Colorado Gubernatorial Candidates Debate

What a disappointment. I know I shouldn't judge just on their cannabis stance....but actually I do because this tells you a lot about their intelligence, heart, and future effectiveness in reality.

I'm sad that they are all pure politicians. I actually thought Hickenlooper was an exception but he isn't. He is against legalization and I know he is smart enough to realize this is wrong. He is hedging politically and I call bullshit.

Dan Maes is just an idiot who thinks shit he may or may not have done in the 90's somehow means something in this day and age. None of the candidates really seemed focused on the future as much as their past. Maes answer to the cannabis issue was so backward. He thinks the medicinal legalization is just a scam and actually wants cannabis to be forced into the pharmaceutical arena as a new pill! He has no understanding of the real issues or he is a complete shill for the illegal drug cartels, who want nothing more than cannabis to be as illegal as possible.

Tom Tancredo even backed down a bit from his pro-legalization stance. He basically said the whole issue should be debated but he was still the most pro-cannabis guy there. Of course, he is still Tom Tancredo.

God, help us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AuggieWest

What a disappointment. I know I shouldn't judge just on their cannabis stance....but actually I do because this tells you a lot about their intelligence, heart, and future effectiveness in reality.

I'm sad that they are all pure politicians. I actually thought Hickenlooper was an exception but he isn't. He is against legalization and I know he is smart enough to realize this is wrong. He is hedging politically and I call bullshit.

Dan Maes is just an idiot who thinks shit he may or may not have done in the 90's somehow means something in this day and age. None of the candidates really seemed focused on the future as much as their past. Maes answer to the cannabis issue was so backward. He thinks the medicinal legalization is just a scam and actually wants cannabis to be forced into the pharmaceutical arena as a new pill! He has no understanding of the real issues or he is a complete shill for the illegal drug cartels, who want nothing more than cannabis to be as illegal as possible.

Tom Tancredo even backed down a bit from his pro-legalization stance. He basically said the whole issue should be debated but he was still the most pro-cannabis guy there. Of course, he is still Tom Tancredo.

God, help us.

---

I am not certain what you mean by Tancredo backing down on his stance on legalization? My thread on this board--Tancredo-Hickenlooper-Maes Debate on Marijuana makes it very clear where he stands on this issue. Under this thread and article you will note that while he was a congressman in this state he in 2006 voted against using tax dollars for the DEA to raid people in medical marijuana states--LONG before Obama did.

There is no doubt that California is going to legalize it--and we know already that legalization is going to be on our ballot in 2012--just two short years from now.

It would be nice if we had a governor in office that agreed with legalization.. And the only person that would be is Tom Tancredo. Yes an ultra-conservative--and this for you liberals and democrats on this board--need to understand that this is where (the ultra conservative) meet with the liberal.

As we know today--it was democrats that wrote 1284 and 109--it was democrats that passed it--and it is democrats that are currently wanting to add more regulations--monitoring devices--finger-printing for medical marijuana patients to purchase it. Once they're done with this--they will add more regulation to the purchase of marijuana--GUARANTEED. The only person that would be able to stop this would be a governor who understands that it is a waste of tax payer dollars to do so. That man is Tom Tancredo.

Unfortunately most democrat politicians have an insatiable appetite to expand--regulate and control. They never want to stop the expansion of government control over the citizens of this country.

So you democrats and liberals have a choice now. If you really want to legalize marijuana in this state & or at least get the continual regualtions off your backs-put your vote where your mouth is.


Here again is the debate on Marijuana that was held in Colo. Spgs.

Quote:

---

Tom Tancredo today called for the legalization of marijuana.

â??Legalize it. Regulate it. Tax it,â?� said the American Constitution Party candidate for governor. He said despite all the time and money dedicated to the war on drugs, it has been a complete failure. â??If you can show me where we can get people off drugs by continuing down this same path, then show me,â?� he said.

Tancredo said no one skulks around parks or school playgrounds trying to sell alcohol for the simple reason that the law provides no incentive for such behavior given that you can sell alcohol legally to adults.

Republican Dan Maes and Democrat John Hickenlooper both said they oppose legalization of marijuana. The comments were made at a debate in Colorado Springs sponsored by Action 22, a political action group representing 22 counties in SE Colorado.

Maes said if pot was legalized and taxed, the money brought in would probably just be wasted on the expansion of social programs anyway. â??We might as well prostitute our teenage daughters and tax that,â?� he said sarcastically.

â??Dan and I donâ??t disagree too much on this,â?� Hickenlooper said. He said he has discussed the issue with social scientists, psychologists, and law enforcement professionals and that they all agree legalizing marijuana would be a bad idea.

Tancredo countered that he knows many people in law enforcement who support legalizing marijuana and who say dealing with people who are high on marijuana is seldom as dangerous or problematic as dealing with drunks. â??The arguments against marijuana today are they same as the arguments against liquor years ago,â?� he said.

Maes said legalized medical marijuana in Colorado was the first step toward legalization generally and that the state needs to control medical marijuana better than it is doing now. â??Theyâ??re coming in through the basement door and theyâ??re working their way up,â?� he said.

