Pat Robertson comes out against the War on Pot!

[MRoCkEd]

The last person you would have suspected!

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/pat-robertson-time-to-legaize-marijuana/

[low preference guy]

lol. fantastic!

[CaseyJones]

http://www.cybersalt.org/images/stories/cleanlaugh/signs/signhell.jpg

[trey4sports]

commented

[Brett85]

He didn't exactly come out in favor of "legalizing" marijuana. He was basically just making the same argument that Rand made on Hannity's show that the war on drugs unfairly targets young people and ruins their lives.

[FSP-Rebel]

He didn't exactly come out in favor of "legalizing" marijuana. He was basically just making the same argument that Rand made on Hannity's show that the war on drugs unfairly targets young people and ruins their lives.

Still, this is a breakthrough coming from a leader of the social conservatives. I'm with Casey on this one.

[speciallyblend]

http://www.cybersalt.org/images/stories/cleanlaugh/signs/signhell.jpg


I am originally from va beach. pat robertson is a liar and should never be trusted! He is only changing his views because somehow he has found away to get his filthy paws on the money!!! This guy is the slime of the world! Not sure what his motive is but i am sure it boils down to money nothing else!!

Pat Robertson is the devil bobbi bouche!!

[Brett85]

Still, this is a breakthrough coming from a leader of the social conservatives. I'm with Casey on this one.

Yeah, I might send this to my parents to show that you can be a social conservative and still realize that the war on drugs is a complete failure.

[speciallyblend]

He didn't exactly come out in favor of "legalizing" marijuana. He was basically just making the same argument that Rand made on Hannity's show that the war on drugs unfairly targets young people and ruins their lives.

He is only marketing deceit! Pat robertson is no friend to liberty or freedom. He is the right-wingers that love biggovernment!!!

Pat Robertson is on the top 10 list of never trust a slimy word out of this guys mouth!!!

[Matt Collins]

This is a paradigm shift!!!!

[FSP-Rebel]

He is only marketing deceit! Pat robertson is no friend to liberty or freedom. He is the right-wingers that love biggovernment!!!

Pat Robertson is on the top 10 list of never trust a slimy word out of this guys mouth!!!

No one is saying that the guy is Willie Nelson, just a tool that can be used to smooth over some of the social cons on this issue. Those people look up to their so-called leaders and I'm merely suggesting that this could work in our favor. Remember, coalition building along the issues is what Ron is all about, so if the guy wants to swing our way on this one, let's make the most of it if it can help. No need to get all worked up.

[emazur]

I remember last year when he said God would embrace socialism in the U.S.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=85243

[Matt Collins]

No one is saying that the guy is Willie Nelson, just a tool that can be used to smooth over some of the social cons on this issue.

"Pat Robertson Agrees With Ron Paul That Pot Should Be Legal"

[BlackTerrel]

Kind of shocking to be honest.

[emazur]

Judge Nap should bring him on the show to talk about it (it would really make the rounds on youtube and draw more attention to his show)

[Vessol]

This is good news. We can use this to pull more social conservatives to our ideas.

[james1906]

Will his show now be called the 420 Club?

[Vessol]

Will his show now be called the 420 Club?

I lawled IRL.

[tnvoter]

I lawled IRL.

me too haha

[speciallyblend]

waiting for the 2nd breaking story ;) Breaking News !!! Pat Robertson busted with marijuana while getting a massage!!!

[speciallyblend]

No one is saying that the guy is Willie Nelson, just a tool that can be used to smooth over some of the social cons on this issue. Those people look up to their so-called leaders and I'm merely suggesting that this could work in our favor. Remember, coalition building along the issues is what Ron is all about, so if the guy wants to swing our way on this one, let's make the most of it if it can help. No need to get all worked up.

i hear ya. i am certainly shocked! He must have had a younger relative screwed over or something;) Hell just froze over for sure!!

[BarryDonegan]

Paradigm shift incoming!

[oyarde]

I remember last year when he said God would embrace socialism in the U.S.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=85243

F that , try looking at 2 Thessolonians 3 :10. One of my favorite two anti socialism verses .

[GunnyFreedom]

ROFL! I remember praying for exactly this during RP08 :D straight up truth.

[speciallyblend]

ROFL! I remember praying for exactly this during RP08 :D straight up truth.

the more i think about this. The bigger this is! I gotta love my job. Who calls me not 5 minutes ago to tell me about the pat robertson deal? My boss:) haha I had to let him know rpf had already informed me:) I will believe Pat when he is on his show chanting Ron Paul 2012:0 Which i will pray for:) they must be snowboarding in hell now that it has truly froze over:)

[TC95]

I remember last year when he said God would embrace socialism in the U.S.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=85243

No, he didn't. He said that God said AMERICANS would embrace socialism, not that God Himself would embrace socialism in the U.S.

Quote from your article:

"Robertson said God also declared, "The steps taken will lead to a dramatic increase in the power of government. The people will welcome socialism in order to relieve their pain. Nothing will stand in the way of a plan by Obama to restructure the economy in the same fashion as the New Deal in the '30s." (emphasis mine)

[TC95]

he is only marketing deceit! Pat robertson is no friend to liberty or freedom. He is the right-wingers that love biggovernment!!!

