers Ron and Barney
by Jeannie DeAngelisKellogg’s Corn Pops® may be going out of business, but Captain Zig-Zag is about to get an up-tick in popularity if political odd couple Ron Paul (R-TX) and Barney Frank (D-MA) have their way. In a bipartisan effort to end the federal ban on marijuana, a newfangled congressional edition of the “doobie” brothers are banding together to put forward legislation that limits the federal government’s role in policing pot.
Ron Paul and Barney Frank are proposing the first bill ever that, if enacted into law, would end centralized marijuana prohibition. The legislation seeks to limit federal involvement in cannabis monitoring to “cross-border or inter-state smuggling.” If the proposal succeeds, marijuana farmers across America stand to save on electricity and light bulbs as recreational horticulturists venture outside to legally grow weed and even sell the fruit of their harvest in states where pot is legal.
Ron Paul, individual liberty and freedom Republican/Libertarian and one half of the bill’s sponsor, said the following: “Drugs are very dangerous but there are a lot of things that are very dangerous. The question is, should we regulate danger? Should we take responsibility for ourselves or should the government take care of us? I don’t believe in the nanny state.”
Paul consistently maintains that the government has no business butting into private lives, so it stands to reason that the same philosophy would apply to bong usage, whether it’s Ron Paul’s, if he has one, or someone else’s. One would expect Congressman Paul to step forward on behalf of legalizing marijuana if the end result limits government and grants individual autonomy to be either as reckless or responsible as one desires.
On the other hand, Barney Frank may have other, more personal reasons for proposing the legislation. Seems Congressman Frank found himself embroiled in marijuana-related controversy when visiting longtime partner and Fire Island ferry companion James Ready at his home in Maine a few years back.
James Ready is also renowned for being spotted on video heckling and calling Sean Bielat, Barney’s 2010 opponent for his congressional seat, “dude.” James is an avid gardener, and when Barney had stopped by Ogunquit for a visit, Mr. Ready was arrested for cultivation and possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia, which explains James’ public use of the word “dude.”
Although Frank was on the premises during the arrest, the Massachusetts congressman claimed he knew nothing and told police he didn’t “live in the house and that he only smoked cigars.”
Unlike James, who spends a lot of time kicking around out back in the pea patch, Congressman Frank said he was “surprised and disappointed with what police found,” and that he wouldn’t “recognize a marijuana plant if he saw one because he is ‘not a great outdoorsman,’ and ‘wouldn’t recognize most plants.’”
Three years later, Barney’s original “surprise and disappointment” turned into activism because the cigar-smoking congressman, when referring to the Frank/Paul Pot Bill, said that “The notion that you lock people up for smoking marijuana is pretty silly. I’m going to call it the ‘Make Room for Serious Criminals’ bill.”
Never deviating from the libertarian platform whether it’s legalizing pot or maintaining a foreign policy position of non-intervention, Ron Paul is predictable and, although viewed as eccentric at times, remains pretty much controversy-free.
Then there’s Barney Frank, who has a scandal-ridden past that includes a history with gay prostitutes and associations with pot-growing and weed-toking male friends, as well as making verbal reassurances that have been proved economically devastating such as: “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—are not facing any kind of financial crisis.”
Although Barney Frank claims to be “particularly irked by DEA raids and federal prosecution of medical marijuana patients and providers in California,” proposing legislation could be what remedies Barney’s history of public humiliation.
All Barney needs to do is find a congressional colleague who’ll sign on to enact laws that take the sting out of embarrassing situations. For example, legalize growing and smoking pot, and in the future Frank can visit James Ready in Maine without the fear of being caught up in a drug raid.
For years, Ron Paul has spoken out on behalf of legalizing prostitution; maybe the duo can get a Barney and Ron Bunny Ranch Bill going, which means that when Frank hires con men to run errands it won’t matter if personal aides work part-time from home. And with the pesky issue of discounted ferry tickets, maybe the congressman can push through a bill that exempts public employees from paying full price on ferry rides to islands that serve underrepresented minority groups.
As for the Freddie and Fannie fiasco, it’s a little late for legislation to gloss over that debacle. However, for future reference maybe after Barney and Ron’s cannabis connection helps the two men cultivate a closer relationship, Barney will check with Ron before reassuring the public that government involvement in the housing market is a good thing, especially if you happen to be head of the House Committee on Financial Services at the time.