Hickenlooper said he supports medical marijuana and talked about someone he knows in city government â??who has probably never been drunk a day in her lifeâ?� but who suffers from debilitating back pain. He said marijuana is the only thing that has ever helped her. He noted that she doesnâ??t smoke it but takes a tincture.

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.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rightwinger

I am not certain what you mean by Tancredo backing down on his stance on legalization? My thread on this board--Tancredo-Hickenlooper-Maes Debate on Marijuana makes it very clear where he stands on this issue. Under this thread and article you will note that while he was a congressman in this state he in 2006 voted against using tax dollars for the DEA to raid people in medical marijuana states--LONG before Obama did.

There is no doubt that California is going to legalize it--and we know already that legalization is going to be on our ballot in 2012--just two short years from now.

It would be nice if we had a governor in office that agreed with legalization.. And the only person that would be is Tom Tancredo. Yes an ultra-conservative--and this for you liberals and democrats on this board--need to understand that this is where (the ultra conservative) meet with the liberal.

---

I know what Tancredo has said on this issue in the past, hence my disappointment when I saw him say last night, that the issue should be debated. I was also disappointed that he didn't take this bull by the horns and just denounce a)prohibition (I guess in the tv replay I saw, they must have omitted some of his comments you reference - or he said those in another debate?) and b) the other candidates who are backwards on this issue.

Harvard economics professor Jeffrey Miron, among others who tend to study all sides of this issue (unlike politicians), says all drugs should be legalized "Pot, cocaine, LSD, crystal-meth --- you name it." I personally hate those drugs but as a true fiscal free-market conservative, I understand how we would save tens of billions of $ every YEAR! in stupid enforcement of prohibition. Miron has the figure @ $41.3 billion. "Of these savings, $25.7 billion would accrue to state and local governments, while $15.6 billion would accrue to the federal government," Miron claims in a recent Cato Institute report he co-authored.

"The report also estimates that drug legalization would yield tax revenue of $46.7 billion annually, assuming legal drugs were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco. Approximately $8.7 billion of this revenue would result from legalization of marijuana and $38.0 billion from legalization of other drugs."

But won't we become a nation of drug addicts?

No, says Miron. Walk down any city street and you can already buy legal drugs in multiple establishments: Caffeine at Starbucks, nicotine at the supermarket, alcohol at bars and restaurants. And we're not ALL addicted to all of these drugs.

Our current drug policy doesn't work, Miron observes. Despite ~$40 billion spent on enforcement and prosecution, drug use is still widespread. Meanwhile, because the products are illegal, they're dangerous, low-quality, and unregulated, and they generate zero tax revenue.

Legalizing drugs would solve those problems, Miron says. It would help close the budget deficit. And it would eliminate a bizarre double standard, in which Americans are encouraged to drink and smoke themselves to death -- while guzzling addictive coffee and tea -- but become criminals if they dare to get stoned.

Cannabis should at least be a no-brainer to become legal and to become an asset vs. a liability in our out of control government spending, specifically in this sector. Yes, I agree w/ you RightWinger. It would be nice if we had a governor in office that agreed with legalization.....actually we can't afford not to. Time is money and politicians are killing us by dragging their feet on not stopping waste and taking too long to liberate what should have never been prohibited in the first place.

Legalization would have much too large of an impact on the enforcement/incarceration complex that it would never work. There are too many jobs and too much revenue for states tied into the cops, the courts, the politicians, etc. With legalization, they'll lose major sources of funds, drug seizures etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

Legalization would have much too large of an impact on the enforcement/incarceration complex that it would never work. There are too many jobs and too much revenue for states tied into the cops, the courts, the politicians, etc. With legalization, they'll lose major sources of funds, drug seizures etc.

---

Don't say it would never work. Yes, too many jobs & $ tied to prohibition and enforcement lifers & politicians are reaping the benefit @ all our expense. Thats the point/problem!!! Fuck them. Its our country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

Legalization would have much too large of an impact on the enforcement/incarceration complex that it would never work. There are too many jobs and too much revenue for states tied into the cops, the courts, the politicians, etc. With legalization, they'll lose major sources of funds, drug seizures etc.

---

The flip side is that they could be doing more productive work and resources could be reallocated. There are always things to enforce. There would be fewer prison jobs, but I think we can agree that is a good thing for society on the whole.

Additionally, the argument would be that the money saved by ending the "war on drugs" would supersede those losses, even if just in societal benefits. I guess it's somewhat irrelevant, as no one in those positions is willing to discuss that side of the legalization debate. It's a moral issue for many, economic to a few.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rightwinger

There is no doubt that California is going to legalize it--and we know already that legalization is going to be on our ballot in 2012--just two short years from now.

---

No doubt? The initiative is 10 points behind, its not going to happen.

According to a poll released by Ipos/Reuters Tuesday, Californians plan to vote against legalizing marijuana on the 2nd November poll by 53% to 43%
Poll: Californians Against Legalizing Marijuana

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rightwinger

As we know today--it was democrats that wrote 1284 and 109--it was democrats that passed it--and it is democrats that are currently wanting to add more regulations--monitoring devices--finger-printing for medical marijuana patients to purchase it. Once they're done with this--they will add more regulation to the purchase of marijuana--GUARANTEED.