Pat robertson is on the top 10 list of never trust a slimy word out of this guys mouth!!!

qft

[TC95]

I know why he wants to legalize it...cuz he wants to TAX IT! Yes! Give the big government one more thing to tax! This will be awesome!

[FSP-Rebel]

Wow, this page did nothing constructive. Gunny, you're a rep now and you shouldn't opt in to mini-conversations, esp if you have a problem with a national figure coming around to a certain point of view on an issue that you likely don't want to flaunt to voters, if you come out right and say it to your constituents, then hi5. To the rest of you, why are you trying to extrapolate anything that could mean any less than the impression than what this schmuck Paterson is trying to say? Why is there no effort or guts to use this to our specific platform message on the particular issue besides going all nutty and trying to bust this guy's balls on not being true pro-freedom even tho this can help?

Paranoia doesn't help nor being a pure-head when we have this guy where we want him, he isn't likely to go for gay rights so can't we level him and the social-cons here?
I'm stopping here for now.

[FSP-Rebel]

I know why he wants to legalize it...cuz he wants to TAX IT! Yes! Give the big government one more thing to tax! This will be awesome!

Either way nope! Just keep it illegal forever.

How would Ron go for it given the chance? More freedom of choice and less prison or a measly tax?

[GunnyFreedom]

Wow, this page did nothing constructive. Gunny, you're a rep now and you shouldn't opt in to mini-conversations, esp if you have a problem with a national figure coming around to a certain point of view on an issue that you likely don't want to flaunt to voters, if you come out right and say it to your constituents, then hi5. To the rest of you, why are you trying to extrapolate anything that could mean any less than the impression than what this schmuck Paterson is trying to say? Why is there no effort or guts to use this to our specific platform message on the particular issue besides going all nutty and trying to bust this guy's balls on not being true pro-freedom even tho this can help?

Paranoia doesn't help nor being a pure-head when we have this guy where we want him, he isn't likely to go for gay rights so can't we level him and the social-cons here?
I'm stopping here for now.

I'm sorry, in 2008 I was trying to get Ron Paul elected. For some bizarre reason (I forget the context) I thought that Pat Robertson coming out against prohibition would affect something magically and give Ron Paul a real chance to win. It sounded fantastic, so I went to the fantastic-Maker in prayer. I didn't think seeking help in prayer during a Presidential campaign was forbidden.

I can assure you that my electorate will appreciate that fact that the things I do are prayerfully considered. :)

[dannno]

Gunny, you're a rep now and you shouldn't opt in to mini-conversations, esp if you have a problem with a national figure coming around to a certain point of view on an issue that you likely don't want to flaunt to voters, if you come out right and say it to your constituents, then hi5.

I think he has a youtube somewhere discussing the topic with said constituents.

[dannno]

How would Ron go for it given the chance? More freedom of choice and less prison or a measly tax?

LOL, where were you for the CA Prop 19 debates??

[FSP-Rebel]

I'm sorry, in 2008 I was trying to get Ron Paul elected. For some bizarre reason (I forget the context) I thought that Pat Robertson coming out against prohibition would affect something magically and give Ron Paul a real chance to win. It sounded fantastic, so I went to the fantastic-Maker in prayer. I didn't think seeking help in prayer during a Presidential campaign was forbidden.

I can assure you that my electorate will appreciate that fact that the things I do are prayerfully considered. :)
No disrespect, but now is a time when a social-con like him can forth-rightly come out in this sort of mood while expressing that idea even though he mildly supported it in the past. Paterson's low-balled effort in prior times doesn't mean what it means today. Don't you think that the social-cons are more respective of it now or 2 years ago? Is he taken more seriously now or 2 years ago? Not sure what you riding on prayer on as I do it daily, I'm just trying to capitalize on Paterson's newer idea on this issue.

[GunnyFreedom]

"End The Violence Act" ending gang warfare by abolishing black markets.

[speciallyblend]

Either way nope! Just keep it illegal forever.

How would Ron go for it given the chance? More freedom of choice and less prison or a measly tax?

Ron would support ending domestic terrorism basically reversing and removing the penalities for something far safer then aspirin,right-wingers and dems and republicans!! legal or illegal marijuana is available and no threat to my liberties has ever stopped me from enjoying a joint or brownie or tea and never will.

[specsaregood]

Why is there no effort or guts to use this to our specific platform message on the particular issue besides going all nutty and trying to bust this guy's balls on not being true pro-freedom even tho this can help?


Because they are all self-righteous morons that don't know any better. Just like the neocons they claim to hate.

[GunnyFreedom]

Wow, this page did nothing constructive. Gunny, you're a rep now and you shouldn't opt in to mini-conversations, esp if you have a problem with a national figure coming around to a certain point of view on an issue that you likely don't want to flaunt to voters, if you come out right and say it to your constituents, then hi5. To the rest of you, why are you trying to extrapolate anything that could mean any less than the impression than what this schmuck Paterson is trying to say? Why is there no effort or guts to use this to our specific platform message on the particular issue besides going all nutty and trying to bust this guy's balls on not being true pro-freedom even tho this can help?

