So which Governor candidate is most pro-legalization? Tancredo

[rightwinger]

Tom Tancredo running as a 3rd party candidate is in favor of legalizing marijuana.

You can read the below article to see what Hickenlooper's and Maes comments are--but they are not as favorable to marijuana as Tom Tancredo.

I have been a Dan Maes fan--but have thrown the towel in on him--especially after this incidence of his resume claiming that he worked undercover with the Liberal Kansas FBI--and no one out there can verify this story.

Right now Tancredo is polling ahead of Dan Maes but he is still behind John Hickenlooper.

So my vote is going to go to the 3rd party candidate--Tom Tancredo for Governor.

Pot legalization: Rob Corry asks Dan Maes, Tom Tancredo, John Hickenlooper if they'll back it - Denver News - The Latest Word (http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2010/09/pot_legalization_rob_corry_asks_dan_maes_tom_tancr edo_john_hickenlooper_if_theyll_back_it.php)

[denverbear]

It looks like Tancredo is going to jump higher in the poll"s now the Hick is in trouble with using his position for personal gain by the property he owns in Park County...I would love to see Tanccredo as Gov. and unless something happens he has my vote for sure...he loves guns and wants to legalize marijane...what more can we ask for...ohhh he wants to better control immagration...yep he's da man.

[Zedleppelin]

I cant support anyone who makes statements such as we should send Obama back to Kenya.

[denverbear]

he's only saying what 50 pct of the population is saying and after he forced the too pricey health care on us it would not bother me if he left the country after selling us out big time.

[TheReleafCenter]

I cant support anyone who makes statements such as we should send Obama back to Kenya.

Wish I could personally rep this. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

Jake

[copobo]

Wish I could personally rep this. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

Jake

yup.

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Zedleppelin again."

[Zedleppelin]

he's only saying what 50 pct of the population is saying and after he forced the too pricey health care on us it would not bother me if he left the country after selling us out big time.

50 pct of FOX News viewers do not represent 50% of the population. Regardless of all that lets take a look at Tancredo when he served in Congress:

Voted YES to disallow states from making their own medical marijuana laws. (Jul 2006)

Voted YES on prohibiting needle exchange & medical marijuana in DC. (Oct 1999)

Now he says he's for medical marijuana, even though he voted against it, interesting.

Its his other issues I find more disturbing:


Voted NO on additional $10.2B for federal education & HHS projects. (Nov 2007)

Voted NO on $84 million in grants for Black and Hispanic colleges. (Mar 2006)

Voted YES on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror. (Nov 2001)

Voted NO on requiring states to test students. (May 2001)

Supports requiring schools to allow prayer. (Jan 2001)

Supports a Constitutional Amendment for school prayer. (May
1997)

Litmus test for judges: only appoint if theyâ??d overturn Roe. (Sep 2007)

We donâ??t need the Department of Education. (Dec 2007)

Voted YES on retroactive immunity for telecoms' warrantless surveillance. (Jun 2008)

Prosecute all adult pornography. (Sep 2007)

Voted NO on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons. (Jun 2000)

Voted YES on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime. (Jun 1999)

Voted YES on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. (Jul 2006)

Voted YES on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)

Voted YES on banning gay adoptions in DC. (Jul 1999)

Voted YES on restricting bankruptcy rules. (Jan 2004)

Voted NO on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Jan 2007)

Voted NO on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)

Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save motherâ??s life. (Oct 2003)

Voted YES on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)

Voted YES on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)

Voted NO on tax credits for renewable electricity, with PAYGO offsets. (Sep 2008)

Voted NO on tax incentives for energy production and conservation. (May 2008)

Voted NO on tax incentives for renewable energy. (Feb 2008)

Voted YES on speeding up approval of forest thinning projects. (Nov 2003)

Voted YES on deauthorizing "critical habitat" for endangered species. (Sep 2005)

Voted YES on restricting independent grassroots political committees. (Apr 2006)

Voted NO on campaign finance reform banning soft-money contributions. (Feb 2002)

Voted NO on giving mental health full equity with physical health. (Mar 2008)

Voted NO on Veto override: Extend SCHIP to cover 6M more kids. (Jan 2008)

Voted YES on denying non-emergency treatment for lack of Medicare co-pay. (Feb 2006)

Voted YES on banning physician-assisted suicide. (Oct 1999)

Voted YES on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant. (Sep 2006)

Voted YES on continuing intelligence gathering without civil oversight. (Apr 2006)

Voted YES on federalizing rules for driver licenses to hinder terrorists. (Feb 2005)

Allow assassination of terrorist leaders. (Jan 2001)

The rest of his voting record at Tom Tancredo on the Issues (http://www.ontheissues.org/Tom_Tancredo.htm)

[HighPopalorum]

I think it's great that Colorado Republicans have not one but two unelectable nutjobs on the ballot. Colorado voters choose the more moderate candidate in statewide elections, and neither Maes nor Tanc is remotely moderate. It doesn't help that they're running against the most popular man in the state who actually is a moderate.