Nevertheless, Ron Paul and Barney Frank are banding together as brothers to smooth relations between state law and a confused federal government that intermittently deploys DEA agents to raid dispensaries in jurisdictions that allow the sale of medical marijuana. As they do, it is nice to know that legalizing pot will also help bring Barney Frank, despite past indiscretions, one step closer to legitimacy.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
588 Comments
What the Hell, the whole world is going to "pot" anyway…. while we're at it let's legalize prostitution and every other vice since it's much easier to let go of our moral compass than to be better people.
Then everyone can have great self esteem…..
The "war" on marijuana has long been overdo to be put to an end. A terrible wast of tax dollars goes into fighting a battle that cannot be won. If you are against marijuana use the educate your children by means of setting good examples. Obviously the government trying to teach ethics on drug issues is, like most government programs, an epic failure.
Oh and by the way the Doobie Brothers are awesome, "Jesus is Just All Right" is a great song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ie9sY_zp9xg
Frank, Reid and Pelosi. Demons sent straight from the pit of hell.
and it would be great for the couch industry,just think about all those pot heads wearing out all those couches,they have to be replaced some day,am I right?
Funny.
I was out at the corral feeding my saddle horses this morning, idly kicking horse turds, and thinking about this very issue. Granted, i am not surprised that Bwarney Fwank would "get behind" anything he could suck on, but as far as I'm concerned, Ron Paul's chance of ever being taken seriously just went up in a cloud of pot smoke…….
If there was reasonable evidence that the "drug war" could or did work I might be convinced to support it. But there isn't. We've spent fifty years attempting to change human behavior with prison and fines and all we've done is fuel violent criminal gangs, destroyed the 4th Amendment to our Constitution, and the drugs are still here. Past time to legalize it.
I'm opposing this legislation of unbanning marijuana. It is nothing more than a drive to further dumb-down the younger generations with high consumption of pot. It would lead to irresponsible behaviors and unproductive people.
Oops. Sorry bashley. Hit wrong thumb. Hate it when that happens ; (
+1
Following your logic we should just banish all laws that dont stop crimes from happening…….oh wait thats all of them. I am so tired of hearing that tired argument, how about the majority of the population do not condone nor are we willing to tolerate creating a second tier welfare class by legalizing a drug that does nothing but promote another step to harder drugs.
I had a debate with some friends while sitting around a campfire near our gold claims in N. Cal about this very topic just two weeks ago. We had just hiked all day to one of our remote locations and found our second "grow site" of the season. There were no roads, no houses for miles, not even any trails. Low and behold, here was piles and piles of trash, broken drip lines, discarded bags of fertilizer, batteries in the creek. These people are also armed with assault style weapons. They care not for the environment…..at all.
One of my friends said he didn't want "pot heads" driving while stoned. I promptly informed him that they all ready do, always have.
People argue all the time about this, but science has proven that marijuana is a step drug, your mind tells you that you need more and more to obtain that "euphoria" effect. Personally, I don't believe pot is all that bad, but I certainly wouldn't want my kids smoking it, and I'm getting pretty sick and tired of having to carry a .357 and a 9mm backup just to go find gold on my own claims because of the Mexican pot growers.
If anyone would know about drugs and illegal behavior it would be Barney Frank, since he had a distribution center in his own home at one point, but of course he knew nothing about it. /sarc
No worries, Have a good day/weekend Infidel
Agreed…I saw the Doobie Brothers last month and they opened with "Jesus Is Just All Right"…GREAT song live!!! Don't know how many original members but those guys can STILL bring it!
like alcohol doesn't??? look at the government statistics – there are more visits to the emergency room over alcohol than marijuana.
Ron Paul is a FAKE conservative and the fact that he has teamed up with a homosexual like Frank proves this fact. He is no part of a conservative and I called him a moonbat anarchist because that is what he really is.
He's no different from a Democrat and here's why. He wants to legalize abortion, prostitution, gambling, drugs and homosexual marriage and then he wants them TAXED.
Your character is revealed by the friends you keep.
