Ron Paul jokes: "I don't want to use heroin" so I need drug laws

Status
Not open for further replies.
Apostacious said:
Phrozen asked, "I don't know much about him[Ron Paul]... Anyone care to explain why he's so terrible?" And I responded in turn.
Click to expand...
You spouted unrelated political nonsense that had nothing to do with the threads topic. If you got a reason he's so bad that isn't political, then I'd say it's relevent. All you said was BS how he doesn't support art, or spending on college etc. That's got nothing to do with the thread or DitM. Or why he's a terrible person. All you're saying is he's a terrible politician... and even then you basically votes for conservative beliefs; he's not a neocon like other politicians...


Oh wow... I haven't seen that since 5th grade. Dude... did you seriously just write that? I mean... really?!





A little bit of self-consciousness goes a long way, you know? I feel bad for you...
Click to expand...

cool story bro.
 
severely etarded said:
You spouted unrelated political nonsense that had nothing to do with the threads topic. If you got a reason he's so bad that isn't political, then I'd say it's relevent. All you said was BS how he doesn't support art, or spending on college etc. That's got nothing to do with the thread or DitM. Or why he's a terrible person. All you're saying is he's a terrible politician... and even then you basically votes for conservative beliefs; he's not a neocon like other politicians...
Click to expand...

So, you didn't even read what I posted? Okay. Cool. I no longer see a reason to keep this going with you, because it is far from a productive argument :\
 
Lady Codone said:
FWIW, I think Paul would be assassinated or otherwise silenced if he were to

1.) be elected and
2.) attempt to put his ideas into motion.

Most of the "ideals" he represents would never become law even if he were president. America is too far gone; there are too many politicians, lobbyists and corporate assholes willing to do anything in their power (or beyond their power) to uphold the current system. The last "real" president we had...and his brother...didn't even live to see 50. Can you imagine someone like Paul coming in and attempting to do away with the Federal Reserve? Or the FBI? Or the Drug War?

If I had to choose based on whose ideals and beliefs matched my own (isn't that the point?), I'd say Ron Paul for Prez, with Jesse Ventura as VP :) Flame away.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly...<3
 
Alright, I made a couple of edits. No more ad homs, please. I won't say it again.

Speaking of...
ektamine said:
I agree. He made a good point, consider it, forget about your opinion on whether or not he would make a good president. Like others have said, thats not the god damn topic at hand.

I think its great that politicians can/are saying things like this, I don't care who they are.
Click to expand...
See, I think that is the topic at hand or at least a big part of it. People are saying that they agree with his stance on that issue, but not with his other views. Well, why not? This forum is largely anti-prohibition, so why wouldn't people vote for a politician that agrees with that?

Things aren't always so black and white...
Apostacious said:
Oh wow... no wonder you are one infarction away from being banned... anyway, I'll be out doing other things in the meantime.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to ask who told you that, but if a staff member told you that, tell them staff leaks are taken seriously.
 
phrozen said:
People are saying that they agree with his stance on that issue, but not with his other views. Well, why not? This forum is largely anti-prohibition, so why wouldn't people vote for a politician that agrees with that?
Click to expand...

There are two main issues people worry about when central governments shrink.

1. Their social safety net.
2. Corporate maleficence

1. The safety nets help ease the economic stress of booms and busts in the market. The problem with government safety-nets is that we can not afford them and future generations inherit the debt of the addicted generation. A pyramid scheme that becomes more social acceptable as more people become dependent on it. The solution for most liberals is to make the top 10% pay more in taxes until it becomes affordable. However that just increases incentive for the rich to invest in foreign assets(china) where it is cheaper.

2. Until the last couple years, executives were assumed to act in the best interest of the company but congressional hearings found otherwise. The solution is always to create more government oversite(regulation) to prevent this from happening even though we already have it and it fails time after time. Enron, BP, Madoff. But even if we had studies that showed a decrease in corporate fraud due to more regulation(doesn't exist), we would need studies on the cost of implementing that regulation. Usually, these fees are passed onto the consumer and then we all complain when prices go up. Also government involvment leads to corporatism where we have large corporations(BP) working with federal departments to implement more rules in their favor.
 
phrozen said:
People are saying that they agree with his stance on that issue, but not with his other views. Well, why not? This forum is largely anti-prohibition, so why wouldn't people vote for a politician that agrees with that?
Click to expand...

Because his other policies are so absolutely atrocious that the trade off wouldnt be worth it. Its like having a pain in your leg, so the doctors like, well, well amputate your leg then, that way you wont have pain anymore! you just wont have a leg! yea, theres one very good result-your pain goes away, but a whole shitload of very bad results that really outweigh any good that would come of it.

