Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Drug laws won't be on the fall ballot, but tobacco money will
Detroit Free Press ^ | September 11, 2002 | DAWSON BELL

Posted on 09/11/2002 4:55:57 AM PDT by VA Advogado

Edited on 05/07/2004 7:12:39 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

A carefully planned and well-financed campaign to overhaul Michigan's drug laws crashed Tuesday, as the state Supreme Court declined to place the issue before voters in November.

Without comment, the court upheld decisions issued last week by the Court of Appeals and a state elections panel to keep the drug question off the ballot.


(Excerpt) Read more at freep.com ...


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 361-377 next last
To: Hemingway's Ghost
Probably a good thing Finneran is a Dem but one probably more conservative then most of our electorate( hes certainly more conservative then Ted Kennedy or Barney Frank).
41 posted on 09/11/2002 5:44:45 AM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: VA Advogado
These billionare foreign drug pushers need to find a new hobby.

You're right. The CIA should stick to trafficking illegal drugs. They shouldn't corrupt or political system like this.

42 posted on 09/11/2002 5:49:01 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: weikel
Probably a good thing Finneran is a Dem but one probably more conservative then most of our electorate( hes certainly more conservative then Ted Kennedy or Barney Frank).

That still doesn't excuse his dictatorial actions. If the people are going to vote like idiots, thats their perogative. The moment we start "saving people from themselves", it becomes a socialist dictatorship. Yes, I know Taxachusetts is already a de facto socialist dictatorship, but we shouldn't encourage it to become de jure.
43 posted on 09/11/2002 5:50:20 AM PDT by WyldKard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Freeper 007
"Let the people vote. Is that such a horrible idea?"

Yes, if they are on drugs! :~)

44 posted on 09/11/2002 5:55:42 AM PDT by verity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: WyldKard
I will qualify my statment. I do not believe people have a right to vote themselves things that aren't theirs and I tend to think of right wing monarchies/dictatorships as good things because they keep the liberals among their populations in line thus protecting the productive citizens from the mob of looters. Democracy is good only when it makes good decisions( like the income tax repeal initive) but it has no inherent virtue over monarchy and in the end always leads to socialism. Without Finneran Taxachussetts would probably sink into another Dukasis disaster.
45 posted on 09/11/2002 5:56:35 AM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: WyldKard
And as Heinlein says voting is always an exercise of force to impose your will on society. No its not people perogative to vote like idiots because they ruin the lives of non idiots.
46 posted on 09/11/2002 5:59:04 AM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: WyldKard
Of course, when the good people of DC voted for medical marijuana TWICE . . .

. . . they proved that a sucker can be conned twice by the same grifter.

Arch-socialist George Soros wants to legalize dope. These are his initiatives. He is bankrolling them. Libertarians should ask themselves why. Hint: it has nothing to do with libertarianism and personal responsibility.

Legalizaing dope will not eliminate the horrific external costs associated with dope. It will merely repackage them and serve them up to taxpayers in another form. The "medicinal marijuana" con is one such repackaging. Before long we'll providing poor suffering dopers with supplemental social security and weed at taxpayer expense so they can spend their days stoned and voting for their socialist benefactors.

Soros has this figured out. Libertarians are in denial, too stupid, or uninformed about where this is all leading.

47 posted on 09/11/2002 6:06:14 AM PDT by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
Don't need a recount if there isn't any voting! No ballot stuffing. No hangin chads.
Clean, crisp ballot removal by those that know better.

(/sarcasm)

48 posted on 09/11/2002 6:06:29 AM PDT by JoeSixPack1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: VA Advogado
The campaign, largely financed by three wealthy businessmen including international financier George Soros(one of Hillary's best friends), spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to organize the effort

And the Libertarians will screech saying that drug validation is not a leftist issue when the proof is in the pudding or should I say bong.

49 posted on 09/11/2002 6:08:46 AM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladtx
Upside?

Tell that to Alberto

50 posted on 09/11/2002 6:10:57 AM PDT by Dead Corpse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: tahiti
Excellent point, obviously being ignored by those who can't see the forest for the trees. Being on the side of the Constitution on a legal/illegal drug thread, will bring instant condemnation through the use of that tired old accusation of "druggie". I know too many older individuals with a suitcase full of legal prescription drugs, that I wouldn't trust to vote, drive, interact with the human race, handle a gun, make a decision, and I venture to say, there are far more of them, than there are illegal drug users who are any worse.
51 posted on 09/11/2002 6:11:17 AM PDT by wita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
Legalizaing dope will not eliminate the horrific external costs associated with dope.