"………..The question is, should we regulate danger?…….."
Thank God,………..!!!!!!!
This will surely put to rest the silly,….
Ron Paul presidential candidacy and,……..
place him next to Gingrich where they both belong,………
in the circular file.
we've certainly filled the prison system with non-violent pot smokers – but that's good for the prison industry right? that's job security at it's best.
Amen Ralph and well said! Teaming up with Franks will drive the final nail in the coffin of his candidacy and frankly, I'm glad he decided to make this move now.
I REALLY think Ron Paul should be Chairman of the FED in 2012…
If you wanna get rid of vampires, toss in a zealot over the back fence…
Just my logic is that the government should not be relied upon to teach the ethical behavior of something as benign as marijuana use.
Following your logic the United States should ban everything that may possibly lead to a crime, talk about the ultimate nanny state. Marijuana has never been proven to lead to harder drugs just as alcohol and tobacco don't do that. Should we reinstate alcohol prohibition also? Illegal activity from marijuana is normally do to the fact that the government has made it illegal which it did so for the main reason that alcohol distillers lobbied politicians so as not to have to compete.
My logic is simply that the government should not preach to individual citizens on how to conduct their private lives by way of making laws and creating wars with it's own people.
Oh and as someone that is an expert in weapons of all sorts as you say you are, and following your own logic I expect that you think guns should be outlawed since they are used much of the time in criminal activity. Personally I have a CWP and think the government has no business in that area either.
The argument of self-policing sounds good in theory but the problem is too many ppl. do not take responsibility for themselves. Natural Law does not exist much in our society anymore, and without Natural Law, many of the Libertarian views just won't work.
First of all I don't care for most of Mr. Frank's politics but I am behind this bill 100 percent. Not sure why the author of the article decided to make it more about Mr. Frank's shady history rather than the merits of the bill. Seems like an attempt to attack the bill, but being that it really is a great idea that really is in line with conservative principles (states rights, personal responsibility) I suppose there wasn't much of a way to make a solid argument against the bill.
I certainly hope this passes. Conservatives want to cut, what a better place to start than this needless and fruitless war on drugs?
I think too many people are missing the point here. It is not about legalizing pot. It is about states rights. I would like to see the federal government get out of all of these type issues. I believe that if states want to make pot legal, that is fine. If folks in that state don't like it, they can go to another state that doesn't allow it.
I believe the same is true for abortion, although, I am against abortion. I believe states should have the control over these issues, not the federal government.
Ron Paul fans, please KNOW that one of the best ways to judge the character of a person is by their actions, and by whom they associate themselves with.
So Ron Paul working with Bawney Fwank on a deal to legalize pot is PROOF POSITIVE of KOOK status for RP.
'Nuff Said!
That TAX observation is relevant…
Smaller government doesn't need more revenue…
Whether you morally oppose the consumption of marijuana or alcohol or any other substance, if you claim to support a limited gov't (as conservatives claim to), there is no defensible position for supporting the "War on Drugs". The WoD is actually a assault on freedom and has cost countless innocent lives and tremendous resources while being an abject failure at the same time.
Spanky pointed out a couple days ago that, if he were a two-termer, he'd be in his 80s when he left office. The Infantilized Nation isn't going to get behind him unless he can convince them he will abet their infantilization which does seem to be the case.
The Constitution had to have an amendment added to give the national government the power to ban alcoholic drinks. This never happened with weed. That means it has always been in the jurisdiction of the states. No new law is needed. Just respect the Constitution. Elected officials swear to uphold it. That's the real problem-no recourse when they don't. Checks and balances don't work when all the branches are in the same boat.
It really fits with his anti-paternal laws ideology. I really don't fault Ron for attempting to strike down paternal laws per say. I hate almost all of them just from the stand point that I really don't like the idea of the government being a step-parent.
However, I do have to question Ron's wisdom with taking on this particular law out of the gate and in addition picking Barney as a bed fellow.
Agreed. He'll just throw sand in the gears. Like we don't already have it all against us, now.
Since you brought up morality, is it moral to use force to prevent me from entering into a voluntary contract with another party, just because you may not like what the contract entails?
Leave it to Bwarny Fwank, to encourage everybody to smoke a fat one.
