Posted on 09/16/2004 5:04:47 AM PDT by publius1
SOROS' $$ TOPPLES DA IN WAR OVER DRUGS By KENNETH LOVETT Post Correspondent September 16, 2004 -- ALBANY —
In an unusual infusion of big money into local upstate politics, billionaire George Soros poured cash into the Albany County district attorney's race — and engineered a stunning defeat of the incumbent because the DA supports the strict Rockefeller drug laws.
The Soros-founded Drug Policy Alliance Network — which favors repeal of the Rockefeller laws — contributed at least $81,500 to the Working Families Party, which turned around and supported the successful Democratic primary campaign of David Soares.
Trying to become Albany's first black DA, Soares on Tuesday unexpectedly trounced his former boss, incumbent Albany DA Paul Clyne, who has opposed changing the drug laws. The victory was overwhelming: Soares took 62 percent of the Democratic vote.
"This was more than a local race, that's what the [Soros] funding shows," said Assemblyman John McEneny, who supported the challenger's candidacy.
Soros, an international financier and philanthropist who says he is dedicating his life to defeating President Bush, favors legalizing some drugs.
Clyne backers claim that the Working Families Party, using the Soros money, illegally involved itself in the Democratic primary. They charge the Soros cash was used to target Democratic voters with mass mailings and phone calls labeling Clyne as the reason the drug laws were not reformed, as well as highlighting his anti-abortion stance.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
We're trying to ban murder, rape, and robbery now. Those bans aren't working either - consider how busy the criminal courts are with such cases. Should we abandon those bans too?
No religion says you must go on other's private property.
private property owner says not on my property.... Private property wins.
There is no right to go on anyone else's private property. It always wins. No matter who convoluted and bizarre you make these childish scenarios, they do not prove your point.
Rights do come into conflict and based on morality, legal precedent and history one wins.
No conflict exists
Wow, you're a glutton for punishment, considering the abject failure and dreadful side-effects of our last attempt to ban alcohol.
So in your mind it is OK for non-parrents to be stoned out of their minds?
It's none of government's business.
How about a crack baby?
Ever hear of fetal alcohol syndrome? Is it a good reason to ban alcohol? I say no.
And are crack babies a good reason to ban crack even for those who can't get pregnant, like f'rinstance men?
Ever tried to help an OD victim.
ODing is exactly the self-harm that's none of government's business.
Look at Ricky Williams [...] His decision has an impact on every one of his teammates. [...] Let us not forget the multitude of fans that he screwed.
So government should restrict his choices for their benefit? That's textbook socialism.
Not to mention the owners and employees of the Dolphins. They stand to lose millions. [...] It might also be mentioned that Rickey is also failing to live up to his contract.
So let them pursue their legal options. It's immoral to ban a substance for everyone because it leads some people to violate contracts.
OK. What about advertising directly without coordinating with the campaign?
Does the USSC striking down the VAWA mean that rape and domestic violence are now legal and condoned by the government?
Outside interference in local elections sure wasn't a problem when the Drug Czar was running around doing it, was it?
Maybe, or maybe not ... but certainly not 23 times more (and drug criminalization boosts prices by at least that much, as I have shown). So the net effect is less money spent on the user's drugs.
Well, we're not really banning recreational drugs -- we're just making the possession and/or sales of them illegal.
And that is working just fine.
63% of murder cases are solved (FBI stats); what percentage of drug sales do you think law enforcement even finds out about?
I guess it's OK when government spends our money to influence our vote, but not when individuals spend their own money.
In what way does that differ from a ban?
And that is working just fine.
How so?
(I'm not sure that's even possible.)
It's very possible. They may have gotten rid of them by now, but the last time I was at Monticello the garden had a nice crop.
I agree with the above statement. Congress does not have the power to regulate strictly intrastate commerce.
But, the courts have ruled that IF Congress is regulating interstate commerce, and IF intrastate commerce has a substantial effect on their regulatory efforts, THEN AND ONLY THEN may Congress regulate the intrastate trade.
Now, that makes perfect sense to me. Without that power, Congress' efforts to regulate interstate trade would be wasted.
Apples and oranges. I was comparing a prohibition of a drug to a prohibition of other drugs, not to a prohibition of violent crime.
So, in other words, it is your view that a state can make medical marijuana legal? (Not being flip, it is an honest question)
Come again? In what fantasyland do you live?
Which substances do you think fall into the latter category?
?
Legal marijuana at the "coffee" shops in Amsterdam is about the same price as illegal marijuana in the U.S.
Legal medical marijuana in Canada (really horrible stuff) is about the same price as illegal marijuana in the U.S.
Legal medical marijuana in California ... need I go on?
Needless to say, that marijuana is not even taxed. Add federal, state, local, city, county, etc. and you'll be lucky to pay the same amount.
It's not about price.
"If freedom ought not include the freedom to risk addiction, it seems clear that it also ought not include the freedom to risk death, so skydiving, rock climbing, etc. are right out.
"And since some currently illegal drugs (e.g., marijuana) are less addictive than alcohol, you'll doubtless be calling for either the legalization of those drugs or the criminalization of alcohol. Right?"
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.