Paranoia doesn't help nor being a pure-head when we have this guy where we want him, he isn't likely to go for gay rights so can't we level him and the social-cons here?
I'm stopping here for now.

Wait, where did I say that I had a problem with this?

[speciallyblend]

Because they are all self-righteous morons that don't know any better. Just like the neocons they claim to hate.

actually it is called general distrust of right-wingers who we have been saying this stuff to them forever!!! The morons you speak of are named Pat Robertson! Who have used his platform to condemn folks to hell and brainwash christians in the name of the lord empowering the corruption that exist toady in the gop!! Pat robertson is one of the main reasons we have the failed gop of toady;)

[FSP-Rebel]

Wait, where did I say that I had a problem with this?

Didn't seem like you did outside of our disagreement up above, nor ure buddy crazyblend. I'm not here to castigate you as I donated to your campaign and wished you nothing but the best. All I've said all along is that this man's language can be to our benefit in the near times. If it came out as an attack on you perhaps I was wrong. I'm merely saying that we should use this to our advantage (Paterson, so-called[ly]) hating on mj prohibition). I would imagine we all agree to some extent on drugs and mostly marijuana here. The bottom line, is this guy is giving us an opportunity to connect with the socials on issues we never thought we could gain grown on with them, so let's pursue it and not rake each other over the coals for speculative differences.

[GunnyFreedom]

Didn't seem like you did outside of our disagreement up above, nor ure buddy crazyblend. I'm not here to castigate you as I donated to your campaign and wished you nothing but the best. All I've said all along is that this man's language can be to our benefit in the near times. If it came out as an attack on you perhaps I was wrong. I'm merely saying that we should use this to our advantage (Paterson, so-called[ly]) hating on mj prohibition). I would imagine we all agree to some extent on drugs and mostly marijuana here. The bottom line, is this guy is giving us an opportunity to connect with the socials on issues we never thought we could gain grown on with them, so let's pursue it and not rake each other over the coals for speculative differences.

absolutely, this is where the RP Christians actually have an amazing opportunity to present the argument that the violence is created by the black markets, and that black markets are created by the prohibition. The problem is worse now than when we started this experiment. It's time to look for a different way. Pat Robertson recognizes, along with a saddened Church, that the only people being hurt by this war are the poor and the needy; and that is not the way of Christ.

The door is now open to talk about ending prohibition from the perspective of a Christian social conservative. What a body can consume is the business of the Church. By giving it up to government, we witness drug abuse and madness with violence and death. Get the government out of that business altogether and let the Church take full-charge of morality again -- and you watch just God bless our hand.

Move the Church to 'take back charge' of the moral high ground, and to repudiate it's domain from under the authority of government. (marriage and morality)

The moral chaos will only go away when we get government out of the moral business that isn't theirs to mind. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and render unto God what is God's. If we put the Church over what is God's domain and put government over what is man's domain, then God will bless this nation once again.

The much-trusted Pat Robertson is even wakening to this new insight, like Reagan said: the problem is caused by the government in the first place.

Christians today face a reversal of priorities if we truly moved to Godly government.

Godly government actually respects the sovereignty of the individual, just like Christ did. If God Himself can respect the sovereignty of the individual man, then why the hell can't some bureaucrat at the airport? Much less someone we elect?

That's why we came so close in the Constitution. I have often said that "The Constitution is a voluntaryist document in nature."

If we make it back to the Constitutional path, we will return to the cusp of real liberty and prosperity, and it starts with recognizing the respect due a sovereign of the Republic. You.

Let's build a government that respects the people, and lets the church set moral policy.

[Working Poor]

:eek:

[guitarlifter]

absolutely, this is where the RP Christians actually have an amazing opportunity to present the argument that the violence is created by the black markets, and that black markets are created by the prohibition. The problem is worse now than when we started this experiment. It's time to look for a different way. Pat Robertson recognizes, along with a saddened Church, that the only people being hurt by this war are the poor and the needy; and that is not the way of Christ.

The door is now open to talk about ending prohibition from the perspective of a Christian social conservative. What a body can consume is the business of the Church. By giving it up to government, we witness drug abuse and madness with violence and death. Get the government out of that business altogether and let the Church take full-charge of morality again -- and you watch just God bless our hand.

Move the Church to 'take back charge' of the moral high ground, and to repudiate it's domain from under the authority of government. (marriage and morality)

The moral chaos will only go away when we get government out of the moral business that isn't theirs to mind. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and render unto God what is God's. If we put the Church over what is God's domain and put government over what is man's domain, then God will bless this nation once again.

The much-trusted Pat Robertson is even wakening to this new insight, like Reagen said: the problem is caused by the government in the first place.

Christians today face a reversal of priorities if we truly moved to Godly government.

