The Only USA Presidential Candidate In Favor Of Legalization

[UTD Toker]

What about Bill Richardson from NM? I'd DEF trust the country I live in in his hands....

[JD1stTimer]

To Burnable: The problem with that thinking is that they often suddenly turn into a different person when they get into office. For example, how do you know FOR SURE that Al Gore would have actually been better than Bush? They're really ALMOST the same. So if everyone who voted for Bush or Gore instead of their real pic, had voted for their actual guy anyways, maybe Gore WOULD have gotten it, or maybe something wild and crazy like Nader winning could have happened (Assuming that he actually had a major underground following within the two biggest parties.)

[JD1stTimer]

Okay, I just came up with my dream law that would be highly unconstitutional and I would never ever do it even if I had the power.

Promotion of front-runners in election campaigns for no other reason than that they are front-runners is hereby prohibited under penalty of a flagpole wedgie.

[MadSativa]

Theri are lots in favor of legalization however most are wierd and think that things wiil fix them selevs once herb is leagal..............my vot is for this guy and hes for herb too
The Bill Richardson File - SantaFeNewMexican.com

[redhotstoner]

Note** Ron Paul is Pro Life. he also opposses same sex adoption
Just stating the facts

[redhotstoner]

and also, while he is against the War on Drugs- he isn't "pro-marijuana" and he is against stem cell research. He's seems like a cool guy for a republican, but i think we should be careful not to jump to the conclusion that he is the solution to america's problems

[JohnnyII]

and also, while he is against the War on Drugs- he isn't "pro-marijuana" and he is against stem cell research. He's seems like a cool guy for a republican, but i think we should be careful not to jump to the conclusion that he is the solution to america's problems

The point is that he doesn't believe the federal government should enforce a particular view, unless it is specifically in the Constitution. That's why he's such a spectacular choice, he doesn't try to be Mr. Morality and try and ban whatever someone wants to do. He leaves all that authority to the states, which is where it should be in the first place.

[Asasan]

Excellent posts burnable.

As far as intellectual discipline and multi-perspective critical thinking goes, thats not just the best I've seen on this forum but about as good as it gets on any internet forum. Big ups on your high-level operating.

[stopsnitchin]

i wish i could vote... im gonna get all my friends to vote for RON PAUL

[angry nomad]

This is not really directed to King of The World, but to everybody who, in frustration, can only see fit to put out one liners of doom when anybody gets excited about change.

I would like to gently point out that that was not a very nice thing to say to somebody who is seeking change. The status quo is created solely by naysayers. Oppressors have always used the inertia of the oppressed against them. They don't really have to do the oppressing. By doing nothing we are keeping ourselves chained.

Even if the good doctor's chances are slim, his supporters are the people that raise the level of debate among the citizenry. Shitting on activists is worse, in my view, than being a rotten, pocket-lining politician. At least they have a reason ($$$) for their actions or lack thereof. If you don't believe miracles can happen, do a Google search for Senator Jeff Smith, or watch the documentary about him. You will see that sometimes grassroots efforts succeed...certainly more often than doing nothing.

Wow. I have been thinking the same thing for the past six months, but I couldn't put it into words like that. Thanks.

Also, I would like to point out that Ron Paul said the drug laws should be decided at the local level, not even the states, which means each one of us would have a million times more say over the laws.