[5280and420]

Tancredo is a freaking nutball lunatic.

[wkhey4]

Tancredo is a headcase. He makes main-stream repugnants look liberal. If the people of Colorado elect him we'll be the laughing stock of the country.

[cologrower420]

I think it's pretty hilarious to see the repubs right now. They never though maes would win, and now that they realize he's unelectable, tancredo got in the mix, and we're seeing the right attempt to discredit maes in order to get him to drop out.

It's like the repubs are attempting to get around the general election process by trying to get maes to withdraw so the repubs can decide their best candidate. They still deserve to lose, it's just hilarious to see this unfold.

[denverbear]

Zed I hear what you are saying about Tancredo but he is the only politician who is wanting to try to fix the immegration problem here in Colo to get more people back to work and to me he is worth looking at just for this reason.
I still think he will be better then hicup for sure.

[wkhey4]

A few quotes from Tommy
....
Now how many people in their heart of hearts in that community want to see the demise of this country? How many would cheer, not out loud maybe, but in their heart when things like 9/11 occur and I'll tell you; it's a majority among them.

I have to tell you that we are facing a situation, where if we don't control immigration, legal and illegal, we will eventually reach the point where it won't be what kind of a nation we are, balkanized or united, we will actually have to face the fact that we are no longer a nation at all.

The Republican Party looks at massive immigration, legal and illegal, as a source of cheap labor, satisfying a very important constituency.

Because the worst of all worlds is when you pretend like you have an immigration policy, you make coming into the United States without our permission illegal, and then you actually don't enforce it.

We strain to tell Americans and aliens in this country that there's nothing unique about America, nothing unique about American civilization, nothing that requires their allegiance, nothing of great value that they should sacrifice for.

You know, I'm a Republican, I'm a Conservative, I voted for George Bush.

President Obama poses a bigger threat to the country than the perpetrators of the worst terrorist act in the nation's history.

Look at what has happened to Miami. It has become a Third World country," he said. "You just pick it up and take it and move it someplace. You would never know you're in the United States of America. You would certainly say you're in a Third World country.

I suspect the pope's immigration comments may have less to do with spreading the gospel than they do about recruiting new members of the church,This isn't preaching; it is faith-based marketing.

[denverbear]

A few quotes from Tommy
....
Now how many people in their heart of hearts in that community want to see the demise of this country? How many would cheer, not out loud maybe, but in their heart when things like 9/11 occur and I'll tell you; it's a majority among them.

I have to tell you that we are facing a situation, where if we don't control immigration, legal and illegal, we will eventually reach the point where it won't be what kind of a nation we are, balkanized or united, we will actually have to face the fact that we are no longer a nation at all.

The Republican Party looks at massive immigration, legal and illegal, as a source of cheap labor, satisfying a very important constituency.

Because the worst of all worlds is when you pretend like you have an immigration policy, you make coming into the United States without our permission illegal, and then you actually don't enforce it.

We strain to tell Americans and aliens in this country that there's nothing unique about America, nothing unique about American civilization, nothing that requires their allegiance, nothing of great value that they should sacrifice for.

You know, I'm a Republican, I'm a Conservative, I voted for George Bush.

President Obama poses a bigger threat to the country than the perpetrators of the worst terrorist act in the nation's history.

Look at what has happened to Miami. It has become a Third World country," he said. "You just pick it up and take it and move it someplace. You would never know you're in the United States of America. You would certainly say you're in a Third World country.

I suspect the pope's immigration comments may have less to do with spreading the gospel than they do about recruiting new members of the church,This isn't preaching; it is faith-based marketing.


A whole lot of truth in here.

[5280and420]

President Obama poses a bigger threat to the country than the perpetrators of the worst terrorist act in the nation's history.
Talk about hyperbole. Stop listening to talk radio and watching Fox News and you may actually get some reality in your brain instead of being brainwashed by the Fear movement.

