Conservative Political Forum

Some states seem to defy washington on the rules on marijauna. I am just asking where you stand as a patriotic american.

I don't know why you put this in the war forum, but I think pot laws should be determined by the states.

The reason I find these recent ballot initiatives interesting, has nothing to do with pot. As a conservative, I am encouraged by the fact that states are enacting laws that defy federal law, and the feds seem hesitant to do anything about it.

I think it serves as a green light for conservative governors and conservative states to start taking control of their own destinies, and openly defying laws that come from the federal government that are unconstitutional. The time to get started is now............before Obama has a chance to appoint any more socialist supreme court justices.

Just call me an old stick in the mud.  No pot, no pills, no alcohol-tee-totaler on all of it.  We have enough problems and they are better dealt with if we do it clear-headedly.  I have zero tolerance for any of these because this is most often how all of the really bad things like murder, abortion, all kinds of crime originate. 

Quote from: keyboarder on November 17, 2012, 08:32:50 AM
Just call me an old stick in the mud.  No pot, no pills, no alcohol-tee-totaler on all of it.  We have enough problems and they are better dealt with if we do it clear-headedly.  I have zero tolerance for any of these because this is most often how all of the really bad things like murder, abortion, all kinds of crime originate.

It sounds good, but it's a bit utopian. As long as there are humans crawling around this earth, they will be finding ways to get high.
Responsible and educated people will be able to use drugs and alcohol as a moderated and temporary escape, others will get trapped in a life of destitution and self destruction. Neither laws nor legalization will work as intended.

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/Controversies/1114796842.html (http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/Controversies/1114796842.html)

Although I don't and have never used pot, and would probably never use it even if it were legal, I have always had a problem with pot being illegal and alcohol being legal.

But, then, of course, I have a problem with the demonization of smoking - the "sin" taxes, the government madated warnings on packages and the disgusting anti-smoking ads on T.V. Sorry, folks, its LEGAL. If you don't want to smoke - don't!

If smoking is so damned bad for you, take an effing stand and outlaw it!

By the way, I don't smoke, either.

I don't think we should be sending people to prison for possessing or using drugs. All this does is put non-violent offenders in prison, prisons that need more and more of our tax dollars to accomodate the inmates being sent in because of these drug laws. We would end the black market if we simply legalized it, and all the violence that goes along with the black market. I don't support drug abuse, but we don't outlaw alcohol today in spite of the fact that tons of people get killed every year from drunk drivers. The only thing we should outlaw is the sale of drugs to minors just like we have outlawed the sale of cigarettes to people under 18 and the sale of alcohol to people under 21.

Quote from: valjean on November 17, 2012, 01:11:03 PM
I don't think we should be sending people to prison for possessing or using drugs. All this does is put non-violent offenders in prison, prisons that need more and more of our tax dollars to accomodate the inmates being sent in because of these drug laws. We would end the black market if we simply legalized it, and all the violence that goes along with the black market. I don't support drug abuse, but we don't outlaw alcohol today in spite of the fact that tons of people get killed every year from drunk drivers. The only thing we should outlaw is the sale of drugs to minors just like we have outlawed the sale of cigarettes to people under 18 and the sale of alcohol to people under 21.

It's the way it always should have been.

Unfortunately, between republicans demonizing drugs and keeping the prices high, and democrats advocating dependency and irresponsible behavior, we have reached a point that the population has become so stupid, that a switch to legalization would be a nightmare.

We never should have deviated from the path that the individual is fully responsible for their own actions............along with the consequences.

We have allowed our government to herd us into a corral in which our personal decisions no longer matter.

Quote from: kramarat on November 17, 2012, 01:25:57 PM
It's the way it always should have been.

Unfortunately, between republicans demonizing drugs and keeping the prices high, and democrats advocating dependency and irresponsible behavior, we have reached a point that the population has become so stupid, that a switch to legalization would be a nightmare.

We never should have deviated from the path that the individual is fully responsible for their own actions............along with the consequences.

We have allowed our government to herd us into a corral in which our personal decisions no longer matter.

There is a quote, often attributed to Lincoln, which says that, "The government which protects its populace from all adversity will eventually rule a nation of idiots!"

Or words to that effect...

Quote from: Darth Fife on November 17, 2012, 01:29:11 PM


There is a quote, often attributed to Lincoln, which says that, "The government which protects its populace from all adversity will eventually rule a nation of idiots!"