---

Wrong. We don't know that, matter of fact 1284 was sponsored in the House by Massey and Summers (democrat AND republican) and was sponsored in the Senate by Romer and Spence (democrat AND republican), Senator Morgan Carroll, a democrat, was the most vocal AGAINST 1284, so quit portraying this was all the dems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rightwinger

Unfortunately most democrat politicians have an insatiable appetite to expand--regulate and control. They never want to stop the expansion of government control over the citizens of this country.

---

And unfortunately republicans have an insatiable appetite to incarcerate as many people as they can that goes against their moral beliefs. I find the republican talking point about dems and govt expansion humorous when Bush expanded the US govt to a record size after Clinton reduced its size to the smallest in 30 years.

Tancredo talks about less govt interference, unless of course you are a teenage girl that was raped and impregnated by her stepfather and wants to get an abortion, or you enjoy a little porn in the privacy of your own home (he wants to make porn illegal). Nor will I ever vote for some nutjob that wants to force my kid when he's in school to send telepathic messages to some Jewish zombie to save his soul because a woman was tricked into eating an apple by a talking snake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

Tancredo talks about less govt interference, unless of course you are a teenage girl that was raped and impregnated by her stepfather and wants to get an abortion, or you enjoy a little porn in the privacy of your own home (he wants to make porn illegal). Nor will I ever vote for some nutjob that wants to force my kid when he's in school to send telepathic messages to some Jewish zombie to save his soul because a woman was tricked into eating an apple by a talking snake.

---

:thumbsup::jointsmile::thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

Wrong. We don't know that, matter of fact 1284 was sponsored in the House by Massey and Summers (democrat AND republican) and was sponsored in the Senate by Romer and Spence (democrat AND republican), Senator Morgan Carroll, a democrat, was the most vocal AGAINST 1284, so quit portraying this was all the dems.

---

Additionally, Matt Cooks position at the DoR is apolitical, and he's the only one I've heard talking about monitoring, etc.

I think the enforcement he plans is on such a level that when this all gets going, it's all going to fall apart or become too much a a burden to the state.

it's just over the top. all this knee jerk regulatory bs is going to turn out to look dumb when this hysteria wears off... and it's already wearing off. pot is becoming normal in society. people talk about it openly.

of course I spend most of my time in Boulder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by copobo

I think the enforcement he plans is on such a level that when this all gets going, it's all going to fall apart or become too much a a burden to the state.

it's just over the top. all this knee jerk regulatory bs is going to turn out to look dumb when this hysteria wears off... and it's already wearing off. pot is becoming normal in society. people talk about it openly.

of course I spend most of my time in Boulder.

---

\\

Your absolutely right. Times are a changing. :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AuggieWest

I know what Tancredo has said on this issue in the past, hence my disappointment when I saw him say last night, that the issue should be debated. I was also disappointed that he didn't take this bull by the horns and just denounce a)prohibition (I guess in the tv replay I saw, they must have omitted some of his comments you reference - or he said those in another debate?) and b) the other candidates who are backwards on this issue.

Harvard economics professor Jeffrey Miron, among others who tend to study all sides of this issue (unlike politicians), says all drugs should be legalized "Pot, cocaine, LSD, crystal-meth --- you name it." I personally hate those drugs but as a true fiscal free-market conservative, I understand how we would save tens of billions of $ every YEAR! in stupid enforcement of prohibition. Miron has the figure @ $41.3 billion. "Of these savings, $25.7 billion would accrue to state and local governments, while $15.6 billion would accrue to the federal government," Miron claims in a recent Cato Institute report he co-authored.

"The report also estimates that drug legalization would yield tax revenue of $46.7 billion annually, assuming legal drugs were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco. Approximately $8.7 billion of this revenue would result from legalization of marijuana and $38.0 billion from legalization of other drugs."

But won't we become a nation of drug addicts?

No, says Miron. Walk down any city street and you can already buy legal drugs in multiple establishments: Caffeine at Starbucks, nicotine at the supermarket, alcohol at bars and restaurants. And we're not ALL addicted to all of these drugs.

Our current drug policy doesn't work, Miron observes. Despite ~$40 billion spent on enforcement and prosecution, drug use is still widespread. Meanwhile, because the products are illegal, they're dangerous, low-quality, and unregulated, and they generate zero tax revenue.

Legalizing drugs would solve those problems, Miron says. It would help close the budget deficit. And it would eliminate a bizarre double standard, in which Americans are encouraged to drink and smoke themselves to death -- while guzzling addictive coffee and tea -- but become criminals if they dare to get stoned.

Cannabis should at least be a no-brainer to become legal and to become an asset vs. a liability in our out of control government spending, specifically in this sector. Yes, I agree w/ you RightWinger. It would be nice if we had a governor in office that agreed with legalization.....actually we can't afford not to. Time is money and politicians are killing us by dragging their feet on not stopping waste and taking too long to liberate what should have never been prohibited in the first place.

---

I agree: We have spent 1.3 trillion dollars over the last 60 years in chasing down marijuana that hasn't put a dent into--nor persuaded anyone to stop the use of it. To me--it is a waste of taxpayer dollars--in this futile effort to save people from themselves.