[SprngsCaregiver]

You guys do realize that the republicans & democrats are the same thing now, right? They all work for the bankers. Don't believe me? How about some ex-presidents then.?.


â??The central bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the Principles and form of our Constitution. I am an Enemy to all banks discounting bills or notes for anything but Coin. If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered.â?�

-Thomas Jefferson

â??Mischief springs from the power which the moneyed interest derives from a paper currency which they are able to control, from the multitude of corporations with exclusive privilegesâ?¦ which are employed altogether for their benefit.â?�

-Andrew Jackson

â??The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. The banking powers are more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. They denounce as public enemies all who question their methods or throw light upon their crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe. Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow. The money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed.â?�

-Abraham Lincoln

â??The government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency. Creating and issuing money is the supreme prerogative of government and is its greatest creative opportunity. Adopting these principles will save the taxpayers immense sums of interest and money will cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity.â?�

-Abraham Lincoln

(Lincoln later introduced the â??Greenbackâ?� which was to be used in place of money international bankers loaned the U.S. at incredible interest to finance the Civil War and subversively control the government. Soon after this move, Lincoln was assassinated, and the Greenback was mysteriously taken out of circulation.)

Kennedy had a similar fate when he introduced the silver certificate and tried to eliminate the bankers.

My point? Time to stop playing their little left right game and join together as 1.

[wkhey4]

You guys do realize that the republicans & democrats are the same thing now, right? They all work for the bankers. Don't believe me? How about some ex-presidents then.?.



Kennedy had a similar fate when he introduced the silver certificate and tried to eliminate the bankers.

My point? Time to stop playing their little left right game and join together as 1.

And how would you accomplish this ?

Yes you are right about they're mutual agenda but it's still a choice of lesser of two evils. This said choice is why most Americans are so fed up with the current system and why they give credence to organizations like the tea party. Sorry but they are a bunch of wackos. I'm all for a third or even a forth or fifth choice for us voters. I'm sick and tired of voting for the lesser of two evils but dam if I'll vote for some right wing, fear-mongering, bigoted, repressive, hypocritical republican candidate.

[SprngsCaregiver]

And how would you accomplish this ?

Yes you are right about they're mutual agenda but it's still a choice of lesser of two evils. This said choice is why most Americans are so fed up with the current system and why they give credence to organizations like the tea party. Sorry but they are a bunch of wackos. I'm all for a third or even a forth or fifth choice for us voters. I'm sick and tired of voting for the lesser of two evils but dam if I'll vote for some right wing, fear-mongering, bigoted, repressive, hypocritical republican candidate.

Reintroducing the treason charge to a bunch of these people would be a good start. We could start with the Rockefeller family and the Rothschild family. Henry Kissinger would be a good fit for a treason charge too. We pay WAY to much attention to the puppets, we should be looking at the puppet masters.

If we continue to play the little left right game and not hold these people accountable for their actions, we will be under a global government in no time.

[ThaiBuddhaMan]

<quickly runs for cover and grabs some foil to fashion a pyramid hat...>
;)

[5280and420]

we will be under a global government in no time.

There's that rational thinking I've come to love from the right... "be scared as hell or else!!! The worst is upon us!!!!" If 8 years of Bush's policies didn't cause a global meltdown, then.. hold on...

[ThaiBuddhaMan]

.... If 8 years of Bush's policies didn't cause a global meltdown, then.. hold on...

But wait! This past summer was one of the hottest in recorded history, soooo.....
;)

[SprngsCaregiver]

There's that rational thinking I've come to love from the right... "be scared as hell or else!!! The worst is upon us!!!!" If 8 years of Bush's policies didn't cause a global meltdown, then.. hold on...

I'm a registered Democrat. How do you like me now? :D Nice ASSumption though.

Just because you don't want to recognize certain things doesn't mean they aren't happening. Do a little research instead of believing everything you see on MSNBC or FOX.

[rightwinger]

I cant support anyone who makes statements such as we should send Obama back to Kenya.


Well after him spending 3 TRILLION dollars in the last 20 months to try and micro-manage this economy--maybe we should buy him a plane ticket--LOL.