Or words to that effect...

Brilliant!

AKA- How a promising country became entangled in their own expanding safety net...........and perished from stupidity.

Quote from: kramarat on November 17, 2012, 01:25:57 PM
It's the way it always should have been.

Unfortunately, between republicans demonizing drugs and keeping the prices high, and democrats advocating dependency and irresponsible behavior, we have reached a point that the population has become so stupid, that a switch to legalization would be a nightmare.

We never should have deviated from the path that the individual is fully responsible for their own actions............along with the consequences.

We have allowed our government to herd us into a corral in which our personal decisions no longer matter.

Couldn't agree more. My ONLY trepidation here is that while I am afraid of a nation of idiots, I am more afraid of a nation of idiot stoners. But in principle I stand by my position, it does more institutional harm than good to keep drugs illegal, but the societal problems will come up at least initially if there is full legalization. But as is, I have more faith in society to fix itself than for government to fix itself from the inside. For example society can recognize alcohol abuse and start alcoholics anonymous, and anti drunk driving campaigns, government "fixes" the problem by banning alcohol and this gives birth to an age of gangsters and bootleggers.

Quote from: valjean on November 17, 2012, 01:47:27 PM
Couldn't agree more. My ONLY trepidation here is that while I am afraid of a nation of idiots, I am more afraid of a nation of idiot stoners. But in principle I stand by my position, it does more institutional harm than good to keep drugs illegal, but the societal problems will come up at least initially if there is full legalization. But as is, I have more faith in society to fix itself than for government to fix itself from the inside. For example society can recognize alcohol abuse and start alcoholics anonymous, and anti drunk driving campaigns, government "fixes" the problem by banning alcohol and this gives birth to an age of gangsters and bootleggers.

Everybody that wants to use drugs is already doing them. While full legalization would be a nightmare, it would be short lived. Crack is no longer popular because it truly screws people up and eventually kills them. It is not due to any government intervention. People just don't feel like dying.

I've always felt all of this should have been a states rights issue.
Utah has no drinking laws, Nevada legalized gambling and prostitution, Colorado just legalized weed.
Let those that want to do these things move to states that allow it, while allowing others to move to states that prohibit it, but the Fed should be out of it altogether.

Point is, if a few states pass laws legalizing poor behavior, they will suffer the consequences.
Apparently we didn't learn the first time around, that these behaviors destroy society, which is why people wanted prohibitions on them in the first place.

But let the people of the states decide how to deal with it, what one state wants, another may not, same for abortion, but to force everyone into one room subjecting them to behaviors they can't move away from is just wrong.

Quote from: Solar on November 17, 2012, 04:41:20 PM
I've always felt all of this should have been a states rights issue.
Utah has no drinking laws, Nevada legalized gambling and prostitution, Colorado just legalized weed.
Let those that want to do these things move to states that allow it, while allowing others to move to states that prohibit it, but the Fed should be out of it altogether.

Point is, if a few states pass laws legalizing poor behavior, they will suffer the consequences.
Apparently we didn't learn the first time around, that these behaviors destroy society, which is why people wanted prohibitions on them in the first place.

But let the people of the states decide how to deal with it, what one state wants, another may not, same for abortion, but to force everyone into one room subjecting them to behaviors they can't move away from is just wrong.

I agree.

The legalization of prostitution in Nevada didn't lead to every husband all of a sudden thinking that it was okay to cheat on their wives. I tend to think it would go the same way with drugs. People that have brains, are individuals. They don't depend on government to set their moral compasses for them.

Whether they are screwing whores or shooting heroin, I think that people inherently know the difference between right and wrong. It's not something that the government can determine for us.

They could legalize all drugs and prostitution tomorrow, and it would have zero impact on my personal behavior. But that's just me.

As a PATRIOTIC American I say drugs ae a foreign plot to destroy the country as most of them come in from other countries and fuel rebel/communist/terrorist and criminal empires...Marijuana included.

Billy

Quote from: BILLY Defiant on November 17, 2012, 04:55:33 PM
As a PATRIOTIC American I say drugs ae a foreign plot to destroy the country as most of them come in from other countries and fuel rebel/communist/terrorist and criminal empires...Marijuana included.