Exactly. Laws used to be about correcting problems caused by people who won't police themselves. Those who think legalizing these things will get government out of our lives are nuts. Vice-driven cash/control cows.
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
~John Adams
Do you use pot on a regular basis? How do you know the war on drugs in an epic failure? How old are you….19?
Combine these two morons, with the Keystone Cops led by Holder, and Jughead and the boys in the Fed/Treasury, and with Bozo the Clown in the White House and this entire government is run by fools.
http://theantiliberalzone.blogspot.com/
The Anti Liberal Zone
"Bringing a gun to a knife fight for years!"
I totally agree, Ron Paul showed his colors by trying to.. in his mind… hold hands with liberals with this unholy alliance. I wouldn't even shake hands with Barney, he should have been booted out of office a long time ago for lying about Fannie and Freddie being solvent in front of a congressional committee.
Typical Neocon, please change your username… there is no other candidate that is more in touch with the Constitution than Ron Paul, please read the document sometime. Ron Paul is 110% pro-life and against abortion and he is for marriage between 1 man and 1 woman… get your facts straight and keep supporting Mitt Romney and Romneycare
On the real subject of this article, while I think the war on drugs is a huge waste of my tax payers money I am not real sure why a Presidential candidate would put his name on this kind of bill because we still have a lot of mindless voters out there that will immediately say "Ron Paul is for smoking pot". Ron Paul said it well at one of the debates when this loaded question came up… "how many in this room would do heroin if it was legal?" and that is the point, you can't outlaw stupid decisions… you can outlaw when stupid decisions endanger others like driving under the influence… just like we do with alcohol.
According to the feds, marajuana is a schedule 1 drug (most dangerous) and cocaine is a schedule 2
How is this possible?
Oh yeah. Big Pharma doesn't want weed legal and pays millions to lobbyists and members of congress to keep it classified with heroin and LSD.
Aleric,
What is your factual basis for this?
Would love to hear it. There is plenty of science and not feeling that proves relaxed drug laws actually benefit society.
Pull your head out of your ass, Bashley. Marijuana is a beguiling as drug as there is which is why it is as dangerous as it is. I heard a bunch of dope smokers calling Mark Simone yesterday. One actually was delusional enough as to repeat a meme that I've heard for forty years, that being that he actually thought he drove better under the influence.
He wants to overturn Roe vs. Wade.
He has sued Barack Obama for using tax dollars to continually bomb Libya.
He only wants prostitution, gambling and marijuana to be taxed like groceries or clothing. Which "Constitutional" candidate that you support is standing up against sales tax?
There is no reason that you cannot work with other people as long as their goal on a particular issue matches. You have to work within coalitions to get things done. Dr. Paul does not compromise his principals to work on the common ground. He does not work with Frank on everything only on the things they see eye to eye.
You've hit on what I would argue is the real issue: pot makes bad people who would otherwise be small-time crooks into Al Capone.
Weed shares all of the qualities that made liquor a lucrative black-market trade during the days of Prohibition. It's relatively cheap to mass produce, easy to smuggle, and ubiquitous within American culture because (unlike Meth or Heroin, which have a nasty tendency of killing people) it's a relatively safe drug. While a free market for weed would probably not turn the crop into a particularly high-margin product, government prohibitions definitely have. Enter the cartels.
The war on drugs has given every cartel "businessman" his dream come true: a high demand, low production cost product–at incredibly lucrative black market premiums. But since only the nefarious bother with the business model to begin with, murder, violence, and deepening degrees of evil draw succor from the illicit trade. We could have kept Capone weak and poor by avoiding the mistake of Prohibition. We could do the same to the Cartels if we would reverse course on Marijuana.
This is where I separate from my conservative brethren. Like most things that Washington does, it turns into an abysmal waste of our money, “The War on Drugs,” is no exception. Nothing has changed since Richard Nixon announced this folly. Instead of curbing drug abuse, we’ve created an industry, entrenched beauroacracy, with dozens of Al Capone’s. It should be controlled like booze, and just like booze, the same fools will abuse it. However, this will never happen, refer back to entrenched beauroacracy.
He's talking about endangering yourself. Driving while high would be illegal. Part of personal liberty is making sure you don't infringe on someone else's rights.
