Ron Paul climbs in the polls

well, when every other viable candidate is just as horrible...

everything sucks.

i'm gonna vote for ron paul. if he wins, he'll tear out a lot of inefficiency & bulk in the government, allowing a more progressive candidate to later arise and rebuild with better programs. it'll be a process, but at least it's something different than what everyone else is doing, which i feel is a slow ritualistic shamble toward the apocalypse.

my favorite part about him: he wants to legalize drugs. this is a hugely important issue to me and he's the only candidate that has expressed this view (obama has actually laughed at the idea of decriminalizing weed...). the drug war is ruining countless lives. so are the wars in iraq & afganistan. everyone else wants to maintain the status quo. this guy does not.

if kucinich or gravel were up, i'd vote for them. they're not though, so i'll vote for ron paul, because he's a shitload better than obama. really, i doubt much would change with emphasis on states rights. everyone is afraid of archaic laws springing up, but that's a lot easier to prevent on a state level and it's worth it, imo, to get rid of a few great evils that have been hurting our country.

he does have an appalling view on the environment. might be a dealbreaker. we'll see, if/when he gets nominated.

i think i might just write in kucinich.

actually, scratch that...we need to all band together and vote for the corpse of Robert LaFollette

[youtubehd]d5plfw9dV24[/youtubehd]

seriously, if you want to vote Paul, lets push for a ticket with Kucinich. man is a badass and should succeed Paul if he were to die in office.

[youtubehd]qYWWBwf2wHE[/youtubehd]

  On 12/24/2011 at 5:26 PM, Hoodie said:

i'm gonna vote for ron paul. if he wins, he'll tear out a lot of inefficiency & bulk in the government, allowing a more progressive candidate to later arise and rebuild with better programs. it'll be a process, but at least it's something different than what everyone else is doing, which i feel is a slow ritualistic shamble toward the apocalypse.

 

my favorite part about him: he wants to legalize drugs. this is a hugely important issue to me and he's the only candidate that has expressed this view (obama has actually laughed at the idea of decriminalizing weed...). the drug war is ruining countless lives. so are the wars in iraq & afganistan. everyone else wants to maintain the status quo. this guy does not.

I think you overestimate the power the president has. I do like that sentences though to describe politics. "a slow ritualistic shamble toward the apocalypse" it sounds like a Stars of the Lid title.

[youtubehd]igQlbesF0zA[/youtubehd]

omg i lol'd

hahahaha

and the sad part is, that is exactly how rick perry actually sounds in the real debates.

  On 12/24/2011 at 5:26 PM, Hoodie said:

my favorite part about him: he wants to legalize drugs. this is a hugely important issue to me and he's the only candidate that has expressed this view (obama has actually laughed at the idea of decriminalizing weed...).

that's just beyond sad and probably characteristic of paul's electorate.

how about dealing with the insane unemployment rate ? coming up with a healthcare system that doesn't cause people to go bankrupt ? are those things on the list ?

  On 12/24/2011 at 7:08 PM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

[youtubehd]igQlbesF0zA[/youtubehd]

fucking lol

  On 12/24/2011 at 7:08 PM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

[youtubehd]igQlbesF0zA[/youtubehd]

wow :|

that video was pretty good, but it's just weird that an amateur made viral video technique was taken by somebody who seems to have a budget for producing these. i

as far as i know this is who the concept was stolen from

  On 12/24/2011 at 8:15 PM, eugene said:

how about dealing with the insane unemployment rate ? coming up with a healthcare system that doesn't cause people to go bankrupt ? are those things on the list ?

Those things certainly weren't on the list of Ron Paul's favorite president (Grover Cleveland)

  On 12/24/2011 at 8:15 PM, eugene said:

  On 12/24/2011 at 5:26 PM, Hoodie said:

my favorite part about him: he wants to legalize drugs. this is a hugely important issue to me and he's the only candidate that has expressed this view (obama has actually laughed at the idea of decriminalizing weed...).

 

that's just beyond sad and probably characteristic of paul's electorate.

how about dealing with the insane unemployment rate ? coming up with a healthcare system that doesn't cause people to go bankrupt ? are those things on the list ?

most people are swayed by certain issues: abortion, gay marriage, support for israel, etc. this is just one that is very important to me. i don't see the problem. maybe research more into the positive consequences of drug legalization and you'll understand my point of view instead of deriding my opinion.

this kind of thinking is a serious problem, i mean, can't you identify the objectively more urgent issues ?

not that it's too realistic given obamba's strength..but theoretically it can lead to someone like rick perry taking over because you just wanted to smoke weed legally. i hope it's a consideration.