Billy

Cute idea, but I think we have just proven to the world that we don't require foreign plots. We are more than happy to vote for self destruction. :sad:

Quote from: kramarat on November 17, 2012, 04:59:44 PM
Cute idea, but I think we have just proven to the world that we don't require foreign plots. We are more than happy to vote for self destruction. :sad:

The foreign plot which began 50 years ago has worked, perpetuating it
for the benefit of those I already mentioned just shows the stupidity of the American people....it seems we need to be dependant on something...welfare, the Govt.... food stamps.... dope

Billy

Don't forget..... America also has a drinking problem....... Alcoholics anonymous.....
Alcoholic beverages.
Alcohol-related car crashes are the number one killer of young adults in the United States But it's ok, each state should make their own laws on how to deal with young adults in the United States killing themselves by drinking alcoholic beverages.

Quote from: BILLY Defiant on November 17, 2012, 04:55:33 PM
As a PATRIOTIC American I say drugs ae a foreign plot to destroy the country as most of them come in from other countries and fuel rebel/communist/terrorist and criminal empires...Marijuana included.

Billy

I agree Billy and the Congressional Record,1963 Communist Goals is proof of that plan.

Quote from: kramarat on November 17, 2012, 04:59:44 PM
Cute idea, but I think we have just proven to the world that we don't require foreign plots. We are more than happy to vote for self destruction. :sad:

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :cry:

Quote from: kramarat on November 17, 2012, 04:55:14 PM
I agree.

The legalization of prostitution in Nevada didn't lead to every husband all of a sudden thinking that it was okay to cheat on their wives. I tend to think it would go the same way with drugs. People that have brains, are individuals. They don't depend on government to set their moral compasses for them.

Whether they are screwing whores or shooting heroin, I think that people inherently know the difference between right and wrong. It's not something that the government can determine for us.

They could legalize all drugs and prostitution tomorrow, and it would have zero impact on my personal behavior. But that's just me.

Yeah, let the states that want it draw those that want to do drugs and give the rest of us another place to avoid them.
I'd move to Utah if Ca goes any further.
Hell, I may be moving anyway, now that the libs have a veto proof majority in our Legislature.
They plan on repealing prop 13 Jarvis Ghann initiative that prohibits increasing taxes on land owners.
If that happens, no one will stay here, it will be left full of leaches.

Quote from: Solar on November 17, 2012, 05:32:21 PM
Yeah, let the states that want it draw those that want to do drugs and give the rest of us another place to avoid them.
I'd move to Utah if Ca goes any further.
Hell, I may be moving anyway, now that the libs have a veto proof majority in our Legislature.
They plan on repealing prop 13 Jarvis Ghann initiative that prohibits increasing taxes on land owners.
If that happens, no one will stay here, it will be left full of leaches.

You're in deep doo doo out there brother. What nobody seems to be willing to talk about, is that only the rich can afford the lib policies. The rest will be crushed. The democrats are the party of the rich...................and I mean the mega rich, not the people that make $200K a year.

Quote from: kramarat on November 17, 2012, 05:39:55 PM
You're in deep doo doo out there brother. What nobody seems to be willing to talk about, is that only the rich can afford the lib policies. The rest will be crushed. The democrats are the party of the rich...................and I mean the mega rich, not the people that make $200K a year.

But but but...were the evil corporatist bastards the libs rail against :rolleyes:.

Amazing isn't it, how the libs can be so easily lead by the nose into believing working people that earn their own money and that of their investors are somehow the bad guys, when the really big money holders are the leftists in the country.

Quote from: Solar on November 17, 2012, 05:46:02 PM
But but but...were the evil corporatist bastards the libs rail against :rolleyes:.

Amazing isn't it, how the libs can be so easily lead by the nose into believing working people that earn their own money and that of their investors are somehow the bad guys, when the really big money holders are the leftists in the country.

If I could make $20 million for making a movie in 6 months, I would vote for a slight increase in my taxes too. Actually, that's a lie..........but you get the point. A person that has $60 million socked away isn't going to be as freaked out over a 50% tax rate, as a person that works every day for $200K a year.

It's time to change the narrative. It's time to paint the democrats as they really are.