Do you think Republicans are no unholy? Both parties are full of bad decision makers.
You show your true colors of in tolerance and bias. If I do not have to compromise anything and people have common views on an issue, why not work with them?
I do not like Frank, but he has good views about gambling too. A nut can be right sometimes. And, in this world he is right more than a lot of Dems. But, I would put Frank on par with a lot of Republicans. But hopefully, you can open your eyes and see the Republicans are not to much different.
"and that he wouldn’t “recognize a marijuana plant if he saw one because he is ‘not a great outdoorsman,’ and ‘wouldn’t recognize most plants.’”
That same disfunctional recognization gene came into play, big time, when he declared Fannie and Freddie solvent with little chance of needing taxpayer bailout.
Ann
Barney Frank could be the stupidist corrupt "man" in Congress.
Haven't a clue what my age has to do with anything, other than you see it as something to judge others on, and my personal life is just that, personal and none of your business.
How I know the war on marijuana is an epic failure is the fact that it's still consumed on a massive scale by millions of Americans that would in all other aspects be completely law abiding. And if you scroll down and read Petroglyphs comment (which is a good comment even though we have slightly differing points of view on this subject) He would not be having the problem he's having on his claims and private property if, A. the war on marijuana was a success in any fashion and B. marijuana was decriminalized.
The war on drugs is an epic failure because we spend escalating billions on it, yet supply keeps increasing. It's an epic failure because to fight it, we've allowed the trashing of the Constitution that you are supposedly "for". It's an epic failure because we incarcerate hundreds of thousands of citizens whose only offense is using, or possessing drugs. It's an epic failure because innocent people keep getting murdered in botched drug raids.
I'm 61 years old, and I've watched the farce of the drug war since it began 40 years ago.
Oh, and when Adams was president, there was NO prohibition on Marijuana!
And you're repeating the meme that marijuana is a gateway drug.
Sorry if dope smokers annoy you, but I don't see a need to equate potheads with violent criminals. What if a bunch of drunk people called Simone and started spouting out their inebriated thoughts? Would you want booze banned too?
It is no legalizing it. It is only removing the Federal law. Every state has its own regulations on marijuana. It will not repeal state laws. States should be allowed to not have the Fed run them unless it is a Constitutional matter.
Unless you are for having the nanny state take care of what your religious beliefs, drinking, and/or smoking habits.
You sound like the liberal.
I didn't have time to read this entire thread, but I will ask … Is there no one here who realizes this is only
Ron Paul's (& Frank's) shameless pander to a certain group of campaign contributors?
$#iT, anyone who can't SEE this for what it is, must be perpetually stoned, like Barney was when he
continued to argue that Fannie and Freddy were in no danger of insolvency… duuuh!!!
Paul and Frank are using our time and taxes to perform what is nothing but a PR stunt, designed to
fill their campaign coffers. They both understand perfectly this legislation has no legs.
And we are supposed to take Ron Paul the presidential candidate seriously? WTF?
WHAT A COUNTRY!!!
.
Tobacco is beguiling to alcohol and coffee is beguiling to tobacco, tobacco is also beguiling to sex….Perhaps you have your head in your ass or you think that all of those things should be outlawed by our government also, one person's statement isn't a very good way to base an entire subject matter on.
Glad these clowns figured out that the feds should not control what is the responsibility of the states…maybe we can keep this going and end the fed control of education, energy, commerce, etc.
You didn't answer my question, so I'll take that as a YES, you are a drug user. That's why you want it to be legalized. Are you high right now as you type?
As to your song about Jesus, would HE want you to use drugs on a regular basis? I want you to quote chapter and verse FROM THE BIBLE where God says it's OK to use drugs. BTW I find your song to be sacrilegious. I don't see that song as one that would be played around the Throne of God where the angels sing…Holy, Holy Holy is the Lord God almighty! I don't see God up in heaven token on weed!
You are half my age, and I don't take advice from one who hasn't experienced life and had children.
You mean the same Paul that drafted the Sanctity of Life Act?
Just say you don't like the guy and stop talking out of your ass.
But I did answer your question, obviously your reading comprehension skills are rusty. I said my personal life is none of your business. I also gave you no advice in any of my comments so that must be a hallucination you are having. A person twice my age should be able to read better than that, perhaps you use too many drugs?
