John Stewart Points Out Blatent Media Bias and Hand-Picking of Candidates.

[_Simpson_ 250]

It's like the focus on Dale Jr. or Danica during NASCAR races. Both drivers are mediocre at best but both get large amounts of coverage because that's what the sheeple want.

Will somebody please tell Go Daddy that Danica is not that hot.

As to legalizing drugs... nobody said they'd be legal in your state or local area, it would just no longer fall under the federal government's sphere. Ron Paul is really big on having the federal government do only what it's supposed to do and not much else. Your community is your own business. If you don't like crack heads in your community, ban crack. Your call. Just don't go tugging on big brother's arm for funds and resources to fight the problem.

Not true, Ron Paul - " I think the governments role should not be involved in personal habits",he was referring to the state level. Lets for a second forget about all word games politicians play(Ron Paul not a exception) and just admit that he supports it but won't just come out and say it.

It's Jon, not John.

Here is me not giving a damn.........................................

[fozzie 41]

It doesn't matter how you feel about their policy ideas or their stance on legalization of drugs etc.! You should still have the opportunity to hear them speak and make your own mind up.

The UK system of party political broadcasts gives all the parties the same air time on national TV. It matters not if one side has more money than the other.

[slim 1,525]

Not true, Ron Paul - " I think the governments role should not be involved in personal habits",he was referring to the state level. Lets for a second forget about all word games politicians play(Ron Paul not a exception) and just admit that he supports it but won't just come out and say it.

Personal habits aren't the government's job. That's not an endorsement of anything and it's also not saying state and local governments can't pass their own laws.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Paul, I posted this 2 wees ago. You were in fact the first person to post in my thread. Fail

Thread

[_Simpson_ 250]

Personal habits aren't the government's job. That's not an endorsement of anything and it's also not saying state and local governments can't pass their own laws.

Drinking and driving? Not the governments job to regulate? Drugs like crack will not only affect the people doing the drug, it will affect the whole neighborhood. Ron Paul is suggesting that all drugs should be legal but of course like most politicians he doesn't have the balls to just come out and say.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Paul, I posted this 2 wees ago. You were in fact the first person to post in my thread. Fail

Thread

i think i was half awake that day

[scandal 951]

Drinking and driving? Not the governments job to regulate? Drugs like crack will not only affect the people doing the drug, it will affect the whole neighborhood. Ron Paul is suggesting that all drugs should be legal but of course like most politicians he doesn't have the balls to just come out and say.

Drugs are a very serious problem. They ruin lives, families, careers, neighborhoods, communities. I think anyone would agree that LESS crack and H on the street is better than MORE. The question is: how do we reduce drug usage and its impact and the related violence and crime it is linked to?

We've had a war on drugs for about 4 decades now. It's done squat except for fill our prisons and give lots of otherwise productive citizens a criminal record for minor possession charges. It is a total colossal failure and it's about time we recognize that.

Conservatives are always on about personal responsibility and reducing the reach of government into our private lives. And yet they are often the biggest champions of the war on drugs.

How about some intelligent, sensible policies that focus on the problem rather than treating it as a 'war'? How about respecting citizens' rights to smoke a joint in their own home without harassment in the same way that they're entitled to drink a beer?

How about spending our time and resources on rehab clinics, job programs for the homeless, education efforts rather than searches, seizures, incarcerations?

I'm all for effective regulation. Tax the product, inspect and regulate for quality and safety, don't sell to minors, continue to come down hard on organized crime or gangs pushing the narcotrade. But otherwise leave citizens alone. It worked when we ended Prohibition and got Capone and the rumrunners out of the illicit booze industry. It can work now too.

I agree very little with Ron Paul on just about all his positions. But he's got a refreshing take on the war on drugs, and the proper role of the state in telling citizens what they can do with their own bodies.

