PDA

View Full Version : "Conservatives" And The 'Drug War'




Auntie Republicrat
03-25-2009, 06:24 PM
...I was recently talking to a typical conservative Republican knucklehead about the stinking "drug war" mess in Mexico..

...Typical of conservatives, he was Ok with US involvement/meddling, saying something like, "we need to help bust those evil drug dealers in Mexico"...

...I've been around this conservative Republican knucklehead a few times and have heard him blather about how he and his stinking conservative Republicans 'respect/abide the Constitution, unlike the liberal Democrats'...

...I reminded the conservative knucklehead that before the federal government became involved in alcohol prohibition they were compelled to amend the Con...I then asked the clueless conservative, "when was the Con. amended to allow federal involvement in the stinking 'Drug war?'

...His mouth dropped and after some dazed moments he said something like, 'you're crazy if you want to legalize drugs..'

:rolleyes:

..In my experience, THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WHO IDENTIFY AS CONSERVATIVES ARE PITIFUL KNOW-LITTLES..More evidence that no decent libertarian wants to be associated with these dinks..YUK!!

Auntie Republicrat
03-26-2009, 07:44 AM
...As one wag put it, "These stooooooooooooooooooopid conservative drug warriors have maintained/enacted 'pot' laws ostensibly to 'reduce/curb the use of pot'..but the reality is that POT USE HAS EXPLODED since their stinking Republicrat 'pot prohibition' has been foisted..

..for example...ask a 90 year-old what they knew of 'pot' prior to the stinking Republicrat politicians foisting pot prohibition..I bet they tell you they knew VERY FEW people who smoked pot..

...BUT NOW, AFTER MUCH HUMAN MISERY AND ILLION$ WASTED, etc. ad nauseam, YOU MISERABLE REPUBLICRAT 'DRUG WARRIORS' ARE HARD-PRESSED TO FIND A STINKING POLITICAL CANDIDATE NOT PHOTOGRAPHED SUCKING ON A BONG IN COLLEGE!!"..YET YOU CONTINUE THE MADNESS FULL STEAM AHEAD!!.. :crazy:

..(btw, I'd say AT LEAST 90% of the people I know who self-identify as 'conservative' support this miserable, destructive, UNCONSTITUTIONAL, STOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPID, etc. 'drug war')

Republicrats = $50 haircuts on $5 heads!.. ;)

SWATH
03-26-2009, 07:49 AM
Demobilcans = $400 haircuts on $1,000,000 tongues.

hillertexas
03-26-2009, 07:51 AM
Here...show him this...


http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/03/14/portugal/index.html

SATURDAY MARCH 14, 2009 06:19 EDT
The success of drug decriminalization in Portugal

In 2001, Portugal became the only EU-member state to decriminalize drugs, a distinction which continues through to the present. Last year, working with the Cato Institute, I went to that country in order to research the effects of the decriminalization law (which applies to all substances, including cocaine and heroin) and to interview both Portuguese and EU drug policy officials and analysts (the central EU drug policy monitoring agency is, by coincidence, based in Lisbon). Evaluating the policy strictly from an empirical perspective, decriminalization has been an unquestionable success, leading to improvements in virtually every relevant category and enabling Portugal to manage drug-related problems (and drug usage rates) far better than most Western nations that continue to treat adult drug consumption as a criminal offense.

On April 3, at 12:00 noon, at the Cato Institute in Washington, I'll be presenting the 50-page report I wrote for Cato, entitledDrug Decriminalization in Portugal. Following my presentation, a supporter of drug criminalization laws -- Peter Reuter, a Professor in the University of Maryland's Department of Criminology -- will comment on the report (and I'll be able to comment after that), and then there will be a Q-and-A session with the audience. The event is open to the public and free of charge. Details and registration are here at Cato's site, where the event can also be watched live online (and, possibly, on C-SPAN).

There is clearly a growing recognition around the world and even in the U.S. that, strictly on empirical grounds, criminalization approaches to drug usage and, especially, the "War on Drugs," are abject failures, because they worsen the exact problems they are ostensibly intended to address. "Strictly on empirical grounds" means excluding from the assessment: (a) ideological questions regarding the legitimacy of imprisoning adults for consuming drugs they choose to consume; (b) the evisceration of Constitutional and civil liberties wrought by drug criminalization; and (c) the extraordinary sums of money devoted to the War on Drugs both domestically and internationally.

Very recent events demonstrating this evolving public debate over drug policy include the declaration of the Drug War's failure from several former Latin American leaders; a new Economist Editorial calling for full-scale drug legalization; new polls showing substantial and growing numbers of Americans (and a majority of Canadians) supportive of marijuana legalization; the decision of the DEA to make good on Obama's campaign pledge to cease raids on medical marijuana dispensaries in states which have legalized its usage; and numerous efforts in the political mainstream to redress the harsh and disparatecriminal penalties imposed for drug offenses, including Obama's supportfor treatment rather than prison for first-time drug offenders.