Godly government actually respects the sovereignty of the individual, just like Christ did. If God Himself can respect the sovereignty of the individual man, then why the hell can't some bureaucrat at the airport? Much less someone we elect?

That's why we came so close in the Constitution. I have often said that "The Constitution is a voluntaryist document in nature."

If we make it back to the Constitutional path, we will return to the cusp of real liberty and prosperity, and it starts with recognizing the respect due a sovereign of the Republic. You.

Let's build a government that respects the people, and lets the church set moral policy.

I like you. I agree that a major point to make to Christians that the prohibition is causing more harm than good, and it is more important to point out that it is theologically wrong to attempt prohibition (or ANY type of coercion, inhibition or oppression) in the first place, regardless of the outcome. Many Christians believe that the ends justify the means, but God calls us to have our means justify our ends. Does God want people getting high? There is theological evidence to thoroughly back that he probably does not, but, regardless of this, God doesn't call for coercion of his laws. God does want to see people being faithful toward him, but, just because one is not sinning by tangible action, does not mean that one isn't sinning in one's own heart. Faith requires to believe in one's own heart as well as act faithfully with one's actions. One may not commit adultery with one's physical body, but, if one looks onto another with lust, then one has committed adultery in one's own heart. What's more is that, once one stops watching, the people who commit adultery in their hearts will go out and do it tangibly. It is just as bad before or after stopping them from committing it, and it was wrong to try in the first place. Virtue cannot be coerced. It must be chosen. God has clearly laid out what ends he wants us to accomplish in this world, but, more importantly, is that we do it the way God calls us to accomplish these ends. We must show others that we are Christians by our love, not by oppression.

That's the message we need to be sending out.

[Vessol]

I'm an agnostic/deist, but I couldn't help but love your post Glenn :D.

[JohnEngland]

If only Gary Johnson was pro-life... I have a feeling that his reasoned discussion of the legalisation of marijuana in the primaries would be far better respected otherwise. Instead, people may associate legalisation with being pro-choice and thus harden people's opinions against drug decriminalisation. Unless, of course, more people like Pat Robertson speak out.

[Sola_Fide]

This is AWESOME.

I don't think Pat Robertson is the go-to guy for Christian political opinions like some people in the media do. We Christians who are active politics usually look on Pat as kind of amusing (like most people do:)).

But go Pat. He is right on this one. Wow. I wonder what my firmly pro-drug war Christian Dad will think when I send him this video?:):):)

[Sola_Fide]

If only Gary Johnson was pro-life... I have a feeling that his reasoned discussion of the legalisation of marijuana in the primaries would be far better respected otherwise. Instead, people may associate legalisation with being pro-choice and thus harden people's opinions against drug decriminalisation. Unless, of course, more people like Pat Robertson speak out.

I agree.

[t0rnado]

Whatever his reasons may be for saying what he said, the man still said it. The amount of influence Robertson, Dobson, and other fundamentalists have is insane.

[Slutter McGee]

No one is saying that the guy is Willie Nelson, just a tool that can be used to smooth over some of the social cons on this issue. Those people look up to their so-called leaders and I'm merely suggesting that this could work in our favor. Remember, coalition building along the issues is what Ron is all about, so if the guy wants to swing our way on this one, let's make the most of it if it can help. No need to get all worked up.

This. Why do you guys care about if he means it or not? What does it matter if you think he is the devil? I don't like him at all, so what. He is a tool that can be used now. This is something to be happy about. Not to get all pissed because someone you don't like is saying something you agree with.

Slutter McGee

[dean.engelhardt]

This. Why do you guys care about if he means it or not? What does it matter if you think he is the devil? I don't like him at all, so what. He is a tool that can be used now. This is something to be happy about. Not to get all pissed because someone you don't like is saying something you agree with.

Slutter McGee

Agree. The far right has helped bankrupt this country with this insane war on drugs. Even though Robertson is a kook, he still has alot of influence.

[itshappening]

he was quite clear, he's for possession of a few ounces... it's a step in the right direction

[ItsTime]

"Pat Robertson Agrees With Ron Paul That Pot Should Be Legal"

Could help us in Iowa?

[TC95]

Either way nope! Just keep it illegal forever.

How would Ron go for it given the chance? More freedom of choice and less prison or a measly tax?

Well, yeah, but I don't think Ron Paul and Pat Robertson want it legalized for the same reasons. That's all I was sayin'. I truly believe that Robertson probably just wants to tax it, although I could be wrong. Either way, Robertson coming out against prohibition could make RP look better in the eyes of neocons as they may figure that if Robertson is ok with legalizing it then maybe it's not such an evil position to take.

[Imaginos]

This is good news. We can use this to pull more social conservatives to our ideas.

+1

[Fozz]

This isn't too surprising.......Pat Robertson endorsed pro-abortion, pro-gay Giuliani in the 2008 election.

[Sola_Fide]

This isn't too surprising.......Pat Robertson endorsed pro-abortion, pro-gay Giuliani in the 2008 election.

LOL. What's that supposed to mean?