There would be one "pro" of having RP in charge, if he even stuck to the shit he said, which would be legalization (supposedly), but that would be the ONLY good thing, and there would be so many horrible "cons" that it would completely cancel out the good. The country would go to absolute shit.


Im somebody whose life been changed forever by the drug war. I got multiple felony arrests and convictions. Ima have trouble for a long time gettin a job becuz of those. I been turned down from so many jobs becuz of it. It makes a huge difference in my ability to work especially now with even overqualified, never-even-had-a-parking-ticket people not bein able to find work. Im still on probation now for some shit that happened years ago. Ive paid thousands of dollars in fines and still owe more. Its had a huge undeniable effect on the course of my life. Not just me, but my family and friends, people I know, I seen the horrible effects of prohibition.

So it should hold some weight when I say that even knowing from personal experience of havin my life almost ruined by the consequences of prohibition, I still would not want legalization if it came at the cost of havin this man as the president. That should tell you somethin, becuz somebody like me has everything to gain from ending drug prohibition. But the cost is too high. I would rather keep drugs illegal than have our country tore up by RP. Legalization is somethin I would love to see, one of my life long wishes but not if it gotta happen by putting that man in charge.

Just becuz this forum is full of people whose lives would be affected by ending prohibition dont mean that is the only issue that is important to us.
 
^ As always Khadijah very well spoken.

Not to mention let's assume for a second that Ron Paul single handedly gets drugs legalized and the country goes to shit due factors that are completely non-related to drugs in any way shape or form. The next canidate that comes up is just going to use the legalization of drugs as the reason that things went so badly and then it's back to the blacklist with them.
 
Ah, I wasn't really asking the question you guys replied to. (But I'm glad you did.) I was just saying that questions such as that are why I decided to leave this in DiTM.
 
Khadijah said:
Because his other policies are so absolutely atrocious that the trade off wouldnt be worth it. Its like having a pain in your leg, so the doctors like, well, well amputate your leg then, that way you wont have pain anymore! you just wont have a leg! yea, theres one very good result-your pain goes away, but a whole shitload of very bad results that really outweigh any good that would come of it.

There would be one "pro" of having RP in charge, if he even stuck to the shit he said, which would be legalization (supposedly), but that would be the ONLY good thing, and there would be so many horrible "cons" that it would completely cancel out the good. The country would go to absolute shit.


Im somebody whose life been changed forever by the drug war. I got multiple felony arrests and convictions. Ima have trouble for a long time gettin a job becuz of those. I been turned down from so many jobs becuz of it. It makes a huge difference in my ability to work especially now with even overqualified, never-even-had-a-parking-ticket people not bein able to find work. Im still on probation now for some shit that happened years ago. Ive paid thousands of dollars in fines and still owe more. Its had a huge undeniable effect on the course of my life. Not just me, but my family and friends, people I know, I seen the horrible effects of prohibition.

So it should hold some weight when I say that even knowing from personal experience of havin my life almost ruined by the consequences of prohibition, I still would not want legalization if it came at the cost of havin this man as the president. That should tell you somethin, becuz somebody like me has everything to gain from ending drug prohibition. But the cost is too high. I would rather keep drugs illegal than have our country tore up by RP. Legalization is somethin I would love to see, one of my life long wishes but not if it gotta happen by putting that man in charge.

Just becuz this forum is full of people whose lives would be affected by ending prohibition dont mean that is the only issue that is important to us.
Click to expand...

I don't think prohibitionist obama's any better :\

Another thing nobody has mentioned even though RP is a conservative/libertarian is that those ideologies do not automatically become law just because a president with those ideologies is elected. The only thing RP has shown by voting is that he sticks to his conservative values... Maybe that would mean he would actually support legalizing drugs if elected... But he's not going to take away anybody's college money unless the House & senate pass him a bill to sign which does so.

So maybe if you want legalization, but don't want conservative values from an administration, you should vote paul, then vote liberal democrat for senator/representative?
 
Last edited:
Blacksoulman said:
What are his other policies and why are they bad?
Click to expand...

It's her opinion on financial conservativism, gold standard, etc. that they are bad policies. But it's a just a matter of opinion, since there is no solid evidence any of what Paul stands for is bad.

It's a matter of interpretation, and whether or not the policies would be successful would ultimately boil down to the manner it is carried out. What looks good/bad on paper can always turn out different when put into place.

Paul has my vote for the sole reason that the justice system is currently overcrowded with non-violent, non-threatening drug offenders, which causes rapists and murders to be let out on parole. That's a good enough reason for me.

I would definately vote for liberals in the house & senate. The GOP has way too many crooks/nutcases/hypocrites. Paul *could* be an exception, although as a politician it's really hard to have the slightest bit of faith in him.. I know FOX news really likes to slander him. Any republican FOX news is willing to slander is probably more honest than other politicians.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top