Republicans: Don't give up on 'W' now! {Henry Lamb}

WorldNetDaily / Commentary ^ | Posted: January 31, 2004 | Henry Lamb

[sauropod]

Mebbe, jus mebbe W. and Cheney don't know how to debate real well?

Still, your answer is no excuse for not knowing WTF is going on Austin.

[Mike4Freedom]

No, there is no right to get high and endanger other people's lives. What perverted view of "freedom."

Thus you must support another try at alcohol prohibition. Nothing less would be logically consistent. Alcohol intoxication makes you very dangerous to others if you are so foolish as to drive but probably does no harm if you do so in the confines of your home. Long run health effects make alcohol much more dangerous on many counts. Short run health effects again make alcohol much more dangerous. You can actually consume a lethal dose of alcohol (or Heroine, cocainc, etc) at one sitting. That is not possible with MJ. No lethal dose has been identified since no one, in all history, has ever died of an overdose of marijuana.

Most substances are dangerous in some large dose and useful in lesser doses. It is just NOT the business of government to make mere possession or responsible use of some, politically selected, substances a crime since no one is hurt.

[HankReardon]

Yeah, I agree, you see, in hindsight I'm wiser now. Do you really think when your father voted for Perot he did not want him to win, he just wanted to "send a message"? Conservatives voting for a 3rd party candidate brough death and destruction to America.

[sauropod]

Yeah, I agree, you see, in hindsight I'm wiser now. Do you really think when your father voted for Perot he did not want him to win, he just wanted to "send a message"? Conservatives voting for a 3rd party candidate brough death and destruction to America.

I don't think he had thought it through to that point.

BTW, I do not agree w/ your last sentence. That leaves no room for adhering to principles. That leaves us no better than them.

[HankReardon]

When the threat against America is immenent, it's too late. After 9-11, any nation that proclaims itself the enemy of the USA and wishes Americans any kind of harm should be taken at their word and dealt with.

[HankReardon]

What's there not to agree with? The Clinton presidency brought politicization the intelligence agencies, would not allow info to be gathered from criminally associated sources, they did not take the terrorist threat as seriously as they should have, treated attacks as a criminal acts that needed to be addressed as such. Death and destruction, the attacks of 9-11 happened to America because Clinton was President. Clinton was President because many of us voted for the 3rd party candidate, Perot.

[Piquaboy]

The best men for that job don't want anything to do with it.

[HankReardon]

It is unimaginable that Saddam would pass off chemical or biological weapons to terrorists and they put them into a container on a ship bound for New York harbor! Unimaginable! It was also unimaginable that terrorists would fly commercial arliners into the WTO, the Pentagon and where ever else the other one was headed. There's not a thing wrong with president Bush sending the miltary in to take Saddam out, it is NOT proven everyday.

[Austin Willard Wright]

Mother Ayn would be dismayed at your failure to address my questions head on and your failure to check your premises. I never said that these things were "unimaginable." You are arguing with a straw man.