[copobo]

that's all spin. here's a good article from last week. The stimulus may break even or even turn a profit. The politicians don't know what to do - blame it on the other side or take credit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/01/business/01tarp.html

9/30/2010
TARP Bailout to Cost Less Than Once Anticipated
By JACKIE CALMES
WASHINGTON â?? Even as voters rage and candidates put up ads against government bailouts, the reviled mother of them all â?? the $700 billion lifeline to banks, insurance and auto companies â?? will expire after Sunday at a fraction of that cost, and could conceivably earn taxpayers a profit.

A final accounting of the governmentâ??s full range of interventions in the economy, including the bailouts of the mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is years off and will most likely remain controversial and potentially costly.

But the once-unthinkable possibility that the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program could end up costing far less, or even nothing, became more likely on Thursday with the news that the government had negotiated a plan with the American International Group to begin repaying taxpayers.

The rescue of the troubled insurer included $70 billion from the bailout program that was enacted two years ago, at the height of the global financial crisis late in the Bush administration, initially to prop up big banks.

At the White House on Thursday, the Treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner, briefed President Obama about A.I.G. and about the broader outlook for the expiring rescue program, putting the projected losses at less than $50 billion, at most. Yet neither the White House nor Congressional Democrats are likely to boast much in the month remaining before midterm elections. For most voters, TARP remains a four-letter word.

Brian A. Bethune, the chief financial economist in the United States for IHS/Global Insight, while critical of parts, called the program over all â??a tremendous success. Now obviously, they canâ??t go out on the campaign trail and say that, because certainly, for a lot of voters, itâ??s just not going to resonate.â?�

The â??bank bailoutâ?� was the first big issue, before the Obama administrationâ??s roughly $800 billion stimulus plan and its health insurance overhaul, to stoke the rise of the Tea Party movement. After supporting TARP, several Republicans have lost elections largely because of their votes. For many Americans, TARP is more than a vote; it is a symbol of big government at its worst, intervening in private markets with taxpayersâ?? billions to save Wall Street plutocrats while average Americans struggle through the recession those financiers spawned.

Fewer than three in 10 Americans say they believe the program was necessary â??to prevent the financial industry from failing and drastically hurting the U.S. economy,â?� according to a poll in July for Bloomberg News.

â??This is the best federal program of any real size to be despised by the public like this,â?� said Douglas J. Elliott, a former investment banker now associated with the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank.

â??It was probably the only effective method available to us to keep from having a financial meltdown much worse than we actually had. Had that happened, unemployment would be substantially higher than it is now, the deficit would have gone up even more than it has,â?� Mr. Elliott added. â??But it really cuts against the grain for a public that is so angry at banks to think that something that so plainly helped the banks could also be good for the public.â?�

After Sunday the Treasury can no longer commit money to new initiatives or recycle repayments to other purposes.

The Treasury never tapped the full $700 billion. It committed $470 billion and has disbursed $387 billion, mostly to hundreds of banks and later to A.I.G., the car industry â?? Chrysler, General Motors, the G.M. financing company and suppliers â?? and to what is, so far, a failed effort to help homeowners avoid foreclosures.

When Mr. Obama took office, the financial system remained so weak that his first budget indicated the Treasury might need another $750 billion for TARP. The administration soon dropped that idea as Mr. Geithner overhauled the rescue program and the banking system stabilized. Still, by mid-2009, the administration projected that TARP could lose $341 billion, a figure that reflected new commitments to A.I.G. and the auto industry.

The Congressional Budget Office, which had a slightly higher loss estimate initially, in August reduced that to $66 billion.

Now Treasury reckons that taxpayers will lose less than $50 billion at worst, but at best could break even or even make money. Its best-case assumptions, however, assume that A.I.G. and the auto companies will remain profitable and that Treasury will get a good price as it sells its corporate shares in coming years.

â??Weâ??d have to be very lucky to have both A.I.G. and the auto companies pay us back in full,â?� Mr. Elliott said.

Also, the best result for taxpayers could mean bad results for squeezed homeowners. Treasury has been ready to use up to $50 billion to help modify mortgages for people facing foreclosure, but its initiatives have been such a failure that little has been spent.

Whatever the final losses from housing, auto companies, A.I.G. or smaller banks, those will be offset by taxpayersâ?? profits from the big banks that have been the focus of their ire since 2008.

They have repaid their loans and Treasury has collected about $25 billion more from dividends and proceeds from the sale of warrants held as collateral, officials say. Many smaller banks hold on to their loans, however, reflecting their weakness and the desire of some others to keep the money given its advantageous terms. Scores are behind on dividend payments to the Treasury.