[Pooky 3,782]

It doesn't matter how you feel about their policy ideas or their stance on legalization of drugs etc.! You should still have the opportunity to hear them speak and make your own mind up.

The UK system of party political broadcasts gives all the parties the same air time on national TV. It matters not if one side has more money than the other.

And best of all, it's all over and done with inside 6 weeks

For the other 4 years, 10 months and 2 weeks, the politicians do their best to remain invisible and get on with the business of running the damn country. The USA should try it. It's a remarkable concept.

[_Simpson_ 250]

It doesn't matter how you feel about their policy ideas or their stance on legalization of drugs etc.! You should still have the opportunity to hear them speak and make your own mind up.

Sure, of course. Just saying that the world is probably better off not knowing of this guy.

Drugs are a very serious problem. They ruin lives, families, careers, neighborhoods, communities. I think anyone would agree that LESS crack and H on the street is better than MORE. The question is: how do we reduce drug usage and its impact and the related violence and crime it is linked to?

and legalizing it will reduce usage?

We've had a war on drugs for about 4 decades now. It's done squat except for fill our prisons and give lots of otherwise productive citizens a criminal record for minor possession charges. It is a total colossal failure and it's about time we recognize that.

Are you suggesting things would of been better had we just legalized all drugs.

Conservatives are always on about personal responsibility and reducing the reach of government into our private lives. And yet they are often the biggest champions of the war on drugs.

Its when lack of personal responsibility affects me and my neighborhood that I want the government to step in. Crack addicts don't just keep it to themselves, this effects everyone.

How about some intelligent, sensible policies that focus on the problem rather than treating it as a 'war'? How about respecting citizens' rights to smoke a joint in their own home without harassment in the same way that they're entitled to drink a beer?

When politicans start talking about legalizing drugs I dont think people are sitting around their living room thinking "oh dear god they're going to try and legalize marijuana", its the hard drugs people are mostly concerned with. So yes I agree when it comes to pot the laws are outrageous but to equate that to all drugs should be legal is crazy.

How about spending our time and resources on rehab clinics, job programs for the homeless, education efforts rather than searches, seizures, incarcerations?

These are a lot feel good solutions that have very little affect, now with that said there is a lot of programs out there for people who are willing to make the step(key point)to help themselves.

I'm all for effective regulation. Tax the product, inspect and regulate for quality and safety, don't sell to minors, continue to come down hard on organized crime or gangs pushing the narcotrade. But otherwise leave citizens alone. It worked when we ended Prohibition and got Capone and the rumrunners out of the illicit booze industry. It can work now too.

What product? Drugs? All drugs?

Edited September 11, 2011 by _Simpson_

[Danno 1,228]

why should drugs not be legal?

What business is it of yours what I do in the privacy of my own home?

why must you only do it in the privacy of your home?

What kind of free society is it where people must hide out to do what is legal?

If you are really for freedom, unrestricted why stop at your home?

[slim 1,525]

Drinking and driving? Not the governments job to regulate?

Not the federal government.

Drugs like crack will not only affect the people doing the drug, it will affect the whole neighborhood. Ron Paul is suggesting that all drugs should be legal but of course like most politicians he doesn't have the balls to just come out and say.

A federal war on drugs is a huge scam.

There's no reason local governments can't handle drugs on their own.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

why must you only do it in the privacy of your home?

What kind of free society is it where people must hide out to do what is legal?

If you are really for freedom, unrestricted why stop at your home?

Because you're only putting yourself in 'possible' harms way.

Drinking and Driving laws protect those around you.

Now if someone wanting to have 'pot' or 'crack' bars here, by all means, go ahead. However the same thing with PI will (and should) apply to drug users.

[slim 1,525]

Drinking and Driving laws protect those around you.

Do they really though?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Do they really though?

no, but society 'feels better' about themselves.

[slim 1,525]

no, but society 'feels better' about themselves.

Which is why it's time the federal government get out of almost all laws. Let the states handle it.