However--we have to take baby-steps here. This nation is not going to make this enormous leap--we'll lets legalize all drugs. But we have a real chance to make a real change in the legalization of marijuana--because all of us on this board understand that marijuana is much less dangerous than the legal drugs of prescription pain pills, alcohol and tobacco.

And frankly--there has never been a politician that I agreed with 100% of the time on every single issue. They all have skeletons jumping out of their closets--big mouth gaffs, etc.

I am crossing party lines to vote for Tom Tancredo--not only because of his liberal views on marijuana--but because he is determined to rein in government spending--which means cutting government agencies and regulation.

Democrats to me are just so determined to expand the governments role in every single move we make. No matter what the cost. Hickenlooper is just so middle of the road--and I sure didn't like his comment on some of his law enforcement buddies told him it's not a good idea to make marijuana legal--that I fear he would just be a puppet to the republican attorney general John Suthers--and we know what he thinks about medical marijuana and what he would do. Suthers is totally against medical marijuana and believes it should all just go away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

No doubt? The initiative is 10 points behind, its not going to happen.

According to a poll released by Ipos/Reuters Tuesday, Californians plan to vote against legalizing marijuana on the 2nd November poll by 53% to 43%
Poll: Californians Against Legalizing Marijuana




Wrong. We don't know that, matter of fact 1284 was sponsored in the House by Massey and Summers (democrat AND republican) and was sponsored in the Senate by Romer and Spence (democrat AND republican), Senator Morgan Carroll, a democrat, was the most vocal AGAINST 1284, so quit portraying this was all the dems.



And unfortunately republicans have an insatiable appetite to incarcerate as many people as they can that goes against their moral beliefs. I find the republican talking point about dems and govt expansion humorous when Bush expanded the US govt to a record size after Clinton reduced its size to the smallest in 30 years.

Tancredo talks about less govt interference, unless of course you are a teenage girl that was raped and impregnated by her stepfather and wants to get an abortion, or you enjoy a little porn in the privacy of your own home (he wants to make porn illegal). Nor will I ever vote for some nutjob that wants to force my kid when he's in school to send telepathic messages to some Jewish zombie to save his soul because a woman was tricked into eating an apple by a talking snake.

---

If you want to count the number of politicians on the left and right has to who wants to legalize marijuana--it may very well surprise you that more top republicans--than democrats want to legalize it--:)

Democrats want to control--regulate--regulate--and regulate it.

A good case in point. Marijuana used to be legal in the United States until a major newspaper man named Randolf Hearst--decided he wanted to use "trees" for paper rather than cannibus. Who made cannibus ILLEGAL? None other and Franklin Roosevelt--WHOOPS--a democrat. And ever since then it has been illegal to cultivate marijuana plants. Money--politics and POWER at work.

Democrat Romer was the one that stated he was going to track every single marijuana SEED in this state--and it was Governor Ritter that insisted that municipalities and counties could ban medical marijuana centers.

Finally your comment of:

Quote:

---

Tancredo talks about less govt interference, unless of course you are a teenage girl that was raped and impregnated by her stepfather and wants to get an abortion,

---

I can always tell when I am dealing with a FLAMING LIBERAL--because they always bring up their right to kill babies in this country regardless of what the topic may be. Don't worry your right to kill inocent helpless babies--is protected by the United States Constitution--and it's not going to go away--LOL. The way liberals act about abortion--it is like every woman in the Unites States is planning on having an abortion in the near future--and it is ALWAYS their number ONE topic of concern.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AuggieWest

Don't say it would never work. Yes, too many jobs & $ tied to prohibition and enforcement lifers & politicians are reaping the benefit @ all our expense. Thats the point/problem!!! Fuck them. Its our country.

---

Well--I think the American public overall is slowly catching onto that. Marijuana use is more acceptable than ever before. People are waking up to the fact that the largest lobbyist in this country that is against marijuana is the Pharmacutical industry. And we know how much they're in our politicians pockets.

This after over the last several years they have been shoving all of their news drugs on us. A new pill for anything and everything. And also the NUMBER ONE reason why medical insurance is no longer afforable in this country. Pills for erectile dysfunction--dry eye syndrome--restless leg syndrome and every other syndrome imaginable. We get a 10 second description of what this new pill is for--then a 45 second WARNING of all the side effects which include: Death--Suicidal thoughts--weight gain--liver--kidney--heart damage--blindness--headaches, etc. etc.

As far as law enforcement--there are many in law enforcement that agree to the legalization of marijuana--and then there are others that look at legalization as some kind of a threat to their job security. As if they didn't have enough violent criminals to chase down?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rightwinger

I can always tell when I am dealing with a FLAMING LIBERAL--because they always bring up their right to kill babies in this country regardless of what the topic may be. Don't worry your right to kill inocent helpless babies--is protected by the United States Constitution--and it's not going to go away--LOL. The way liberals act about abortion--it is like every woman in the Unites States is planning on having an abortion in the near future--and it is ALWAYS their number ONE topic of concern.

