Ron Pauls view on Drugs

You guys gotta check out this site and read Ron Paul views on Drugs and shit! Good read:

http://www.issues2000.org/2008/Ron_Paul_Drugs.htm

 

I thought he was pretty far back in the standings?

 

god, does that make a difference? Pick a candidate you would like in office, not one the media tells you will win.

 

man, how I wish I was 18......

 

Well what I'm saying is, it doesn't really make a difference what he's planning to do, he's too far back in the standings to get elected and have all of our dreams come true anyways.

 

yeah, but i believe theres two other canidates who want to decrimanalize and legalize marijuana. But it really seems like obama, huckaby, or cliton will win.....

 

I'm an independent, but I live in a state with an open primary, so I'm voting for ron paul. there are some others who are fabulous people and would be good presidents. But Paul specifies exactly which areas of the gov't are outdated and instead of tweaking them he suggests eliminating them and starting from scratch, similar to Obama, who is a close second choice

 

Ron Paul has the best drug policy of any candidate, but his other plans for our country are completely inviable.

Vote for Ron Paul if you want our poor people to starve, our health-care system to go to shit, terrorists to invade our country, etc...


Some of his policies are cool but abolishing the income tax is just going too far.

 

where do you get this nonsense? getting rid of the income tax would only take us back to the same spending level as 1996. do you have any idea where your tax money goes? i'm sure you don't or you wouldn't be writing these ridiculous things. your tax money goes directly to the federal reserve, a private corporation run by the international banks, to pay off the interest on the national debt. do you really want a federal governement that takes care of its people from the cradle to the grave? that puts way too much power in their hands and leaves little self-determination.

 

Sadly, he is. I think way far back actually.

 

what site are you going to? He's is second at the moment in Nevada.

 

Why on earth would you vote for a Republican just because you think he'll let you get high? I'm afraid that either brain cells are in short supply on these boards or some folks have highly questionable priorities.

The libertarian style platform has for years captivated and confused voters who don't seem to realize that all of America isn't like Montana where you can freely roam around with guns and do whatever you want with your land, be it irresponsible land management, cooking up some meth, or creating your own militia.

Libertarians (or Libertarian Republicans) pander to the pothead crowd by describing some sort of utopian America that hasn't existed for many years and will never exist in the future.

 

even if your canidates of choice doesnt seem like they will win, you still should vote cause it expresses your own opinion of who you want to led our country. who knows even if the prez you what is behind, the more people vote for them, the higher change they will win. come on, support who want in office.

 

mccain

 

To vote for a candidate solely upon the assumption that he'll let you get high is indeed absurd, but not because it's not a good idea, but because legislation about weed, etc. is meaningless to the average stoner anyway. I've smoked weed for twelve out of my twenty five years on the planet and have never been perturbed by the law. The activist effort about mj is not that we can finally get high legally, it's that we want others to realize how beneficial it would be to all society if it were commercially exploited, for non-psychedelic reasons.

I can understand skepticism about the feasibility of Paul's ideas, but the idealistic vision of America is precluded only because of closed-mindedness and allegiance to the status quo, and the natural human tendency to be more comfortable with what is familiar. The hippies of the 60's started a fundamentalist notion about a utopia, and it was only abated because they deceived themselves into the thought that their philosophy only led to excess. What led to the resignation was the coincidental yet exceptional deaths of morrison, joplin, etc. and the whole manson thing. The hippies let the magnitude of rare and excessive situations dictate the parameters of their movement. So they gave up the public effort and kept the drugs, but the philosophy was maintained by a few, and I believe is making a comeback presently.

 

What America needs is a new band, like the Grateful Dead.

Your optimism is refreshing and I encourage you to keep it up. I'm still frustrated by the failure of the anti-war movement to stop the march to war in Iraq and perhaps a bit cynnical. While I agree that the spirit of the hippie movement is still alive in America, I think in many ways it has splintered into so many sub groups and counter cultures that they really no longer bear any resemblance to each other, either superficially or ideologically, and the sum of these groups certainly are not a cohesive, cooperative, activist minded force that can blow the political winds one way or another.

To illustrate my point, I've aways considered the rave culture to be my generation's new hippie movement (Jerry Garcia died when I was 16, forcing thousands of heads to either get real jobs, start touring with Phish, or buy turntables.) Raves had it all, peace, love, hugs, drugs, and music. What happened though was that rather than having this fresh demographic primed for political change percolate to the mainstream, a parallel culture emerged that really didn't crave acceptance from the mainstream. If most people wanted to have their 9-5 job and didn't really care about Peace, Love, Unity, or Respect, ravers didn't care because they had their own little world in dirty warehouses and remote farmlands. Hell, you could even have a 9-5 at financial institution and go raving on the weekend.

As the rave movement evolved, its participants found that they had less and less in common with each other. Jungle heads, with their coke and ketamine, had their own rooms and made jokes about trance heads with their pills, acid, glowsticks and candy bracelets, and the movement continued to mutate and expand into self sustaining sub-movements that were generally apolotical and had no real sense of heirarchy or reason to be politically active.

That's my vision of the future of the hippie movement in America, parallel subcultures that don't cooperate to make political change. I don't suppose that's necessarily a bad thing. Maybe if there was a new band that could draw crowds like the Grateful Dead did, we'd see some change, but we'd likely have to have a draft instated for an unpopular war like the hippies had to have any real movement emerge.

Oh, and to get back on topic, Ron Paul is a Republican and therefore bad guy. I'm all about the polarization.

 

obama all the way

 

yeah the rave scene was a virtual sibling to disco. it existed when disco did, and lived while disco died. But the attitude of disco-goers and ravers was similar; the values of the sixties faded, but the desire and ability to do drugs and bask in fraternal comfort prevailed, and continued to till the present. But since the 70's the idea of rec. drug use was intertwined with radical stigma. It's easier to explain erratic behavior when you can simplify and boil it down to an ingested psychoactive substance. But just like any other social group, there are bad apples. The bad apples in counter culture are the ones seen by mainstream society, so it's easier to maintain that drugs are just plain bad, but the common folk don't hear about all the good things about drugs, since the good in drugs is brought out by responsible users, and responsible users are also good at keeping private.

So basically you had the boomer hippies naturally going on the DL with their drugs, and the ones who messed up continued to be seen by all, making headlines even. The discreet drug users, according to their new nature, didn't explicitly unite, and still don't. So I guess if we as responsible drug users went against our common sense and were very public with our vices, ppl would start to see drugs as they are, neither good nor bad; they are tools that can be used and abused.

Also, the emergence of the internet and its inevitable growth, might engender the right medium through which counter-culturites can more cohesively connect, especially with sites such as this one.

 

will do!

 

you just had to get smart.