[speciallyblend]

Didn't seem like you did outside of our disagreement up above, nor ure buddy crazyblend. I'm not here to castigate you as I donated to your campaign and wished you nothing but the best. All I've said all along is that this man's language can be to our benefit in the near times. If it came out as an attack on you perhaps I was wrong. I'm merely saying that we should use this to our advantage (Paterson, so-called[ly]) hating on mj prohibition). I would imagine we all agree to some extent on drugs and mostly marijuana here. The bottom line, is this guy is giving us an opportunity to connect with the socials on issues we never thought we could gain grown on with them, so let's pursue it and not rake each other over the coals for speculative differences.

Personally i do not know gunny but we share support of Ron Paul;) and if i am crazy it is better then being sane! Let's Go Crazy for Freedom and Liberty;)

[Humanae Libertas]

Just don't tell the church-goers who supposedly read the bible, that cannabis is a natural plant, aka created by god. Oh no, don't do that! :p

[Brett85]

The last person you would have suspected!

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/pat-robertson-time-to-legaize-marijuana/

Actually, the last person I would've suspected would be Jack Conway. Lol.

[GunnyFreedom]

What makes it doubly stunning is that it appears his intent is to do it the right way; and to take the responsibility for human behavior back into the church where it belongs. (that means from out of the government)

That would mark an amazing reversal on his understanding of the role of the Church in the world, and a positive development for everyone. Especially the people of God.

When I see what actually looks like a light come on in someone, I try not to discount it at least until after it flickers out.

I honestly believe that if the American church properly recognized the role that the Church is supposed to play in an orderly and free society, we would elect Constitutionalist, and Ron Paul type governments overwhelmingly. Separate the matters of Caesar and God, and don't mix them up. Does a bitter well give forth sweet water? Only give God His due and domain, and the cursings will become blessings again. Society will heal.

The church has wrongfully abdicated it's responsibilities over to the government. It's time to take that ground back by taking it back out from the government,, no more moral laws of Caesar, it will be hard going back to the way at first, so the Church will have to step up and forgive, and seek forgiveness for having lost the lamp of liberty. The church will have to take responsibility for the addicted and the victims of gang violence which they helped to create.

Pat Robertson looks like a step along the way here. I will set my hope on God that the whole house of cards comes down in front of many high profile witnesses. Nothing excites a tea party election quite like media-experiential dissonance. :D

Come on Pat, come out right now, today ask for him to run and endorse Ron Paul for President 2012, and we will get a whole amazing lot of help with restoring the proper dominions of man and God.

[BamaAla]

Great news. I was reading an old thread earlier about bridging the gap between us and the Christian right; this seems to be a step in the right direction. From what I understand, Robertson carries a lot of water with that crowd.

[jct74]

Here's a statement from CBN trying to take it back:


Dr. Robertson did not call for the decriminalization of marijuana. He was advocating that our government revisit the severity of the existing laws because mandatory drug sentences do harm to many young people who go to prison and come out as hardened criminals. He was also pointing out that these mandatory sentences needlessly cost our government millions of dollars when there are better approaches available. Dr. Robertson’s comments followed a CBN News story about a group of conservatives who have proven that faith-based rehabilitation for criminals has resulted in lower repeat offenders and saved the government millions of dollars. Dr. Robertson unequivocally stated that he is against the use of illegal drugs.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/12/23/lame-pat-robertson-didnt-mean-we-should-decriminalize-marijuana-says-cbn/

[GunnyFreedom]

Here's a statement from CBN trying to take it back:



http://hotair.com/archives/2010/12/23/lame-pat-robertson-didnt-mean-we-should-decriminalize-marijuana-says-cbn/

Cowards. Money won again.

[Matt Collins]

Maybe rock & roll is next????



115
(click image for larger version)

[Bman]

Here's a statement from CBN trying to take it back:



http://hotair.com/archives/2010/12/23/lame-pat-robertson-didnt-mean-we-should-decriminalize-marijuana-says-cbn/


Total B.S. He said we have to look differently at who we consider a criminal. That was correct. Who the fuck is trying to down play this understanding and for what means? Evil motherfuckers that lot has to be. Shit my best friend throughout high school had drug problems in his late teens early 20's. No government correctional tool helped him end that problem. I will admit as an agnostic one of the best cures for drug addiction is faith. I'd much rather see churches play a role in helping people with drug problems any day over government policies destroying lives even further everyday when it comes to drugs.

[speciallyblend]

Here's a statement from CBN trying to take it back:



http://hotair.com/archives/2010/12/23/lame-pat-robertson-didnt-mean-we-should-decriminalize-marijuana-says-cbn/

i figured pat robertson was still gonna burn in hell!!

[FSP-Rebel]

i figured pat robertson was still gonna burn in hell!!
You are a puzzle that can't be put together.

[speciallyblend]

You are a puzzle that can't be put together.

na it is pretty simple. I said pat robertson was full of bs when it first was reported! This just proved my point that pat robertson is full of it!! My puzzle is solved or i wouldn't be supporting Ron Paul 2012!!

[heavenlyboy34]

will his show now be called the 420 club?

lolz!!!!

