Police return seized pot

The Tribune (San Luis Obispo, CA) ^ | Jan. 04, 2003 | Patrick S. Pemberton

[jmc813]

mmmmmmmmmm.....cannabis rolled pork tenderloin</Homer Simpson voice>

[Dane]

Stoners would go nuts not being able to afford satisfy to their munchies.

And not to mention keeping the potato chip vending machine people in business forever, as the typical Libertarian arguement goes.

[Mr. Mojo]

My candidates, all pro-life and somewhat conservative, won.

Mine too.

It never ceases to amaze how so many here on FR (who should be educated enough to know better) assume that everyone who advocates decrimminalization is a leftist.

[jmc813]

Just out of curiosity, what were your political leanings up until 1987? Did you have libertarian leanings that disappeared after you quit smoking?

[Mr. Mojo]

Have you noticed that the major voices advocating decrimminalization come from the GOP (and conservatives in general), and not the Rats.

George Schutlz, William F. Buckley, Ron Paul (R-TX), GOP Governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson, Bill O'Reilly, Thomas Sowell, Milton Friedman, Walter Williams .....and the list goes on.

[ApesForEvolution]

"Were your candidates pro pot just like Ronald and Nancy Reagan?(/sarcasm)"

There you go again. I don't know about Sen. Coleman, but I'll ask him. /sarcasm

[ApesForEvolution]

"That doesn't surprise me at all. Being homeless and broke doesn't go with pot smoking very well. Stoners would go nuts not being able to afford satisfy to their munchies. Alcohol is both a sedative AND food."

You'd be surprised how much cash these guys manage to go through. All on alcohol...and then we feed them, give them shelter and prayer. Wouldn't trade it for any amount of anything though.

[ApesForEvolution]

"It never ceases to amaze how so many here on FR (who should be educated enough to know better) assume that everyone who advocates decrimminalization is a leftist."

What has disturbed me is that boozing is just fine, but forbid a hit or two. I haven't had a drop in over a decade nor a hit in over 3, but any fool would realize, I'm coming to believe, that illegal pot is probably quantifiably worse for society as a whole than legalization of marijuana. The money being spent and the tactics/invasiveness of the Gestapo in this losing war is mind boggling and not healthy for America. I've come a long way today!

[Mr. Mojo]

The money being spent and the tactics/invasiveness of the Gestapo in this losing war is mind boggling and not healthy for America.

Yep, and that is precisely why so many of the more rational minds desire an end to this war.

[Dane]

Have you noticed that the major voices advocating decrimminalization come from the GOP (and conservatives in general), and not the Rats

Ah yes the typical textbook Libertarian response.

George Schutlz, (a respected GOP warhorse who, IMO is wrong on this issue)

William F. Buckley(someone who writes a couple of articles on drug legalisation, when was the last one in 97 or so>)

Ron Paul (R-TX)(Libertarian Presidential cnadidate in 88, nuff said)

GOP Governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson(who handed New Mexico over to Monica hiring Bill Richardson in 2003)

Bill O'Reilly(the guy who thinks global warming is real)

Thomas Sowell(never saw an article where Prof. Sowell towed the pro-pot line)

Milton Friedman(He's an economist. Economist's are usually idealists looking for a perfect world, although I agree with Prof. Freidman on 90% of the issues, total drug legalization is not one of them)

Walter Williams(Another economist, again I usually agree with Prof. Williams 90% of the time and it was interesting that Prof. Williamas toned down some of his rhetoric during his recent stint for taking over for Rush)

.....and the list goes on

Go on with your fax from the LP. I am here to refute them.

[Mr. Mojo]

To be clear, although O'Reilly may very well advocate the de-crimminalization of pot, he's still a drug warrior of the first order.

[tacticalogic]

the 60's that pot has been an integral part of the leftist drug culture.

Oh well conviently forgetful minds are a trademark of the left. What else is new.

Yeah, I know. Hippies smoke pot, and hippies are liberals, therefore pot makes people liberals. Are we supposed to believe that substituting guilt by association for rational debate and objective logic is a trademark of the right? Good luck with that.