By any measure, TARPâ??s final tally will be less than expected amid the crisis. But the program remains a big loser politically.

On Wednesday, four days before its expiration, House Republicans nonetheless unsuccessfully forced a vote on legislation to end TARP. â??We would be much better served if private institutions would either fail or be successful on their own,â?� said Representative Erik Paulsen of Minnesota, in an interview.

Among those who voted for the program in 2008, several Republicans have lost nominating contests for re-election or for another office, and others are on the defensive in fall races.

Senator Robert F. Bennett of Utah was â??Bailout Bobâ?� to Republicans who refused to re-nominate him for a fourth term.

â??For those who were screaming at me â?? and screaming was the operative word â?? â??Youâ??ve just saddled our children and grandchildren with $700 billion,â?? I said, â??No, I havenâ??t,â?� Mr. Bennett said in an interview.

â??My career is over,â?� he added. â??But I do hope that we can get the word out that TARP, number one, did save the world from a financial meltdown and, number two, did so in a manner that, I believe, wonâ??t cost the taxpayer anything. And even if it did not all get paid back, it was still the thing to do.â?�

[rightwinger]

he's only saying what 50 pct of the population is saying and after he forced the too pricey health care on us it would not bother me if he left the country after selling us out big time.

Ditto--the "most" transperant adminstration in history--turned out to be the "buy your vote policy of"--of course behind closed doors.

1. The Union deal--where non-union workers paid taxes on their health care benefits 5 years before a union worker did--which UNION also includes government workers.
2. The Louisiana purchase.
3. The Gator-Aid deal--where seniors in Florida have no reductions in their medicare cost--but the rest of the nation does.
4. The Corn-Husker deal--Nebraska who was so embarrased they chased their senator out of a Pizza parlour over it--LOL

Yep--this is the "Hope and Change" we all wanted--lol

[Zedleppelin]

Ditto--the "most" transperant adminstration in history--turned out to be the "buy your vote policy of"--of course behind closed doors.

1. The Union deal--where non-union workers paid taxes on their health care benefits 5 years before a union worker did--which UNION also includes government workers.
2. The Louisiana purchase.
3. The Gator-Aid deal--where seniors in Florida have no reductions in their medicare cost--but the rest of the nation does.
4. The Corn-Husker deal--Nebraska who was so embarrased they chased their senator out of a Pizza parlour over it--LOL

Yep--this is the "Hope and Change" we all wanted--lol


Sure beats lying to Congress and the public to invade a country for the sole purpose to make your oil friends rich, don't ya think?

[Reenster]

For me the situation in our political arena is crystal clear. Unless we as a citizenship demand campaign reform for all levels of elected officials nothing will change.

Democrats and Republicans are the same because they are all bought and sold by those that put them in office. The major concern of most elected officials is to stay in office, this takes campaigning and campaigning cost lots and lots of money. We all know how they get all this cash and what they give in return. It's about who has the deepest pockets, if an individual does not have huge financial assets they will not be able to compete with millions and millions of dollars in advertising ads, few will hear their name, know their platform or know they exist.

The fact that contributions to political campaigns can be anonymous is inconceivable, the fact that they can be from foreign interest makes it frighting. I do not understand why it was an out of state organization that put the offensive pamphlet on my door in support of Amendment 63. I was appalled that someone but a picture of an aborted fetus on my door step. I guess the fact it had a christian cross on the photo makes it okay.

Unless we remove the ability of special interests to purchase our elected officials nothing will change. We will hear what we want from them while campaigning and then they will really only represent the interests of the money that got them elected.

[donniedorko]

62 is the abortion one, 63 is the health care thing from the Independence Institute.

Although, really, to me the fact that we have sooooo many constitutional amendments in Colorado is part of the problem. It's nice that citizens have the ability to change things independent of the legislature, but come on. Half the reason our budget is so messed up is because we have things that should be laws stuck in our constitution. Should be easy to change laws, extremely difficult to change the constitution.

[ds0110]

Republicans and democrats work for the same people. Foreign banks. These issues like abortion, immigration, gay marriage, and gun control are what I like to call "wedge issues", meant to divide and conquer the people. As long as the people are divided enough, they will never choose someone who is in a 3rd party...someone who is out of the control of the foreign bankers.