Quote from: kramarat on November 17, 2012, 05:56:59 PM
If I could make $20 million for making a movie in 6 months, I would vote for a slight increase in my taxes too. Actually, that's a lie..........but you get the point. A person that has $60 million socked away isn't going to be as freaked out over a 50% tax rate, as a person that works every day for $200K a year.

It's time to change the narrative. It's time to paint the democrats as they really are.

I wonder why Libs always bring up CEOs of Wall street corporations and banks when they talk about salary caps, but never mention movie stars and Left wing writers?

I have much less of a problem with a corporate CEO getting a 7 or even 8 figure bonus for running a company which employes 10s of thousands of people and provides a product or service used by, perhaps millions of Americans, than I do for an "actor" who get paid the same amount for about 3 to 6 weeks of "work" pretending to be someone else by reading words other people have written for him/her.

Quote from: Darth Fife on November 17, 2012, 11:02:19 PM
I wonder why Libs always bring up CEOs of Wall street corporations and banks when they talk about salary caps, but never mention movie stars and Left wing writers?

I have much less of a problem with a corporate CEO getting a 7 or even 8 figure bonus for running a company which employes 10s of thousands of people and provides a product or service used by, perhaps millions of Americans, than I do for an "actor" who get paid the same amount for about 3 to 6 weeks of "work" pretending to be someone else by reading words other people have written for him/her.

That and they can't even dance or sing.   :popcorn:

Quote from: Darth Fife on November 17, 2012, 11:02:19 PM
I wonder why Libs always bring up CEOs of Wall street corporations and banks when they talk about salary caps, but never mention movie stars and Left wing writers?

I have much less of a problem with a corporate CEO getting a 7 or even 8 figure bonus for running a company which employes 10s of thousands of people and provides a product or service used by, perhaps millions of Americans, than I do for an "actor" who get paid the same amount for about 3 to 6 weeks of "work" pretending to be someone else by reading words other people have written for him/her.

Libs don't like people that work hard.

The only problem I have with actors is their hypocracy. They're sitting on piles of money, (probably offshore), and spew the lib crap that rich people and corporations are bad. :cursing:

Other than that............this is America. Everybody should be able to go out and make as much money as they can honestly earn. The sky is the limit. This new "hate the rich" mantra is an obamanation.

I want it to be legal for several reason:
1. Giving the consenting adults the freedom to choose what to smoke it or not with out fear of censore
2. Another taxed stream
3. Eliminates a cash stream for scum bag criminals

Quote from: RevStan on November 16, 2012, 10:08:50 PM
Some states seem to defy washington on the rules on marijauna. I am just asking where you stand as a patriotic american.

You consistently misspelled "marijuana."

But lets be fair talking about the wealthy.
I have always hated the term 'job creator'. It was very effective in classing all rich as the only job creators. Which is complete bull. What about small business owners and the like. and if they loss another red sent then they would threat the people with 'uncertainty' which would mean they would not create more jobs. Manipulation like that really grinds my gears.

Also the name was used to soften up voters to more tax cuts for the ultra rich.

So to them I'll tell you what I was told at the bar last 'I think you've had enough'.  :drool:

Which is a fair assessment in my mind.

Quote from: Stanthemilkman on November 04, 2013, 10:56:20 PM
But lets be fair talking about the wealthy.
I have always hated the term 'job creator'. It was very effective in classing all rich as the only job creators. Which is complete bull. What about small business owners and the like. and if they loss another red sent then they would threat the people with 'uncertainty' which would mean they would not create more jobs. Manipulation like that really grinds my gears.

Also the name was used to soften up voters to more tax cuts for the ultra rich.

So to them I'll tell you what I was told at the bar last 'I think you've had enough'.  :drool:

Which is a fair assessment in my mind.

I'm thinking maybe you'd had enough before you started typing this foolishness.

I'm not going to waste my time putting up graphs and charts -- there are plenty on this board and elsewhere you can consult to get a grip on who actually pays taxes in the United States. More to the point, I think, is the fact that nearly half of all "taxpayers" aren't taxpayers at all. They either pay nothing whatsoever, or get a "refund" of taxes never paid in the first place.

No, of course the "rich" aren't the only job creators. Who ever said they were? The source of uncertainty in the job market is not those doing the hiring -- it's those doing the governing. The hiring class can ALWAYS be depended upon to hire when business is good, to fire when business is bad, and to hesitate when things are clouded in uncertainty -- almost always by the government.