  On 12/24/2011 at 11:43 PM, eugene said:

you just wanted to smoke weed legally.

Trollin' hard.

not at all, change it to the original wording ("legalize drugs") if it makes it more comfortable.

Your suggestion that they are equivalent is only further trolling.

they are both dwarfed by the importance of proper healthcare. for example.

At face value, I agree.

But if we didn't blow so much money on law enforcement and prisons, not to mention if we had a system for taxing drugs that are currently illegal, we would have more money freed up for other kinds of government programs.

This country has one million inmates, and most of them are incarcerated for drug-related charges.

Someone is always, always going to profit from recreational drugs. Right now it's the cartels. But it could be the government.

well there's obviously much more to legalization than just the ability to smoke weed freely. but i'm sure there are less controversial and more efficient ways to free up cash for a healthcare system, also i don't think i've seen him putting healthcare high up on his agenda. perhaps he believes that his libertarianism is some kind of a universal remedy to the many troubles of usa..but that's just too "invisible hand" imo.

  On 12/25/2011 at 12:33 AM, eugene said:

perhaps he believes that his libertarianism is some kind of a universal remedy to the many troubles of usa..but that's just too "invisible hand" imo.

Totally agree with you there. The problem is that "invisible hand" ideas are pretty popular right now, I guess because unfortunately many people think the answer to a shitty economy is reduced government spending, lowering taxes, etc.

That's why I think legalizing drugs could be a big help - it's very congruent with this laissez-faire ideological palette. I think it's finally becoming culturally realistic the way gay rights has become just recently. The tide is turning. And once embraced, it could solve a lot of currently messy problems around drug enforcement simply and cheaply.

  On 12/24/2011 at 11:52 PM, eugene said:

not at all, change it to the original wording ("legalize drugs") if it makes it more comfortable.

Legalization of marijuana alone would have huge benefits. It's the US's biggest cash crop. Legalize it, tax it and reap the benefits. It would reduce expenditures on bullshit police work, the legal system and free up needed prison space. It would reduce the strain on the health care system because people wouldn't be afraid to go in to the doctor's for fear of getting busted for smoking pot. As it stands, people now with unrelated health care issues wait until it's an emergency because of that fear. It reduces the number of people who are considered unemployable due to criminal records.

Legalizing hard drugs is a bit trickier, because you have people who do stupid shit on harder drugs. However, just like driving under the influence of alcohol is not legal, being high would not be an excuse. And realistically, the number of people who are gonna rush out and start shooting smack because it's legal is very very very very low.

So the issue of legalizing drugs is not simply "i wanna get high man".

That said - I don't think Ron Paul is a great choice, because an isolationist policy is not good for the economy. Since Canada's largest trading partner is the US, what's bad for their economy is bad for ours.

  On 12/24/2011 at 4:48 PM, Iain C said:

I just think it's ridiculous how many people fall head over heels for Ron Paul just because he's a stupid hateful idiot but in a different way.

ta da

  Quote

Drugs in Portugal are still illegal. But here’s what Portugal did: It changed the law so that users are sent to counseling and sometimes treatment instead of criminal courts and prison. The switch from drugs as a criminal issue to a public health one was aimed at preventing users from going underground.

 

Other European countries treat drugs as a public health problem, too, but Portugal stands out as the only one that has written that approach into law. The result: More people tried drugs, but fewer ended up addicted.

Here’s what happened between 2000 and 2008:

•There were small increases in illicit drug use among adults, but decreases for adolescents and problem users such as drug addicts and prisoners.

• Drug-related court cases dropped 66 percent.

• Drug-related HIV cases dropped 75 percent. In 2002, 49 percent of people with AIDS were addicts; by 2008 that number fell to 28 percent.

• The number of regular users held steady at less than 3 percent of the population for marijuana and less than 0.3 percent for heroin and cocaine — figures that show decriminalization brought no surge in drug use.

• The number of people treated for drug addiction rose 20 percent from 2001 to 2008.

Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Socrates, one of the chief architects of the new drug strategy, says he was inspired partly by his own experience of helping his brother beat an addiction.

 

there is no convincing argument that i've read that prohibiting things like drugs which i classify in the same category as prohibiting certain sexual acts or foods is valuable overall for any society. Unless that society prefers to live based on fear rather than reason