This forum is a perfect example. You have a candidate that is openly willing to do what everyone in the cannabis scene wants. We finally have a chance to legalize, and you people wont let it happen, because you are distracted by these wedge issues the establishment likes to throw around, for this very reason. This is a mmj forum, the #1 issue in this election is who is most mmj friendly and the answer is BY FAR....tancredo. None of his other politics matter enough for you people to be saying "dont legalize it now"..."lets wait another lifetime for a chance at legalization".

The biggest difference I can see between the two is that hickenlooper is and always will work for the man. He is a member of this single party false democracy we have, and tancredo is not. Tancredo at least claims to work for the constitution, and is not in the bankers democrat/republican parties.

"i could never vote to legalize mj bc the guy that wants to said something mean about my buddy, barry "barrack huisen obama" soetoro years ago"....give me a break. No candidate will ever be perfect, and you will disagree with something every candidate has to say, no matter what their stance. Im not gay, not in the military, im not going to have an abortion, but I do smoke mj....so im going to vote for the important issue. The one ive been waiting half my life to vote on, the issue thats actually going to effect me.

Vote for the constitution and the people, not for banker cartels and the establishment. If people REALLY wanted true change, then they would vote for a 3rd party for the first time in how many years?? "change" coming from a republican or democrat is just a lie geared towards getting voters....nothing will ever change with either republican or democrat running things.

Vote for legalization, not for regulation. Its as simple as that.

[Zedleppelin]

Republicans and democrats work for the same people. Foreign banks. These issues like abortion, immigration, gay marriage, and gun control are what I like to call "wedge issues", meant to divide and conquer the people. As long as the people are divided enough, they will never choose someone who is in a 3rd party...someone who is out of the control of the foreign bankers.

This forum is a perfect example. You have a candidate that is openly willing to do what everyone in the cannabis scene wants. We finally have a chance to legalize, and you people wont let it happen, because you are distracted by these wedge issues the establishment likes to throw around, for this very reason. This is a mmj forum, the #1 issue in this election is who is most mmj friendly and the answer is BY FAR....tancredo. None of his other politics matter enough for you people to be saying "dont legalize it now"..."lets wait another lifetime for a chance at legalization".

The biggest difference I can see between the two is that hickenlooper is and always will work for the man. He is a member of this single party false democracy we have, and tancredo is not. Tancredo at least claims to work for the constitution, and is not in the bankers democrat/republican parties.

"i could never vote to legalize mj bc the guy that wants to said something mean about my buddy, barry "barrack huisen obama" soetoro years ago"....give me a break. No candidate will ever be perfect, and you will disagree with something every candidate has to say, no matter what their stance. Im not gay, not in the military, im not going to have an abortion, but I do smoke mj....so im going to vote for the important issue. The one ive been waiting half my life to vote on, the issue thats actually going to effect me.

Vote for the constitution and the people, not for banker cartels and the establishment. If people REALLY wanted true change, then they would vote for a 3rd party for the first time in how many years?? "change" coming from a republican or democrat is just a lie geared towards getting voters....nothing will ever change with either republican or democrat running things.

Vote for legalization, not for regulation. Its as simple as that.

NEWSFLASH: Tancredo is a republican.

[ds0110]

NEWSFLASH: Tancredo is a republican.

He used to be. He is currently running as american constitution party. Maybe he saw the light? Maybe not. He's still the best choice for the cannabis scene, by far. He is not running as a republican though. The american constitution party is exactly what we need. Now, whether or not he will follow through, if he gets elected, remains to be seen. So if all things are equal and all politicians lie, i still choose the one that is pretending to tell the truth....tancredo.

[donniedorko]

He used to be. He is currently running as american constitution party. Maybe he saw the light? Maybe not. He's still the best choice for the cannabis scene, by far. He is not running as a republican though. The american constitution party is exactly what we need. Now, whether or not he will follow through, if he gets elected, remains to be seen. So if all things are equal and all politicians lie, i still choose the one that is pretending to tell the truth....tancredo.

Hate to burst your bubble here, but have you looked into the ACP? The name sounds nice, but they are Christian Dominionists and believe that the US is a Christian nation that should be ruled by Bible-based principles. Tancredo is running on their ticket as a convenience. He has almost nothing in common with them in terms of worldviews (they overlap on some of the social/wedge issues). I'm gonna go ahead and go out on a limb here and guess that under 99% of ACP candidates, marijuana, medical or otherwise, is not going to be an issue we'll agree with them on.

Sorry, but being a single issue voter is impossible for me. Sure I care about mmj but I also do care about gay rights, the environment, and preserving Social Security and medicare/medicaid. On the overwhelming majority of issues I could not disagree more with Tancredo. So I won't be pulling a lever for him just because of mmj.

I do wish that there was a third party because I'm one of those who falls into the fiscal conservative/social liberal grouping. Unfortunately the majority of elected Republicans aren't fiscal conservatives in practice, and their social views are repugnant to me. So I end up voting Dem most times because at least they're honest about spending. So, pretty much, politics sucks.

[mustangwomyn]

Republicans and democrats work for the same people. Foreign banks. These issues like abortion, immigration, gay marriage, and gun control are what I like to call "wedge issues", meant to divide and conquer the people. As long as the people are divided enough, they will never choose someone who is in a 3rd party...someone who is out of the control of the foreign bankers.

This forum is a perfect example. You have a candidate that is openly willing to do what everyone in the cannabis scene wants. We finally have a chance to legalize, and you people wont let it happen, because you are distracted by these wedge issues the establishment likes to throw around, for this very reason. This is a mmj forum, the #1 issue in this election is who is most mmj friendly and the answer is BY FAR....tancredo. None of his other politics matter enough for you people to be saying "dont legalize it now"..."lets wait another lifetime for a chance at legalization".

The biggest difference I can see between the two is that hickenlooper is and always will work for the man. He is a member of this single party false democracy we have, and tancredo is not. Tancredo at least claims to work for the constitution, and is not in the bankers democrat/republican parties.

"i could never vote to legalize mj bc the guy that wants to said something mean about my buddy, barry "barrack huisen obama" soetoro years ago"....give me a break. No candidate will ever be perfect, and you will disagree with something every candidate has to say, no matter what their stance. Im not gay, not in the military, im not going to have an abortion, but I do smoke mj....so im going to vote for the important issue. The one ive been waiting half my life to vote on, the issue thats actually going to effect me.

Vote for the constitution and the people, not for banker cartels and the establishment. If people REALLY wanted true change, then they would vote for a 3rd party for the first time in how many years?? "change" coming from a republican or democrat is just a lie geared towards getting voters....nothing will ever change with either republican or democrat running things.

Vote for legalization, not for regulation. Its as simple as that.

Their is no way I am voting for any politician just because he supports legalizing Marijuana, when he is a flipping freak on other issues. The freak does not support other issues that are important to me. I am intelligent enough to analyze his position on all issues & will vote for the candidate that is the most closely aligned on all issues that I consider important.

[Reenster]

[quote=donniedorko]62 is the abortion one, 63 is the health care thing from the Independence Institute. [QUOTE]

You are correct. Sorry for the typo. Amendment 62 has been recycled and didn't not come close to passing previously.

Should not medicate prior to posting :jointsmile:

[Zedleppelin]

He used to be. He is currently running as american constitution party. Maybe he saw the light? Maybe not. He's still the best choice for the cannabis scene, by far. He is not running as a republican though. The american constitution party is exactly what we need. Now, whether or not he will follow through, if he gets elected, remains to be seen. So if all things are equal and all politicians lie, i still choose the one that is pretending to tell the truth....tancredo.

He still is a republican. The only reason he is running on the 3rd ticket is because he got in the race to late to run on the republican ticket. I really cant believe someone would support him simply because for whatever reason he now talks about legalization, you can thank people like Tancredo for mandatory minimums, forfeiture laws and every other get tough on drug laws. He spent 5 terms in Congress voting for every anti-drug legislation put in front of him. He sure wasnt doing anything when it mattered and has been the enemy of marijuana the past two decades, now all of a sudden he's for legalization. Puhlease.

[rightwinger]

Sure beats lying to Congress and the public to invade a country for the sole purpose to make your oil friends rich, don't ya think?


Less than 3% of our oil comes from Iraq--we get most of it from Mexico-- Venezula--Canada.

To add--Haliburtion if this is what you're referrring too actually loses money in war zones as they have done in Iraq--and they are NOT into drilling oil. They supply and service the equipment for others to drill--and are more of a large multi construction business--that is typically sent into developing countries to help out. In fact, Bill Clinton used them on a couple of occasions.

[rightwinger]

He still is a republican. The only reason he is running on the 3rd ticket is because he got in the race to late to run on the republican ticket. I really cant believe someone would support him simply because for whatever reason he now talks about legalization, you can thank people like Tancredo for mandatory minimums, forfeiture laws and every other get tough on drug laws. He spent 5 terms in Congress voting for every anti-drug legislation put in front of him. He sure wasnt doing anything when it mattered and has been the enemy of marijuana the past two decades, now all of a sudden he's for legalization. Puhlease.

So then you're stating this is a lie?--LOL


"While in Congress, Tancredo voted in 2006 for an amendment to stop the U.S. Department of Justice and DEA from using taxpayer funds to raid or investigate people involved in medical marijuana."

Tancredo calls for legalizing marijuana « Colorado Independent (http://coloradoindependent.com/62723/tancredo-calls-for-legalizing-marijuana)

[rightwinger]

I cant support anyone who makes statements such as we should send Obama back to Kenya.


LINK to that statement please?

[rightwinger]

I think it's pretty hilarious to see the repubs right now. They never though maes would win, and now that they realize he's unelectable, tancredo got in the mix, and we're seeing the right attempt to discredit maes in order to get him to drop out.

It's like the repubs are attempting to get around the general election process by trying to get maes to withdraw so the repubs can decide their best candidate. They still deserve to lose, it's just hilarious to see this unfold.


What's really going to be funny is when this 300 foot Tsunami hits the U.S house and Senate on November 2nd.

Judging from the polling data right now--it's going to look like Custer's last stand for democrats running for re-election--LOL. They are certain to lose the house and have about a 55% chance of losing the US senate also.

That's what you get when you go against the majority wishes in this country.

[copobo]

LINK to that statement please?

White House Assails Tom Tancredo for Suggesting Obama Go "Back" to Kenya - Political Hotsheet - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20002850-503544.html)

[Zedleppelin]

Less than 3% of our oil comes from Iraq--we get most of it from Mexico-- Venezula--Canada.

To add--Haliburtion if this is what you're referrring too actually loses money in war zones as they have done in Iraq--and they are NOT into drilling oil. They supply and service the equipment for others to drill--and are more of a large multi construction business--that is typically sent into developing countries to help out. In fact, Bill Clinton used them on a couple of occasions.


Dude you got to stop listening to Limbaugh, Haliburton lost money from the war?? Go look at their stocks, before the war it was a little over $6 a share and once the war started it steadily climbed to over $50 a share.
Halliburton Company: NYSE:HAL quotes & news - Google Finance (http://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=NYSE:HAL)

Oh, and Dick Cheneys shares that were worth around $244,000 are now worth over $8 million. Haliburton lost money...classic!

[Zedleppelin]

"While in Congress, Tancredo voted in 2006 for an amendment to stop the U.S. Department of Justice and DEA from using taxpayer funds to raid or investigate people involved in medical marijuana."

Yep, he wanted to stop using taxpayer money and start having private for profit companies raid medical sites, companies owned by prison contractors.

While in Congress, Tancredo voted in 2006 to disallow states from making their own medical marijuana laws. (Jul 2006)

Tom Tancredo on the Issues (http://www.ontheissues.org/Tom_Tancredo.htm)

[mustangwomyn]

LINK to that statement please?

I found the article on google in about 5 seconds, I'm sure you could of too

[rightwinger]

Dude you got to stop listening to Limbaugh, Haliburton lost money from the war?? Go look at their stocks, before the war it was a little over $6 a share and once the war started it steadily climbed to over $50 a share.
Halliburton Company: NYSE:HAL quotes & news - Google Finance (http://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=NYSE:HAL)

Oh, and Dick Cheneys shares that were worth around $244,000 are now worth over $8 million. Haliburton lost money...classic!


You really can't move forward by continually looking out your rear view mirror. While NONE of us like the Iraq war--and everyone is wondering what happened to that WMD--you also have to remember very clearly that 99% of democrats in congress and the senate--including John Kerry who was on the senate intelligence committee at that time--voted for the invasion--and then afterward voted against it--when he decided to run for President. Futhermore, stock prices have nothing to do with actual profit--we more than witnessed that with the tech sector crash. Halliburton is much more profitable during times of peace working with infracstructure in no war zones.

Then everyone started talking about the conspiracy of Halliburton--and no bid contracts--when it is a well known fact that Bill Clinton used Halliburton on no bid contracts on at least 2 occasions.

The entire point is--our intelligence was horrible. Along with Britain--France--M1-6--and Bill Clinton--Al Gore and John Kerry who are on video record for stating that Sadam Husien was massing up on WMD. And who inherited this intelligence from the previous administration? None other than G.W. Bush.