[Anti Federalist]

http://reason.com/blog/2010/12/22/pat-robertson-wants-to-decrimi

Update: Someone's on cleanup duty. This statement arrived in my emailbox at 12:11 p.m. Thursday, via DRC Public Relations:

CLARIFICATION OF MARIJUANA COMMENTS:

Dr. Robertson did not call for the decriminalization of marijuana. He was advocating that our government revisit the severity of the existing laws because mandatory drug sentences do harm to many young people who go to prison and come out as hardened criminals. He was also pointing out that these mandatory sentences needlessly cost our government millions of dollars when there are better approaches available. Dr. Robertson's comments followed a CBN News story about a group of conservatives who have proven that faith-based rehabilitation for criminals has resulted in lower repeat offenders and saved the government millions of dollars. Dr. Robertson unequivocally stated that he is against the use of illegal drugs.

Chris Roslan
Spokesman for CBN

Watch the clip again. Robertson said: "I just believe that criminalizing marijuana, criminalizing possession of a few ounces of pot, and that kind of thing -- it's costing us a fortune, and it's ruining young people." Unless Robertson wants to claim that he's for "costing us a fortune" and "ruining young people," that sounds like a call for decriminalization to me. I'm sorry to see him walking it back, but I'm glad he's at least standing by his opposition to mandatory minimum sentencing.

[AxisMundi]

The last person you would have suspected!

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/pat-robertson-time-to-legaize-marijuana/

Pat is having a senior moment perhaps. :D

However, I don't believe for a moment that he would loose his power base and source of wealth, and actually push for decriminalization.

Just read some of the lambasting from his fellow bible thumpers below the vid.

Expect a retraction soon.

[AxisMundi]

http://reason.com/blog/2010/12/22/pat-robertson-wants-to-decrimi

Update: Someone's on cleanup duty. This statement arrived in my emailbox at 12:11 p.m. Thursday, via DRC Public Relations:

CLARIFICATION OF MARIJUANA COMMENTS:

Dr. Robertson did not call for the decriminalization of marijuana. He was advocating that our government revisit the severity of the existing laws because mandatory drug sentences do harm to many young people who go to prison and come out as hardened criminals. He was also pointing out that these mandatory sentences needlessly cost our government millions of dollars when there are better approaches available. Dr. Robertson's comments followed a CBN News story about a group of conservatives who have proven that faith-based rehabilitation for criminals has resulted in lower repeat offenders and saved the government millions of dollars. Dr. Robertson unequivocally stated that he is against the use of illegal drugs.

Chris Roslan
Spokesman for CBN

Watch the clip again. Robertson said: "I just believe that criminalizing marijuana, criminalizing possession of a few ounces of pot, and that kind of thing -- it's costing us a fortune, and it's ruining young people." Unless Robertson wants to claim that he's for "costing us a fortune" and "ruining young people," that sounds like a call for decriminalization to me. I'm sorry to see him walking it back, but I'm glad he's at least standing by his opposition to mandatory minimum sentencing.

Speak of the devil.

[speciallyblend]

lolz!!!!

na it will be called the 421 Club gimme a minute to change my mind!!

[emazur]

Cowards. Money won again.

I don't see how his position is any different from Rand Paul's (which isn't good itself)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/12/paul-stance-on-drug-funds-could-cost-votes/
Mr. Paul, a "tea party" favorite, shows libertarian leanings on drugs. He said he is opposed to the legalization of marijuana, even for medicinal purposes. But he also has called drug sentences of 10 to 20 years too harsh.

[speciallyblend]

Speak of the devil.

the devil spoke and is still brainwashing his masses:) pat robertson is the devil bobbi bouche!!!

[speciallyblend]

I don't see how his position is any different from Rand Paul's (which isn't good itself)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/12/paul-stance-on-drug-funds-could-cost-votes/
Mr. Paul, a "tea party" favorite, shows libertarian leanings on drugs. He said he is opposed to the legalization of marijuana, even for medicinal purposes. But he also has called drug sentences of 10 to 20 years too harsh.

personally i would like to shove morphine and muscle relaxers and nerve pills along with hash brownies and pot down rand paul's orifices until he gets the picture! Rand Paul should have his lisc revoked. Rand sounds like a drug dealer to me trying to make sure he stays in business with morphine and his pharm drugs. It is beyond me how he can deny 5000 yrs of medical proof in the name of his pharms!! F rand to!! he doesn't have to live with 14 fused vertebrae but my wife does as she battles weight issues with all the drugs! what has saved my wifes life? Marijuana not morphine. Though she has to take a combination of all of above to function like normal if you can call that normal!!

I hope rand keeps his azz in kentucky and never sets foot in colorado for all i care!! dam backwards kentuckians!

more so-called small gov republicans walking the biggovgop line! same ole bs!!

[GunnyFreedom]

I don't see how his position is any different from Rand Paul's (which isn't good itself)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/12/paul-stance-on-drug-funds-could-cost-votes/
Mr. Paul, a "tea party" favorite, shows libertarian leanings on drugs. He said he is opposed to the legalization of marijuana, even for medicinal purposes. But he also has called drug sentences of 10 to 20 years too harsh.