---

Nah, I just find it fascinating that conservatives fight to protect unborn children yet they have no problem letting them starve once they are born.

if only the patients and caregivers in Colorado fought as hard for their rights

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by copobo

if only the patients and caregivers in Colorado fought as hard for their rights

---

:jointsmile:

Like many Americans I wonder what has happened to our country. I am a boomer, born in 1953. Time, I feel has given me insight into what I refer to the decline of the US. The first president I remember is Eisenhower, however, the assassination of JFK was the first time politics affected my life. I remember my teacher crying after another teacher pulled her into the hallway to tell her the news. The bus on the way home was somber, granted I did not completely understand what was happening but every adult I encounter was sad, shocked and maybe a little afraid. The hours of coverage on television seemed to continue to go over every detail, it just seemed to make everybody sad, I wonder what it would have been like if we had 24 hour cable then, as it was it looked like every detail had been discussed, what would have been said if they had 24 hours of news to fill. Would any other information actually been discovered?

The 1968 democratic convention was the first awakenings of what became my political foundation. I saw our country in turmoil, "the war" was something that was tearing the country apart. The draft was glue for the 18-25 year old. It had to go, the war was unjust, people were not going to take it sitting down. It still took several years before the draft and the war would be over, however, I feel that is my generation that was the major influence in getting the job done.Why can we not find the fortitude to change this, are we too old and tired? Are we too concerned with ourselves, and without concern for the well being of the country and our world? I saw that those in power would violate the civil rights of a citizen, use force and even kill to stop anyone that was speaking out against their agenda.

Fast forward to the 70's and what I think is the real decline of our political system. Nixon permanently soiled the office of the president. I never felt the same way about any elected official and I am sure that the majority of my generation felt much different. Regardless of Watergate, the country had no war to decry and the draft was over, we as a nation became apathetic. We need something as a society to get behind, something that the majority of people feel strongly about, unfortunately the next subject that the country got behind occurred in the 80's and "greed is good".

The accumulation of personal wealth and power is still the driving force behind our country's population and government. This has caused the great decline of our country. The wishes of the individual has overpowered that of the greater good. The question among our politicians is what can it do for me, not what will it do to the country.

Until campaign reform happens, and I am talking about a complete reconstruction, our situation will not change. There is no voice for the dwindling middle class, there is no money to buy lobbyist to push our interests, no politicians that will support our needs in Washington or even in our state capitals. Like many people I do not feel represented by any politician, and sincerely feel that every single person in political office is influenced by money being channeled into their never-ending need for re-election. It seems that every politicians major concern is continuing to be a politician with little interest or concern for those they are expected to represent.

With the Greed is Good mentality in wall street, in Washington DC and from sea to shinning sea, I fear we have lost our humanity. Unemployment is killing off what is left of the middle class, yet there are politicians out there that say the unemployed are lazy, need to find lower paying jobs, I wonder how these politicians would fair if the wage earner in their family made $7.30 an hour. It is sad to say that our very own industry and economy is the reason the unemployment rate is so high. Profits, profits, profits is the major concern. There is no loyalty to long term employees, there is no loyalty from employees, there is no pride in what we do. The ruler for how well a company or individual is doing, not about humanity it's about how much wealth you have. How you accumulate that wealth is not a concern, how much and how fast is what it's about.

Any company that takes jobs away from US citizens and give them to other countries for the sake of their profit margin should be driven out of business. If the government will not tax or penalize them, we as citizens should boycott them. Unfortunately most families are understandably more concerned with getting by day to day and can not afford to not shop or purchase from a company that they are getting a bargain from even if it is against their long term best interests.

I would like to see a complete abolishment of the current campaign financing. There should be no anonymous contributions to any campaign. There should be reasonable spending limits on what any politician can spend while campaigning for office and there should be full disclosure in where and how they got their money. I would like to see people that really want to enter community service get into office not someone that will support agendas that hurt our country, hurt or citizens for the sake of personal gain. As long as our system supports the attitude that those with the most cash wins, we as a country will lose.

There are factions in our government that will say morale decay is the problem. What a woman does with here reproductive organs, what consenting adults do in their bedroom, how hard working responsible adults choose to relax is not the problem. What is the issue is how the political structure is willing to lie, cheat and avoid the truth to get the end result. To put constant fear into the population to take away our rights so that their best intrests can be victorious is inconceivable and unforgiveable.

We as a society are being manipulated by those with the most wealth. Its not about what is best for our country it's about what is best for political business as usual.

This is not about Republicans or Democrats, nor about Liberal or Conservatives, this is what is rotting at the core of our political system.

Sorry for the rant but until we as a population start to care about things other that what directly concerns us our situation will continue to decline. Continue to vote, continue to write to those in office. Lets start a revolution, we need to let our government know how we feel. I have to believe it will make a difference.

Perhaps the quality of candidates is a reflection that the competencies of candidates are irrelevant to government in America today. All Congress persons have to do is what the organizations that bought them tell them to do.
It may also be the case that the demise of democracy in America is a sign of a revolution in world affairs in which nations and national governments are less important than transnational corporations, reflected in the fact that the Supreme Court gave corporations citizenship, and many of these corporations are owned in large part by foreign interests.
We rarely recognize a social revolution when we are living through it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

Nah, I just find it fascinating that conservatives fight to protect unborn children yet they have no problem letting them starve once they are born.