And Jesus consumed wine regularly, which just happens to be considered a drug in our modern society.
People who support drug prohibition are sheep; plain and simple. We can buy a million things that can kill us; why are they legal? Not to mention, 90% of 'pharma' drugs are FAR more dangerous than weed. This whole debate is about keeping pharma money in the pockets of politicians, and American citizens with only half a brain buying into the bullsh*t.
Marijuana has been shown medically to be less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes. There is no scientific evidence to back the “gateway drug” hypothesis and subsequently it has been thoroughly debunked. Prohibition causes more harm to individuals than marijuana ever could by giving a criminal record to people who are doing something that is more benign than many already legal substances. There has never been a death directly caused by marijuana. It even has legitimate medical benefits for people with cancer, glaucoma, AIDS, parkinsons etc.
"I really hate conservatives"
Your avi and your filthy mouth says it all. I'm sure you are already a hardcore drug user. Take your disgusting behavior over to HuffPo.
Legalizing it will kill a lot of the black market for it as well, just as repealing alcohol prohibition did.
When people wanted alcohol prohibition repealed, conservatives said it would cause pandemonium because “everyone would do it.” Everyone would get drunk, crash their cars, beat their wives and drink themselves to death, right?
The truth is there is a social stigma attached to marijuana that comes from its demonization from the timber industry in the old days, and nowadays the liquor/pharmaceutical industries, who sees a new competitor in the horizon. And, of course, there are always modern right wingers ready to make sure we never see anything but the proctologic view of things.
Exactly! Ronald and Nancy Reagan said "Just say NO to drugs!"
We have a spending problem.
Who do you support?
Sarah Palin: RINO Zionist Jon Huntsman, pastor Ed Kalnins, false teacher nutjob Rick Joyner, gay exorcist Thomas Muthee
Michele Bachmann: bigot Bradlee Dean, false teacher nutjob Rick Joyner
Rick Perry: everyone he's speaking with at the Response conference, bigots at AFA, cultist lunatic Lou Engle
Those are actual FRIENDS of the candidates. All you've established is that Barney Frank and Ron Paul agree on one issue. Sometimes, politicians don't tow the party line on every issue. The real question you should be asking is "why doesn't my candidate support this bill?".
I know, you are sad you can't marry your homosexual lover.
I see you are a new account. I'm sure Soros is your employer.
So you are saying Reagan actively campaigned for a moron, and the same moron was one of 2 delegates at the national convention in 1976 to support Reagan for President in Texas? For those with a short memory many Republicans said the same things about Ronald Reagan they are now saying about Ron Paul. Reagan was just a more tactful politician.
William F Buckley
http://old.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley2004...
Don't forget blatantly unfair Rockefeller laws that accelerate social inequality by imposing vastly stiffer penalties for cheap "street" drugs like crack over "upper class" drugs like powder cocaine.
The reason you have to carry a weapon to stop the farmers is because the laws causing the drug trade. Change the laws and the black market goes away. If you like to carry the weapon keep the laws. Maybe you will have to carry a bigger one.
Your kids probably will smoke it. Especially if they go to college. They will binge drink too. I do not know your kids, but these are the odds of growing up and coming into age. It is part of growing up. But, they will not be kids anymore. They will be adults. They can make their own choices. Maybe they will or they wont. Hopefully they listen to your guidance. But, just like government you cannot tell a grown adult what to do with their lives.
Rarely have I seen the thumbing-up and -down happen so fast, as this thread about legalizing pot. Well, I suppose it's a confluence of pot and Ron Paul.
RƎΛO˥ution indeed.
How is one curse word more offensive than you lying about a decent man like Ron Paul?
Or you slandering someone as a "hardcore drug user"?
I think I'd add a 12 gauge with buckshot to the arsenal Petroglyph. Just the intimidation factor alone would justify the added weight. BOOM!!! BOOM!!
Conservatives like to talk about the 10th amendment and limited government, but in reality most conservatives today are as bad as liberals when it comes to limited government.
http://old.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley2004...
Yes, and $1 trillion of tax dollars was spent telling kids to say "no" and incarcerating them if they grew up in a home that taught them to say "yes".