I am betting that Rand hedged to get elected, where he could wield a lot more power to affect a restoration of Constitutinal government. because he is not a liar, he will not actively pursue a legalization agenda during this term. I have taken a similar route myself -- The people are just not ready yet.

But Robertson is not running for election, and he is in a position to really move the public and give Rand and myself the proper environment in which to pursue the repeal of prohibition.

Robertson and his minions are far more cowardly because Robertson had a LOT less to lose from the statement and a LOT more to gain than either Rand or I would having said the same thing.

Rand and I have to balance things like the possible passage of the S510 nullification bills and a balanced Federal budget against the introduction of a wildly controversial policy that could prevent us from the ability to affect policy altogether.

Pat Robertson is not in that position at all. The only drawback is that he loses a few percentage points in donor flow, and has to give up the solid gold toilet handles. The potential benefit is an America with about 70% of the crap that makes us ugly GONE.

Rand and I seriously tone down the WoD talk because there are other policies that desperately need to be affected on a higher order of triage (not necessarily priority, but triage). Robertson has no such conflict, so his position is different indeed from Rand's.

[AxisMundi]

the devil spoke and is still brainwashing his masses:) pat robertson is the devil bobbi bouche!!!

Indeed. Pat Robertson is (was) a student and disciple of Silas Rushdooney, founder of the Christian Reconstructionist Movement, a Calvinist organization still actively seeking their agenda. Robertson, Fallwell (may he rest in flame) and Graham all forward and support this agenda, as well as several other religious personalities and a certain number of our Elected Employees as well.

Turning the United States into a theodemocracy where the Church rules and the g'ment merely supports the church, and the replacement of our Ten Bill of Rights with the Ten Commandments.

It surprises me that the fact that the last administration's DOJ replacements were almost exclusively from Pat Robertson's Regents law School hasn't raised serious concerns.

[speciallyblend]

I am betting that Rand hedged to get elected, where he could wield a lot more power to affect a restoration of Constitutinal government. because he is not a liar, he will not actively pursue a legalization agenda during this term. I have taken a similar route myself -- The people are just not ready yet.

But Robertson is not running for election, and he is in a position to really move the public and give Rand and myself the proper environment in which to pursue the repeal of prohibition.

Robertson and his minions are far more cowardly because Robertson had a LOT less to lose from the statement and a LOT more to gain than either Rand or I would having said the same thing.

Rand and I have to balance things like the possible passage of the S510 nullification bills and a balanced Federal budget against the introduction of a wildly controversial policy that could prevent us from the ability to affect policy altogether.

Pat Robertson is not in that position at all. The only drawback is that he loses a few percentage points in donor flow, and has to give up the solid gold toilet handles. The potential benefit is an America with about 70% of the crap that makes us ugly GONE.

Rand and I seriously tone down the WoD talk because there are other policies that desperately need to be affected on a higher order of triage (not necessarily priority, but triage). Robertson has no such conflict, so his position is different indeed from Rand's.

I hear ya and understand ya ,but there is no reason to deny medical marijuana. 5000 yrs can not be pushed under the rug by a corrupt dea with 75 yrs of lies!! When i hear rand say that it makes me want to march down and remove the word republican from the voter roll by my name!! When rand says that he denies 5000 yrs of history and endorses 75 yrs of dea lies and pat robertson lies etc etc!!

ps my wife is at 137 pounds and was at 130 pounds 2 weeks ago. that is how much she was at age 13!! She is 42 now!! This is a life and death issue that rand is playing with!! I am glad i am in colorado and not that backwards state kentucky!!
what will it take for Rand paul to wake up? my wifes death??

[AxisMundi]

For those wishing to understand the support for the current prohibition on pot...

http://www.hulu.com/watch/63039/reefer-madness

It is, I believe, important to understand the actual motivations and sources of opinion behind those who oppose decriminalizing.

[speciallyblend]

Indeed. Pat Robertson is (was) a student and disciple of Silas Rushdooney, founder of the Christian Reconstructionist Movement, a Calvinist organization still actively seeking their agenda. Robertson, Fallwell (may he rest in flame) and Graham all forward and support this agenda, as well as several other religious personalities and a certain number of our Elected Employees as well.

Turning the United States into a theodemocracy where the Church rules and the g'ment merely supports the church, and the replacement of our Ten Bill of Rights with the Ten Commandments.

It surprises me that the fact that the last administration's DOJ replacements were almost exclusively from Pat Robertson's Regents law School hasn't raised serious concerns.

scary for sure! These are the folks that give the gop and republicans a BADNAME and they are the reason i never joined the gop until i heard Ron Paul! Pat Robertson was one of the main reason i left the communistwealth of viriginia,virginia beach!! We did finally change some of the insane marijuana laws in va before i moved to colorado that were backed by who?? PAT ROBERTSON, the devil!!!!