[tpaine]

Rye:

Nice attempt at a dodge, but I didn't pull the year 1987 out of thin air. (See your post #79). You probably smoked heavily up to that time, couldn't handle it (paranoia, delusions, etc), and then quit. My point was that only people with a natural tendency towards paranoia exhibit these symptoms when smoking ganja.

You've got our boy 'dane' pegged.
- It's the old addictive personality thing. Addicts, or potential addicts, become the biggest crusaders against substance abuse once they've got themselves under control.
It becomes their 'mission' to see that others are brought under the control they lacked.

Dane:
"Well just lock me up and throw away the key for speaking out against the Libertarian drug culture."

There is no such 'culture', -- save in your pitiful, fanatical mind.

[Mr. Mojo]

Ah yes the typical textbook Libertarian response.

#1) I'm a Republican, not a Libertarian.

#2) You failed to refute my main point, which was that the major political voices in favor of stopping the drug war happen to be conservative/republican.

Your attempts at dodges in this conversation have progressed from annoying to laughable.

[The Coopster]

But let's be perfectly frank here.....

The great majority of decriminalization proponents that I come across are in it so that they can get high. I am not saying that there are not a great many good things (or is that a good many great things?) both medical and non that are good about hemp/cannibis/pot. It's just that I see a lot more Phishheads than community leaders espousing it's virtues. It's really just a matter of marketing, and the right spokesperson (joke).

[Mr. Mojo]

It becomes their [addicts] 'mission' to see that others are brought under the control they lacked.

Right on the money, amigo.

[Dane]

Yeah, I know. Hippies smoke pot, and hippies are liberals, therefore pot makes people liberals

Huh probably 90% of pot smokers today are demorat supporters(you know all that demorat jazz that Pubbies are evil corporatists while they commune over the bong).

Show me statistics otherwise, and the .045% Harry Browne got is no cigar, excuse me "blunt", and maybe I will take you seriously.

[tpaine]

Rye
Have you noticed that the major voices advocating decrimminalization come from the GOP (and conservatives in general), and not the Rats
Ah yes the typical textbook Libertarian response.
George Schutlz, (a respected GOP warhorse who, IMO is wrong on this issue)
William F. Buckley(someone who writes a couple of articles on drug legalisation, when was the last one in 97 or so>)
Ron Paul (R-TX)(Libertarian Presidential cnadidate in 88, nuff said)
GOP Governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson(who handed New Mexico over to Monica hiring Bill Richardson in 2003)
Bill O'Reilly(the guy who thinks global warming is real)
Thomas Sowell(never saw an article where Prof. Sowell towed the pro-pot line)
Milton Friedman(He's an economist. Economist's are usually idealists looking for a perfect world, although I agree with Prof. Freidman on 90% of the issues, total drug legalization is not one of them)
Walter Williams(Another economist, again I usually agree with Prof. Williams 90% of the time and it was interesting that Prof. Williamas toned down some of his rhetoric during his recent stint for taking over for Rush)
.....and the list goes on
Go on with your fax from the LP. I am here to refute them.
130 -dane-

Can you refute this comment below , dane?

"There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that authorizes the federal government to wage war against the citizens of the United States, no matter how well-meaning the intent. The Bill of Rights means just as much today, as it did on the day it was written. And its protections are just as valid and just as important to freedom today, as they were to our Founders two hundred years ago. The danger of the drug war is that it erodes away those rights. Once the fourth amendment is meaningless, it's just that much easier to erode away the first and then the second, etc. Soon we'll have no rights at all.
" Jim Robinson, 5/9/01 155

[Dane]

Your attempts at dodges in this conversation have progressed from annoying to laughable

Huh the facts stated in reply #130 gets a laughable ad hominem.

Why am I not surprised.

[Mr. Mojo]

LOL...All you did in that abortion of a post (#130) was to say that you disagreed with all those conservatives/Republicans on the issue of the drug war. You didn't present any "facts."