You are a FAKE.
Ron Paul never says to tax these things. Read it.
Prove it to me. You have no facts to back your case. Also, you cannot be an anarchist if you believe in government taxing something. Make some sense.
Who cares if Frank is gay? Does that bother you?
There it is everybody — ForConstitution showing himself to be a mental midget, incapable of rational thought or a civil debate.
happily married Tea Party Republican… I see you resort to calling people homos when your lies are called out. I like Ron Paul but I am supporting Bachmann.
Dubya teamed up Putin.
Reagan teamed up with the Taliban.
Sounds like you are a bunch of judgmental people. Not really looking at the substance of laws being passed, but only the book by its cover.
I'm sure a crackhead like you are anxious to remove that obstacle. Try to stay on topic, this is about pot.
"And you're repeating the meme that marijuana is a gateway drug."
Actually, no, i didn't but I will now–it is.
And you're repeating the decades-old meme that the reason people drink is invariably to get drunk. Forty years ago, again, the "Juicers vs Heads" argument. That you would imply that that's the case is an indicator of how willing you are to distort the argument to sound reasonable about your position.
The de facto purpose of smoking marijuana is to impair one's judgement. Sort of like the morons whose judgement was impaired by hearing the words "hope and change." If you're willing to let those who might be negatively affected by your selfish and childish penchants legally protect themselves from you, I might be able to get behind across-the-board legalization, believe it or not.
For example, an employer should be legally allowed to refuse you employment if they think they will be negatively affected, in any way, by your drug use (productivity, safety, etc. Would you accept being drug-screened and refused access to the ballot if you're found "dirty?" Are you willing to be drug-screened and refused driver's license renewal if you're found to be "dirty?" I didn't think so.
Grow up.
Does this bill also cut funding for the war on marijuana? That's what I thought!! DEA will just ramp up on another drug and keep pissing OUR money down the drain. Status quo maintained. So sad.
Leave it to kentatwater to stick up for a Federal law that has done nothing, but help spend us into oblivion.
maybe we should pass a law to outlaw in the closet liberals from putting Reagan conservative on their profiles
"Now, as for the economic bailout provisions and the measures that have already been taken, it is a time of crisis and government did have to step in playing an appropriate role to shore up the housing market to make sure that we're thawing out some of the potentially frozen credit lines and credit markets, government did have to step in there." -Sarah Palin
One candidate exhibits fidelity to the Constitution, no matter how futile a gesture, while the other supports the unconstitutional THEFT of the American people by elites. Now, which one should be taken seriously?
@ http://biggovernment.com/jdeangelis
Jeannie,
It seems that your article is a great failure. Do you know your audience? Just look at the comments and the amount of likes and dislikes for them. It’s pretty clear that the vast majority of your own readers are IN FAVOR of this legislation. Seems you're preaching to the wrong crowd. Are the pharma companies paying you off too, or are you just another sheep?
This war on drugs is how we (our society) screw ourselves. The land of the free has the largest incarcerated population per capita in the Western world. Who is ahead of us here? Think Cuba, China, Iran, etc…
I'm legitimately curious to all those who have no qualms with alcohol but are staunch opponents of marijuana. How can you deem one more evil than the other when each fall under the umbrella of 'vices'? I've never done pot, I drink sparingly at best, and I really see no issue with such legislation. How does a stoner's lazy ways affect your life? That's the same busybody attitude that liberals adopt are rightfully admonished on these sites and comments for doing so, yet why is this same busybody attitude so pervasive among conservatives? What bad will marijuana do, especially considering alcohol can have more deleterious effects for people who don't use it in moderation (that's their choice, and good on them if they want to do so)?
So why is alcohol tolerated and deemed an afterthought, while marijuana is like an untouchable frontier? I can understand being for both or against both because to me those are logically consistent positions. However, being for one and not the other simply baffles me.
I said quote chapter and verse from the Bible. Can you even do that? Where did Jesus drink wine on a regular basis!
CHAPTER AND VERSE!
IPeter 5:8
Be SOBER, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.
When you do drugs, you are opening yourself up to DEMONIC INFLUENCE.
I don't drink and I don't do drugs. It's as simple as that. I saw what alcoholism did to my family when I was growing up, and I didn't want that type of dysfunction for MY children.