[speciallyblend]

For those wishing to understand the support for the current prohibition on pot...

http://www.hulu.com/watch/63039/reefer-madness

It is, I believe, important to understand the actual motivations and sources of opinion behind those who oppose decriminalizing.

I know their motivation 75 yrs of lies coming from the us gov aka dea!! and the children;) If they oppose smoking marijuana, then they can eat it, end of argument!!! The Sad part is the law and those people are more dangerous then marijuana ever could be!! Anti-Marijuana folks are blinded by brainwashing and plain ignorance of the facts thanks to our corrupt gov(dea and gov officials who wanted to pad duponts pockets! it was never about marijuana smoking just race and raw materials!!

reefer madness is just comedy nothing else. there is not one accurate fact in that movie! that is a funny movie!

[DamianTV]

Holy Smoke!

Pat Robertson? Of all people?

[AxisMundi]

I know their motivation 75 yrs of lies coming from the us gov aka dea!! and the children;) If they oppose smoking marijuana, then they can eat it, end of argument!!! The Sad part is the law and those people are more dangerous then marijuana ever could be!! Anti-Marijuana folks are blinded by brainwashing and plain ignorance of the facts thanks to our corrupt gov(dea and gov officials who wanted to pad duponts pockets! it was never about marijuana smoking just race and raw materials!!

reefer madness is just comedy nothing else. there is not one accurate fact in that movie! that is a funny movie!

The Pot Prohibition was created and fostered not only by the religious right (which is neither) but Big Corp as well.

There is some evidence that Big Paper and Big Forestry was involved in the Marijuana Tax Stamp Act of the early 1930's.

There is also some evidence suggesting that there was a racist element too. Considering that opium, coke and pot were not made illegal until those drugs began making inroads into "white America", it is a good possibility.

today we have Big Cop, Big Pharma, Big Brewery, Big Prison, and other corporate entities invoked in keeping it illegal as they have a vested interest of profit to consider.

As for Reefer Madness, it was not intended as a comedy, but as an "morality educational film" financed by a church group to show to parents to urge them to keep their kids away from pot. Is it a comedy now? Sure, among intelligent people. But several times I have seen this movie linked to by those heavily opposed to decriminalizing drugs. Pot smokers get a good laugh out of it, especially when viewed under the influence as I well know. However, there are still rabidly religious people who take the film quite seriously.

[AxisMundi]

Holy Smoke!

Pat Robertson? Of all people?

Read the retraction from his organization.

[speciallyblend]

The Pot Prohibition was created and fostered not only by the religious right (which is neither) but Big Corp as well.

There is some evidence that Big Paper and Big Forestry was involved in the Marijuana Tax Stamp Act of the early 1930's.

There is also some evidence suggesting that there was a racist element too. Considering that opium, coke and pot were not made illegal until those drugs began making inroads into "white America", it is a good possibility.

today we have Big Cop, Big Pharma, Big Brewery, Big Prison, and other corporate entities invoked in keeping it illegal as they have a vested interest of profit to consider.

As for Reefer Madness, it was not intended as a comedy, but as an "morality educational film" financed by a church group to show to parents to urge them to keep their kids away from pot. Is it a comedy now? Sure, among intelligent people. But several times I have seen this movie linked to by those heavily opposed to decriminalizing drugs. Pot smokers get a good laugh out of it, especially when viewed under the influence as I well know. However, there are still rabidly religious people who take the film quite seriously.

yep i hear ya! dupont was a major company against the raw materials of hemp( a direct threat to them)!! at the time they made marijuana illegal they were estimating 20,000 possible marijuanausers in our country(if i remember that figure right) these laws were used in texas and many southern border states to deport mexicans and save the white women from the mexicans and the black man raping ways(sarcasm) the amount of marijuana smokers at that time clearly show it was about hemp not marijuana smoking(false flag if i must call it that). That was basically used as a smoke screen(no pun intended) to help kill the hemp industry and paving the road for dupont chemicals.

[dannno]

As for Reefer Madness, it was not intended as a comedy, but as an "morality educational film" financed by a church group to show to parents to urge them to keep their kids away from pot. Is it a comedy now? Sure, among intelligent people. But several times I have seen this movie linked to by those heavily opposed to decriminalizing drugs. Pot smokers get a good laugh out of it, especially when viewed under the influence as I well know. However, there are still rabidly religious people who take the film quite seriously.

Hah, really?? I had no idea ANYBODY still took the film seriously..

[AxisMundi]

Hah, really?? I had no idea ANYBODY still took the film seriously..

I was taken aback as well.

But that's why I know it was first funded by a church group (whose name escapes me ATM) and used as a "moral education film" before some stoners got a hold of it, re-edited it apparently, and turned it into a cult classic.

[jct74]

Vote: Pat Robertson - Pinhead or Patriot for saying marijuana should be decriminalized?

http://www.billoreilly.com/
(poll is at bottom of screen)

[FSP-Rebel]

I think patriot polls should have a ron paul vs. robertson poll, who's with me? If you don't get it then, you're old and tiresome.

[jct74]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaZC_Qifr-E