Particularly in the U.S., there is still widespread support for criminalization approaches and even support for the most extreme and destructive aspects of the "War on Drugs," but, for a variety of reasons, the debate over drug policy has become far more open than ever before. Portugal's success with decriminalization is highly instructive, particularly since the impetus for it was their collective recognition in the 1990s that criminalization was failing to address -- and was almost certainly exacerbating -- their exploding, poverty-driven drug crisis. As a consensus in that country now recognizes, decriminalization is what enabled them to manage drug-related problems far more effectively than ever before, and the nightmare scenarios warned of by decriminalization opponents have, quite plainly, never materialized.

The counter-productive effects of drug criminalization are at least as evident now for the U.S. as they were for pre-decriminalization Portugal. Beyond one's ideological beliefs regarding the legitimacy of criminalization, drug policy should be determined by objective, empirical assessments of what works and what does not work. It's now been more than seven years since Portugal decriminalized all drugs, and dispassionately examining the effects of that decision provides a unique opportunity to assess questions of drug policy in the most rational and empirical manner possible.
-- Glenn Greenwald

Auntie Republicrat
03-26-2009, 07:56 AM
...the stinking liberal Democreeps tend towards prohibition with forced drug counselling as the punishment while the stinking conservative Republicreeps tend towards prohibition with jail as the punishment..

..anyone not a goddamned fool understands there is no important difference between these stinking Republicrats..

acptulsa
03-26-2009, 08:15 AM
Oh, Auntie...

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1597036&postcount=80

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1687729&postcount=100

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1687733&postcount=102

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1687739&postcount=103

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1692367&postcount=106

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1697683&postcount=108

The more things change, the more they stay the same. You expect to undo decades of Big Pharma brainwashing in five minutes?

He Who Pawns
03-26-2009, 08:32 AM
Auntie, you nailed it.

They are simply clueless, because they have never imagined a world where drug use was a matter of personal responsibility. In other words, they just don't think.

Auntie Republicrat
03-27-2009, 07:42 AM
...good ones, hiller and pawns!..

...i remember some years ago a local, LOUD, extremely obese, Republican, 'conservative' know-little was Chairman of the Town Council..he's been the 'County Chair' for the stinking Republican Party off and on...was a frequent, loud, stoooooooooooooopid caller on the local Republican cheerleading squawk-talk radio show..(he was known in my circle as 'Boss Hog' because of his likeness to the TV character...)

...like many 'conservatives' he was an aggressive, stoooooooooooooooooooooopid, supporter of/cheerleader for the stinking, miserable 'war on drugs'..the stinking 'DARE' program..etc. ad nauseam..

..but, he was also a busine$$ partner in a restaurant in the next town over..who whined REPEATEDLY in editorials etc. when the issue of 'smoking bans in restaurants' was hot..(boss hog was, of course, against smoking bans..and rightly so)

...but i remember thinking, 'why you loud, fat, goddamned fool Republicrat!..you claim/recognize some unalienable right to use/grow the leaves of the tobacco plant yet you commi$$ion, etc. GOVERNMENT TO HARASS, JAIL, etc. PEOPLE FOR MERELY GROWING/USING THE DRIED LEAVES OF THE CANNABIS PLANT.. :wacko:

...one more thing for the miserable, monstrously stooooooooooooooooooooooooooooopid, conservative 'drug warriors':..i've never met a cannabis user who wanted to harass/jail YOU tobacco users for using tobacco on YOUR PROPERTY...BUT I'VE MET HERDS OF YOU REPUBLICRAT, TOBACCO-USING, 'DRUG WARRIOR,' NITWITS WHO WANT CANNABIS USERS HARASSED/JAILED FOR USING CANNABIS ON THEIR PROPERTY!!

...(Republicrat 'conservatives' are 'freedom-lovers'..yeah right!) :rolleyes:

acptulsa
03-27-2009, 07:58 AM
......one more thing for the miserable, monstrously stooooooooooooooooooooooooooooopid, conservative 'drug warriors':..i've never met a cannabis user who wanted to harass/jail YOU tobacco users for using tobacco on YOUR PROPERTY...BUT I'VE MET HERDS OF YOU REPUBLICRAT, TOBACCO-USING, 'DRUG WARRIOR,' NITWITS WHO WANT CANNABIS USERS HARASSED/JAILED FOR USING CANNABIS ON THEIR PROPERTY!!

"And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak up."