Lets see:

No longer spending $20 billion dollars a year (more if you include state efforts)

Reduction in crime when dealers are no longer shooting each other up for territory

Fewer OD's from people using tainted or impure product

Reduction in FedGov power

Constitutional rights restored

Far MORE resources freed up to fight terrorism, murder, theft, etc...

Additional revenue streams from sales of regulated products like pot. (I personally don't want coke and heroin sold like booze and cigs...)

Money retained in-Nation, and not flowing out to foreign sources.

There are all horrible things...to socialists like you, I imagine.

It will merely repackage them and serve them up to taxpayers in another form. The "medicinal marijuana" con is one such repackaging. Before long we'll providing poor suffering dopers with supplemental social security and weed at taxpayer expense so they can spend their days stoned and voting for their socialist benefactors.

Oh please...do we provide free alcohol to alcoholics now? Free cigarettes and caffine to THOSE addicts? Your tinfoil cap is on too tightly, Kevin!
52 posted on 09/11/2002 6:13:02 AM PDT by WyldKard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: weikel
And as Heinlein says voting is always an exercise of force to impose your will on society.

Exactly. Which is why the doper brigade is anxious to attain offical recognition as a suffering victim group. Their votes will then join the votes of other official helpless-victim groups who have clear access into your wallet and mine to alleviate their suffering.

"My hair hurts. I've got a prescription for weed. Give me some weed, the best sh*t you got. Charge it to Medicaid. While you're filling the prescription, I'll go get some munchies with my food stamps."

53 posted on 09/11/2002 6:13:05 AM PDT by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
Arch-socialist George Soros wants to legalize dope. These are his initiatives. He is bankrolling them. Libertarians should ask themselves why. Hint: it has nothing to do with libertarianism and personal responsibility.

Arch statists Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, and Ho Chi Minh supported the criminalization of drugs. War on Drugs supporters should ask themselves why. Hint: it has nothing to do with eradicating drug abuse.

54 posted on 09/11/2002 6:14:12 AM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Dane
And the Libertarians will screech saying that drug validation is not a leftist issue when the proof is in the pudding or should I say bong.

In your opinion, were Stalin, Mao, and Ho leftists?

55 posted on 09/11/2002 6:15:13 AM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: WyldKard
If you really think legalizing dope will eliminate ONE government job, prison cell, or agency, you are really dense or malinformed. It will simply create ANOTHER layer of bureaucracy--the doper-coddling rehab bureaucracy--to overlay the current one.
56 posted on 09/11/2002 6:15:42 AM PDT by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
Damn! Now you are against VOTING!?!

WTF is wrong with you Boy?

You also know damn well that libertarians want to dump the welfare state and remove the taxation power that feeds it.

How many times does it need to be said before it soaks into that fear riddled little brain of yours?

57 posted on 09/11/2002 6:17:54 AM PDT by Dead Corpse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
You seem to have a pretty good understanding of your associates. I suggest you get out of that world and into the world of reality.
58 posted on 09/11/2002 6:18:43 AM PDT by wita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
In your opinion, were Stalin, Mao, and Ho leftists?

And who had the pictures of the three above in their dorm rooms during Vietnam while smoking their joints.

Hillary, Abbie Hoffman, the weather underground, Bill Clinton, Jane Fonda etc. etc.

It was the dope smoking hippies who idolized Stalin, Mao, and Ho.

59 posted on 09/11/2002 6:19:05 AM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
If you really think legalizing dope will eliminate ONE government job, prison cell, or agency, you are really dense or malinformed. It will simply create ANOTHER layer of bureaucracy--the doper-coddling rehab bureaucracy--to overlay the current one.

Like we have a boozer-coddling rehab bureacracy now?

With even just pot legalized, most of the wind would be taken out of the sails of groups like the DEA. Thats 700,000 people a year not being arrested for simple possession. It may not close jails, but it will fill those extra cells up with murders, rapists and thieves.

Any social problems that could possibly occur can easily be handled by the massive influx of cash that ending the War on Drugs would bring.

Hell, I don't understand how you people can support a FEDERAL War on Drugs. If you were just for State Level Prohibition, I would understand. I can only assume you have some sort of overriding personal self-interest in keeping the corruption going...very sad.
60 posted on 09/11/2002 6:21:31 AM PDT by WyldKard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 361-377 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson