Dan Maes for Gov. NOT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

You've made several anti-mcinnis posts, yet the reasons you've given such as the anti-mmj thing, apply to the person you're lobbying for as well, maes.

What's the real reason you are anti-mcinnis? Please don't use the MMJ topic, since they have the same position.

I hope this post isn't taken as a personal attack, I am just curious. I certainly wouldn't bother explaining my political views to some random on the internet, so feel free to ignore.

---

Maes is the grass root candidate--which the 1st thing out of his mouth at speeches I have heard--is to cut the size of our state government. Which means less regulation, less taxes. That will run through on medical marijuana also. Yes, Maes wants medical marijuana regulated and taxed--as did our state legislature and Governor Ritter. It's already a done deal--there is nothing that is going to change that--with the exception of the Colorado supreme court--if they eventually overturn 1284.

Maes is not McInnis--whom is totally out of touch with our medical marijuana laws and would do everything he could to wreak havoc. His Colorado Springs talk to law enforcement made that more than clear. McInnis is the one who took 300K from a foundation without actually earning it. That's corruption at it's best.

I think Maes is for tax revenue in this state and private sector capital growth. He's not stupid and realises that medical marijuana in this state is a huge industry--that brings in lots of tax revenue. Because of this--I believe he would not be an enemy of medical marijuana--and would be more inclined to lay off the currently over-regulation--license fees that either Hickenlooper or any other governor candidate would approve of. Being a small business person himself--he understands how detrimental government can be to business.

As far as his comment "he WAS opposed to it originally"--doesn't say that he is now. Lots of politicians on both sides of the isle "were" opposed to medical marijuana--that have had a change of heart--because of the boost of tax revenue to this state. Tax revenue ALWAYS gets their attention, in a positive way, especially to conservative politicians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkeeNuggz

Scott McInnis is a fucking turd and doesn't stand a chance. I personally believe, even though this will be my first election, Hickenlooper will win and even that could be bad. I just saw on the 7 o'clock news that Tom Tancredo many be running as a third party candidate. He's for outright legalization and I personally think if he uses that as his platform, he'll take votes away from both 'Big Parties".

Tom Tancredo, foe of illegal immigrants, to run for governor? - On Politics: Covering the US Congress, Governors, and the 2010 Election - USATODAY.com

---

Tom Tancredo is known for breaking promises. He has seen this as an opportunity to jump into this race--that he cannot possibly win. So he uses his stance on legalizing marijuana His mouth is a loose canon. Just last week Tancredo stated we should bomb Mecca and impeach Obama--of course (without any legal grounds to do so.) He doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of winning this election.

To legalize marijuana in this state would require voter approval--just like in California. No governor can just legalise marijuana.

Therefore, a vote for Tom Tancredo is just another vote for John Hickenlooper. BTW--democrats love to tax and regulate--that is why I am voting for Dan Maes.

You, and anyone else who's like to be considered versed by those who ARE versed, need to quit beating the incorrect dead horse that Dems "raise taxes" and Republicans don't. Seriously. I'm not even going to give you any links or ideas as to where to read up on the subject.

I don't know why ignorant sheeple on both sides of the line suck up to "their" party with such fervor. It's fucking weird on so many levels. Like kids that kiss up to the cool kids in high school so they can tag along with them. "I voted 4 Sarah, she's my homie. Just like Jesus!!" :wtf:

AGAIN, ON BOTH SIDES!!

That said, Hick did a very nice job in Denver. With that said, I like what Palin did in Alaska. I'm more likely to vote for Hick, but Sarah said she's cool with the herb, so who knows. I'm sure I made almost 100% (or maybe 100%) of you sick with that statement.

Of course, I've studied what they actually DID while in office, as opposed to just listening to the BS spewed by my favorite talking head. Be it Limbaugh or Maher or whoever.

Read Up!! A mind is a terrible thing to waste. :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FarmerSteve

You, and anyone else who's like to be considered versed by those who ARE versed, need to quit beating the incorrect dead horse that Dems "raise taxes" and Republicans don't. Seriously. I'm not even going to give you any links or ideas as to where to read up on the subject.

I don't know why ignorant sheeple on both sides of the line suck up to "their" party with such fervor. It's fucking weird on so many levels. Like kids that kiss up to the cool kids in high school so they can tag along with them. "I voted 4 Sarah, she's my homie. Just like Jesus!!" :wtf:

AGAIN, ON BOTH SIDES!!

That said, Hick did a very nice job in Denver. With that said, I like what Palin did in Alaska. I'm more likely to vote for Hick, but Sarah said she's cool with the herb, so who knows. I'm sure I made almost 100% (or maybe 100%) of you sick with that statement.

Of course, I've studied what they actually DID while in office, as opposed to just listening to the BS spewed by my favorite talking head. Be it Limbaugh or Maher or whoever.

Read Up!! A mind is a terrible thing to waste. :thumbsup:

---

Give me a break--right now dems. in congress and the senate are debating "not" extending the Bush tax cuts. They are due to expire in Jan. 2011. Fed chairman Bernake is "begging" this administration not to raise taxes on ANYONE. In effect it would be a tax hike to the middle class and the wealthy of this country. Basically taking more money from American pockets.

Now if you're capable of looking beyond the tippy--tip of your nose-what do you think that is going to do to medical marijuana sales? What do you think that is going to do to the economy in general?

I have listened "personally"--gone to all the meetings of these governor candidates until I am blue in the face. Currently--Colorado is experiencing 9+ unemployment--meaning there are lots of people that have opened up dispensories--C.Spgs. alone has 176--dispensories. A few months ago they only had 14. What does that tell you? There are a lot of laid off people in this state that have looked at medical marijuana has their new careers. Everyone is doing it. This bubble willl crash also.

And may I remind you that this bill (1284) is democrat Romer's and democrat Governor Ritter's bill. Ritter stating that he would veto any bill that didn't have cities and counties being able to ban medical marijuana dispensories. In this bill they totally REGULATE marijuana centers to the absolute extreme. They found another reason to make another enormous government agency in this state--and they did it. Right now the license fees are outrageous.

So now you have a choice. Do you select the governor that is pro-business and wants to CUT the size of government--along with government spending and government REGULATIONS--or do you want to stay with the same ol same ol--which is who I refer to know as Hickenritter?

Dan Maes is the most pro-business candidate. He is the one that wants to cut the size of state government--cut government regulation--and cut government spending. McInnis is the worst choice with his comments on medical marijuana. And Hickenritter-is just another Gov. Ritter. Stifiling job creation in this state--insuring that unemployment remains high--so you can have a little more competition in this industry.

Think beyond the tip of your nose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rightwinger

Maes is the grass root candidate--which the 1st thing out of his mouth at speeches I have heard--is to cut the size of our state government. Which means less regulation, less taxes. That will run through on medical marijuana also. Yes, Maes wants medical marijuana regulated and taxed--as did our state legislature and Governor Ritter. It's already a done deal--there is nothing that is going to change that--with the exception of the Colorado supreme court--if they eventually overturn 1284.

Maes is not McInnis--whom is totally out of touch with our medical marijuana laws and would do everything he could to wreak havoc. His Colorado Springs talk to law enforcement made that more than clear. McInnis is the one who took 300K from a foundation without actually earning it. That's corruption at it's best.

I think Maes is for tax revenue in this state and private sector capital growth. He's not stupid and realises that medical marijuana in this state is a huge industry--that brings in lots of tax revenue. Because of this--I believe he would not be an enemy of medical marijuana--and would be more inclined to lay off the currently over-regulation--license fees that either Hickenlooper or any other governor candidate would approve of. Being a small business person himself--he understands how detrimental government can be to business.

As far as his comment "he WAS opposed to it originally"--doesn't say that he is now. Lots of politicians on both sides of the isle "were" opposed to medical marijuana--that have had a change of heart--because of the boost of tax revenue to this state. Tax revenue ALWAYS gets their attention, in a positive way, especially to conservative politicians.

---

If you think a republican would 'shrink' the government or remove existing regulations or laws (like 1284 or 109), you are crazy. Repubs love to claim small government, but look at bush. What did he do to 'shrink' the government?

All politicians are pieces of shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

If you think a republican would 'shrink' the government or remove existing regulations or laws (like 1284 or 109), you are crazy. Repubs love to claim small government, but look at bush. What did he do to 'shrink' the government?

All politicians are pieces of shit.

---

I agree that "all" politicians are self-interested ego-maniacs. But--we still have the choose the best out of the worst.

We know for a fact that Romer and Ritter made these bills 1284 and 109--while there were several Republicans on the floor of the senate stating they were unconstitutional and or against Admendment 20.

We also know for a fact--that Romer was cheering on an additional 10% excise tax on medical marijuana sales--that cities could charge in addition to the sales tax. These guys saw what they believed to be this "pot of Gold" industry--and right now have over licensed fee-ed it, dramatically over-regulated it--to where it is almost impossible for an owner of a dispensory to make ends meet.

At this time--I am simply voting for someone who states the first thing he is going to do is lay-off state employees--cut the size of government--and stop over-regulating business in this state. Someone who is more interested in growing private sector business that trying to regulate it out of business. And that was exactly the intention of 1284 and 109.

I received a similar response and asked him to expand on his position.

He responded today stating, "I will be glad to place something more on my website." AND "I have time today to get to my website. I will do my best and thank you for your inquiry and input."

He hasn't updated it yet but here is his website:

Dan Maes for Colorado Governor in 2010

Cool. I look forward to hearing what he has to say.