---

In case you didn't notice this thread is about the legalization of marijuana--and which candidate is more open to it. There is absolutely nothing in this thread regarding abortion--other than YOUR fear that with Republicans in control you won't be able to kill babies at random.

It's not anyone's responsiblity--to pay for someone's else's irresponsibility. Condoms are much cheaper than an abortion. Condom's do much less damage to one's mental phsy--than an abortion-in which a young girl may regret it for the rest of her life.

To add--your right to kill a baby is protected by the United States Constitution and has been in effect for at least 40 years now. It hasn't changed. Furthermore--we have young women crowding our emergency rooms giving birth that are single mom's. If they actually believed in killing babies as much as you do--they could have easily done it. Nothing is there to stop them from doing it.

So for the love of God--would you finally get the F... off of abortion and concentrate on topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

Nor will I ever vote for some nutjob that wants to force my kid when he's in school to send telepathic messages to some Jewish zombie to save his soul because a woman was tricked into eating an apple by a talking snake.

---

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rightwinger

In case you didn't notice this thread is about the legalization of marijuana--and which candidate is more open to it. There is absolutely nothing in this thread regarding abortion--other than YOUR fear that with Republicans in control you won't be able to kill babies at random.

---

Really? I thought the thread was about the Colorado Gubernatorial Candidates Debate. I mentioned a number of things that makes Tancredo a nutjob and you took the abortion issue and ran with it. As far as me 'killing babies at random', I'm not an abortion doctor and I'm male, so I'm pretty sure I've never killed babies at random. Perhaps you neglected to remove that line when you copied and pasted from your anti-abortion talking points. I'll give you the benefit of doubt on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rightwinger

It's not anyone's responsiblity--to pay for someone's else's irresponsibility. Condoms are much cheaper than an abortion. Condom's do much less damage to one's mental phsy--than an abortion-in which a young girl may regret it for the rest of her life.

---

I've never paid for anyones abortion, have you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rightwinger

To add--your right to kill a baby is protected by the United States Constitution and has been in effect for at least 40 years now. It hasn't changed. Furthermore--we have young women crowding our emergency rooms giving birth that are single mom's. If they actually believed in killing babies as much as you do--they could have easily done it. Nothing is there to stop them from doing it.

---

This is the second time you've said this, please provide a link to the particular amendment where abortion is protected or even mentioned in the United States Constitution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rightwinger

So for the love of God--would you finally get the F... off of abortion and concentrate on topic.

---

Project much?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reenster

Like many Americans I wonder what has happened to our country. I am a boomer, born in 1953. Time, I feel has given me insight into what I refer to the decline of the US. The first president I remember is Eisenhower, however, the assassination of JFK was the first time politics affected my life. I remember my teacher crying after another teacher pulled her into the hallway to tell her the news. The bus on the way home was somber, granted I did not completely understand what was happening but every adult I encounter was sad, shocked and maybe a little afraid. The hours of coverage on television seemed to continue to go over every detail, it just seemed to make everybody sad, I wonder what it would have been like if we had 24 hour cable then, as it was it looked like every detail had been discussed, what would have been said if they had 24 hours of news to fill. Would any other information actually been discovered?

The 1968 democratic convention was the first awakenings of what became my political foundation. I saw our country in turmoil, "the war" was something that was tearing the country apart. The draft was glue for the 18-25 year old. It had to go, the war was unjust, people were not going to take it sitting down. It still took several years before the draft and the war would be over, however, I feel that is my generation that was the major influence in getting the job done.Why can we not find the fortitude to change this, are we too old and tired? Are we too concerned with ourselves, and without concern for the well being of the country and our world? I saw that those in power would violate the civil rights of a citizen, use force and even kill to stop anyone that was speaking out against their agenda.

Fast forward to the 70's and what I think is the real decline of our political system. Nixon permanently soiled the office of the president. I never felt the same way about any elected official and I am sure that the majority of my generation felt much different. Regardless of Watergate, the country had no war to decry and the draft was over, we as a nation became apathetic. We need something as a society to get behind, something that the majority of people feel strongly about, unfortunately the next subject that the country got behind occurred in the 80's and "greed is good".

The accumulation of personal wealth and power is still the driving force behind our country's population and government. This has caused the great decline of our country. The wishes of the individual has overpowered that of the greater good. The question among our politicians is what can it do for me, not what will it do to the country.

Until campaign reform happens, and I am talking about a complete reconstruction, our situation will not change. There is no voice for the dwindling middle class, there is no money to buy lobbyist to push our interests, no politicians that will support our needs in Washington or even in our state capitals. Like many people I do not feel represented by any politician, and sincerely feel that every single person in political office is influenced by money being channeled into their never-ending need for re-election. It seems that every politicians major concern is continuing to be a politician with little interest or concern for those they are expected to represent.