"Tobacco is beguiling to alcohol and coffee is beguiling to tobacco, tobacco is also beguiling to sex"
If you believe that, you have a self-control problem. Darwinist B.S.
Well Bashley, you probably are LESS than half my age but you have a pretty good handle on the subject. Progressives on both sides are alright with big government as long as it's THEIR big government.
Ron Paul has it right, who cares what Franks is doing it for.
( I've been reading articles and comments for over a year, but just recently signed up for comments. Hello everyone.)
This article makes light of a very serious situation. People are being killed over this stuff. It is senseless. Countless of taxpayer dollars are spent to "control" the absolutely un-controllable. At it's worst, marijuana usage can be considered a vice. It makes no sense to bust down private property doors, risk the lives of law enforcement and innocent bystanders, confiscate property before guilt is proven. It makes no sense to place immense power, and massive amounts of money, into the hands of gangs and drug lords. It makes no sense to place a mere pot smoker behind bars, providing 3 hots and a cot at taxpayer expense.
And it makes no sense for conservatives to say they want less government, but then to demand more government when it comes to moral issues. Like Ron Paul, I believe in the United States Constitution. It is a beautiful document. It severely limits the powers of the government while allowing personal liberty. It is so unfortunate that both Democrats and Republicans seem determined to shred it's meaning.
Well Rockefeller laws applied to pot too… 2 oz could get you 15+ years. Sorry, thought you were talking about the Drug War in general – nice to see you are courteous though to someone you may disagree with on many issues but is trying to support your point here…
I think it can be successfully argued that pot is a gateway drug, but only by virtue of its illegality. For impressionable youngsters, consumption of fairly benign pot will lead many to reach for other forbidden fruit, usually with disastrous results.
And characterizing someone high on pot as violent is just silly and uninformed, though I agree that a baked individual has no place behind the wheel of a car.
If this law would acknowledge that its a state issue and the result is that states decide — then I'm for it. I'm for any legislation that shifts power to the states — the very power that has been usurped by the feds.
If you're going to say something about me, know something about me, first.
I attended Catholic schools for 11 years and teach at a Catholic school, I could quote bible verses for you all day, but your closed minded arrogant nature is quite boring actually and not worthy for any more of my time to be wasted on you. I wish you luck in your life.
Well said.
Most conservatives feel it's their duty to legislate morals.
And you lying about Ron Paul says all I need to know about you. I'll curse any day over spewing straight-up crap about someone about whose politics I'm woefully ignorant.
Things that will happen when we legalize Pot…
1) Reduce crime, by taking a portion of the illegal drug market, this will also save lives of our boarder guards and innocent citizens who are killed in gang turf warfare.
The cost of Marijuana will drastically reduce, making it unprofitable to smuggle it into the USA, reducing drug traffic down to only the hard drugs, which would be in less demand.
2) Reduce the number of hard drug addicts. Marijuana is a gateway drug, because it's harder to acquire than many hard drugs. People who would prefer to just smoke a joint, eventually move on to harder drugs because they are actually cheaper and easier to get.
3) Bring in more tax revenue.
4) Encourage new businesses and expanded existing businesses. The money that would otherwise be going to drug lords would instead be staying within the community.
5) Safer for the users, they don't have to worry if something else has been mixed in the marijuana they just bought.
6) The number of people who drank alcohol took a dramatic spike during prohibition, but quickly took a downturn when prohibition ended. It's very likely we would see the same response among Marijuana smokers.
7) US Farmers would have a new money crop.
9) This would shrink the size of the DEA a bit.
10) I could go on, but I'll put the most important reason here: The Federal Government doesn't have the freaking authority to tell Americans what they can and cannot buy. That power isn't in the constitution. So I ask you, why would a conservative resist a power shift from the Federal Government back to the States and the people?
You may have Constitution in your name, but you are far from believing anything in it.
Go back to you neocon masters and ask them for further instruction.
". Laws used to be about correcting problems caused by people who won't police themselves. "
So now the government should do it for them right?
BTW, where did I say I "equate potheads with violent criminals?"
Any lie will do, I guess, because the end justifies the means.
You must be logged in to post a comment.