Oh, and it's "red cent," not "red sent." Pennies are cents. Before you make pronouncements on the manipulations practiced by the "rich," you might want to learn to manipulate the English language with a bit more skill.

Quote from: TboneAgain on November 05, 2013, 03:36:36 AM
I'm thinking maybe you'd had enough before you started typing this foolishness.

I'm not going to waste my time putting up graphs and charts -- there are plenty on this board and elsewhere you can consult to get a grip on who actually pays taxes in the United States. More to the point, I think, is the fact that nearly half of all "taxpayers" aren't taxpayers at all. They either pay nothing whatsoever, or get a "refund" of taxes never paid in the first place.

No, of course the "rich" aren't the only job creators. Who ever said they were? The source of uncertainty in the job market is not those doing the hiring -- it's those doing the governing. The hiring class can ALWAYS be depended upon to hire when business is good, to fire when business is bad, and to hesitate when things are clouded in uncertainty -- almost always by the government.

Oh, and it's "red cent," not "red sent." Pennies are cents. Before you make pronouncements on the manipulations practiced by the "rich," you might want to learn to manipulate the English language with a bit more skill.

You're right T, the job creators, which includes the anyone with drive (I started my solar Co. with $9. to my name, spent half starting the company) but like you pointed out, it has everything to do with the Govt climate, is the Govt creating a friendly climate, or worse, making it to where business has to cut full time workers to part time?

This is the worst climate in American history, the Dims have created an anti capitalist cloud over industry, from killing off parts of our energy sector, to severely interfering with food production via EPA.

If I was starting a business today, I'd move to another country, this one is hamstringing entrepreneurship.

Hey hey it was a simple typo. No need to attack my entire grasp of the English language. It is quite firm I assure you.



I know that half of people do not pay federal income tax. It's a huge number and a problem. So why are half of the people not paying federal income tax? That should be the question you should ask yourself.

Quote from: Stanthemilkman on November 07, 2013, 04:38:41 AM
Hey hey it was a simple typo. No need to attack my entire grasp of the English language. It is quite firm I assure you.



I know that half of people do not pay federal income tax. It's a huge number and a problem. So why are half of the people not paying federal income tax? That should be the question you should ask yourself.

Stan, please use the quote function.

Quote from: Stanthemilkman on November 07, 2013, 04:38:41 AM
Hey hey it was a simple typo. No need to attack my entire grasp of the English language. It is quite firm I assure you.



I know that half of people do not pay federal income tax. It's a huge number and a problem. So why are half of the people not paying federal income tax? That should be the question you should ask yourself.

I'll let the typo slide, but I'm not sure I should be asking myself why half of the folks don't pay taxes. I'm pretty sure I already know why half the folks don't pay taxes. It's because we have a whopper-jawed tax system designed by lib/progs, the very folks who passed the original IRS legislation in 1913 and expanded it during the Great Depression. There is a large faction in our government -- most of whom have a (D) after their names -- who have found that literally buying the votes of the dependent class with the money of the actual productive class is their stairway to Heaven.

My position is simple. You no pay taxes, you no vote.

Quote from: BILLY Defiant on November 17, 2012, 04:55:33 PM
As a PATRIOTIC American I say drugs ae a foreign plot to destroy the country as most of them come in from other countries and fuel rebel/communist/terrorist and criminal empires...Marijuana included.

Billy

At least in Michigan, the evidence suggests that LEGAL growers of medical mary-hootchie are not making enough profit to benefit any gangs, much less themselves.

I've been researching the issue, and two legal growers I've interviewed say they do not make their costs back on the few legal patients they are allowed. Once the state gets into taxing it and making it available in controlled substances stores like they SHOULD be doing with all booze, costs may go even higher for grower and end-user buyer alike.

The interesting part is whether Ocommiecare will allow IRS deductions as medicine.

Quote from: Stanthemilkman on November 07, 2013, 04:38:41 AM
Hey hey it was a simple typo. No need to attack my entire grasp of the English language. It is quite firm I assure you.

I pointed out you were consistently wrong. It weakens your position. Had I been actually attacking you, you would need tourniquets.

QuoteI know that half of people do not pay federal income tax. It's a huge number and a problem. So why are half of the people not paying federal income tax? That should be the question you should ask yourself.

Why? Democrats paid off their dependents.