With the Greed is Good mentality in wall street, in Washington DC and from sea to shinning sea, I fear we have lost our humanity. Unemployment is killing off what is left of the middle class, yet there are politicians out there that say the unemployed are lazy, need to find lower paying jobs, I wonder how these politicians would fair if the wage earner in their family made $7.30 an hour. It is sad to say that our very own industry and economy is the reason the unemployment rate is so high. Profits, profits, profits is the major concern. There is no loyalty to long term employees, there is no loyalty from employees, there is no pride in what we do. The ruler for how well a company or individual is doing, not about humanity it's about how much wealth you have. How you accumulate that wealth is not a concern, how much and how fast is what it's about.

Any company that takes jobs away from US citizens and give them to other countries for the sake of their profit margin should be driven out of business. If the government will not tax or penalize them, we as citizens should boycott them. Unfortunately most families are understandably more concerned with getting by day to day and can not afford to not shop or purchase from a company that they are getting a bargain from even if it is against their long term best interests.

I would like to see a complete abolishment of the current campaign financing. There should be no anonymous contributions to any campaign. There should be reasonable spending limits on what any politician can spend while campaigning for office and there should be full disclosure in where and how they got their money. I would like to see people that really want to enter community service get into office not someone that will support agendas that hurt our country, hurt or citizens for the sake of personal gain. As long as our system supports the attitude that those with the most cash wins, we as a country will lose.

There are factions in our government that will say morale decay is the problem. What a woman does with here reproductive organs, what consenting adults do in their bedroom, how hard working responsible adults choose to relax is not the problem. What is the issue is how the political structure is willing to lie, cheat and avoid the truth to get the end result. To put constant fear into the population to take away our rights so that their best intrests can be victorious is inconceivable and unforgiveable.

We as a society are being manipulated by those with the most wealth. Its not about what is best for our country it's about what is best for political business as usual.

This is not about Republicans or Democrats, nor about Liberal or Conservatives, this is what is rotting at the core of our political system.

Sorry for the rant but until we as a population start to care about things other that what directly concerns us our situation will continue to decline. Continue to vote, continue to write to those in office. Lets start a revolution, we need to let our government know how we feel. I have to believe it will make a difference.

---

very very insiteful post and you have hit the nail on many heads here. other then being a little older then you, you seem to have crawled into my head and put my personal thoughts to paper...congrats on this post...a very well nicely said.

Hey, if you want to debate politics keep it civil and polite or there will be repercussions.

NOBODY in here is ignorant and likewise, nobody in here has to put up with abusive posts.:mad:

Have a good one!:thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

Hey, if you want to debate politics keep it civil and polite or there will be repercussions.

NOBODY in here is ignorant and likewise, nobody in here has to put up with abusive posts.:mad:

Have a good one!:thumbsup:

---

Thanks. I'm here for discussions about medical Maryjane and not politics

Most politicians say what they're audience wants to hear and people buy it.

Tommy Tanwacko when asked about his stance back tracked and now says he's open to a discussion about legalization and not openly advocating legalization. Politics at work.
I stopped voting for a politician because of his or her stand on a single issue yrs. ago. Underneath Tommy's facade is a raving xenophobic racist bigot who won't be truly happy until he's personally able to man the 50 calibers ate the border.
I personally won't vote for him no matter what his current, bound to change, stance is about medical marijuana or legalization.

I need to say one more thing. Being active in numerous web-sites and blogs I've seen countless examples of right-wingers resort to name calling and personal attacks when their arguments don't hold water and are exposed for a hidden personal agenda.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wkhey4

I need to say one more thing. Being active in numerous web-sites and blogs I've seen countless examples of right-wingers resort to name calling and personal attacks when their arguments don't hold water and are exposed for a hidden personal agenda.

---

I've been moderating this site since "05" and believe me, it comes from both sides of the fence. I'd think that us normal folk would have a common enemy called politicians on most issues.

Have a good one!:thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

I've been moderating this site since "05" and believe me, it comes from both sides of the fence. I'd think that us normal folk would have a common enemy called politicians on most issues.

Have a good one!:thumbsup:

---

You are so absolutely right. Both sides rhetoric is so tiring that one need a fine screen mesh to hash it all out. lol Hows that for multiple puns.... ouch ! :rastasmoke:

One more thing...and it might get me censored banned or worst but.... the last place I ever expected to debate the abortion issue is a on a site like this.
All you right-wingers need to take your tired old hidden agenda rhetoric to a site that cares about your misinformed opinions. I don't come here to hear your convoluted miss informed opinions !!!! Take your opinions and posts to a site that cares.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

I've been moderating this site since "05" and believe me, it comes from both sides of the fence. I'd think that us normal folk would have a common enemy called politicians on most issues.

Have a good one!:thumbsup:

---

One of the best things about cannabis is it brings together such a diverse array of people.

I think Jon Stewart would recommend this thread take a turn back toward sanity on both sides.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter

One of the best things about cannabis is it brings together such a diverse array of people.

I think Jon Stewart would recommend this thread take a turn back toward sanity on both sides.

---

Being on here for the past month doesn't get me any kudos. I understand my newbie status but, could you please explain to me how the right's way of thinking is a sane way of thinking ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wkhey4

One more thing...and it might get me censored banned or worst but.... the last place I ever expected to debate the abortion issue is a on a site like this.
All you right-wingers need to take your tired old hidden agenda rhetoric to a site that cares about your misinformed opinions. I don't come here to hear your convoluted miss informed opinions !!!! Take your opinions and posts to a site that cares.

---

It wasn't me that brought up abortion--it was one of your comrades.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wkhey4

Being on here for the past month doesn't get me any kudos. I understand my newbie status but, could you please explain to me how the right's way of thinking is a sane way of thinking ?

---

From what I have seen and in my personal opinion--most marijuana users believe that the opposition is always coming from the right--when it's not.

It's either a lack of knowledge about candidates--past Presidents etc. But for every republican against the use of marijuana I can bring up just as many democrats.

My point being marijuana is not a left/right issue. There are opponents to legalising marijuana on both sides of the isle. And I imagine there are just as many republicans as democrats who want to legalise marijuana.

So we have to pay attention to the candidates we are voting for. Right now--Tom Tancredo is the most pro candidate in this election cycle--even though he is conservative. He is the one most likely to stop new regulation-pointed at caregivers and medical marijuana centers. Hickenlooper seems to be more inclined to listen to what law enforcement tells him--which wouldn't be good for any of us.

I make no apologies, all I pointed out was Tancredo is for making abortion illegal even in cases of rape and incest and the next thing I'm being called a baby killer, so I decided to toy with him a little and get a few moments of entertainment out of it.

In my humble opinion, any discussion regarding abortion is firmly entrenched in religion. It has been my experience that those that would be in favor of Amendment 62 would describe themselves as christian. I doubt there are many atheists that are in favor of the Amendment 62. If you are out there please stand and be counted.:thumbsup:

Roe vs Wade gave women the right to make the profoundly personal choice to terminate an unwanted pregnancy. Any argument I have heard against Roe vs Wade is based on religious beliefs. Should we be forced to adhere to the doctrine of a religion we might not adhere to?

Religious opinions should not influence political decisions. Freedom of religion should also mean freedom from religion. I respect any one's faith and opinions and I would hope for the same in return.

I enjoy a healthy debate and it's wonderful to hear the differing opinions of those that I have so much in common with. We all agree that Medical Marijuana is truly medicine and that we want to continue to enjoy the right to medicate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

I make no apologies, all I pointed out was Tancredo is for making abortion illegal even in cases of rape and incest and the next thing I'm being called a baby killer, so I decided to toy with him a little and get a few moments of entertainment out of it.

---

You will find that there are many democrat politicians in this nation that feel the same as Tancredo. They are pro-life democrats.

hey t\y11

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rightwinger

It wasn't me that brought up abortion--it was one of your comrades.

---

Your so full of shite ! Typical post when one has nothing to educate us uninformed about. You brought up the entire abortion issue. Take a beep breath and review your posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reenster

In my humble opinion, any discussion regarding abortion is firmly entrenched in religion. It has been my experience that those that would be in favor of Amendment 62 would describe themselves as christian. I doubt there are many atheists that are in favor of the Amendment 62. If you are out there please stand and be counted.:thumbsup:

Roe vs Wade gave women the right to make the profoundly personal choice to terminate an unwanted pregnancy. Any argument I have heard against Roe vs Wade is based on religious beliefs. Should we be forced to adhere to the doctrine of a religion we might not adhere to?

Religious opinions should not influence political decisions. Freedom of religion should also mean freedom from religion. I respect any one's faith and opinions and I would hope for the same in return.

I enjoy a healthy debate and it's wonderful to hear the differing opinions of those that I have so much in common with. We all agree that Medical Marijuana is truly medicine and that we want to continue to enjoy the right to medicate.

---

I don't not have a problem with Roe v Wade. That is a personal choice for every woman in this country. What I have a problem with that continually happens when speaking with liberals is:

That the sky could be caving in right now--and they would bring up abortion rights--in one of their comments.

I am very tired of talking about abortion--because they inflict into every other topic from A to Z. Right now in this country our number one concern is jobs. Someone talks about jobs--and there is certain to be a liberal that wants to talk about abortion. Someone wants to talk about the deficit--and there is certain to be a liberal that brings up abortion. Someone wants to talk about marijuana--and there is certain to be a liberal that wants to bring up abortion.

Again--it's like every woman in this country is going to have an abortion within the next few months--it is a liberals number topic of concern. I just wish their were abortion blogs--where these people could have another 40 year discussion with each other--LOL I don't want to hear it anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wkhey4

Being on here for the past month doesn't get me any kudos. I understand my newbie status but, could you please explain to me how the right's way of thinking is a sane way of thinking ?

---

I'm not arguing that either side is right, actually. There are some issues that I'm profoundly more conservative on than others.

The idea is that we can engage in debate in a rational, nuanced way, where no one gets called Hitler or a baby killer. Most Americans aren't represented by angry talking heads on the cable news networks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

I make no apologies, all I pointed out was Tancredo is for making abortion illegal even in cases of rape and incest and the next thing I'm being called a baby killer, so I decided to toy with him a little and get a few moments of entertainment out of it.

---

I fully agree, Abortion in cases of incest or rape are completely a different issue that abortion in cases where planning was not practiced. If one can expect a woman to be reminded every day of the nightmares of Rape or Incest you are plain & simple heartless.