Ron Paul on the Issue of Medical Marijuana
Posted on November 26, 2007
Remember when Mitt Romney walked away from the medical marijuana patient in the wheelchair? Don’t get me wrong, Mitt answered the kid’s question and went on to being a politician. It did come across kinda cold though. Anyway, that kid seems to be making his rounds to other candidates. He asked a similar question to Ron Paul, who had quite a different answer.
Hmmm. Well, he makes several good points in favor of the medical marijuana argument. I think I agree with him on a lot of that one. However, I don’t agree with all his positions on the drug war. But thats another post and another debate. I gotta give Ron Paul his props on this one. It makes Mitt look even colder when you compare their reactions side by side. Agree with Ron Paul or not on this, he handled it well.
Sidenote thought. He’s gathering up all the outcasts isn’t he? The 911 truthers, the white supremists, the pot-heads, and the pimps and hookers! Strategy.
» Filed Under 1st Amendment, Illegal Activities, News, Politics As Usual, Video
Trackback URL
Comments
31 Responses to “Ron Paul on the Issue of Medical Marijuana”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
Hrm, why would he have such groups like him.
Well, the 9/11 truthers don’t like the government. Small government = less government. I don’t think they like the federal reserve, NAFTA, CAFTA, and all those other world organizations and treaties. I guess if Ron Paul was elected, they’d think that having small government will, not be able to have so much power? I don’t know
White supremacists don’t like world organizations either. They also don’t like the war, apparently. Ron Paul is the most anti-war. Go figure.
Pot heads think if Ron Paul will end the war on drugs, they will somehow be able to smoke pot. But it’d still have to be legal in their state (states’ rights on drug laws, as Paul advocates)
Pimps and hookers, well thank Tucker Carlson for that one. Tucker called up the dude, apparently they are friends, and the guy said “hey I like this guy!” The same guy also donated 2,300 to Hilary Clinton this past summer. I didn’t see much news about it though…
You know who also supports Ron Paul? Me! I’m normal! Robert Novak, Pat Buchanan, Andrew Napolitano, Michael Scheuer (from the CIA), Barry Goldwater, Jr. But no one wants to talk about /those/ people, at least in the mainstream media. Sad, really.
And Ron Paul has also gathered up for supporters all the normal, freedom-loving people who can read and interpret the Constitution. Something Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani do not seem to remember how to do.
Announcement! Brent and Denis are normal. Therefore, they prove that actual normal people like Ron Paul too. Even though I never said otherwise, Brent and Denis in all their normalness were polite enough to point it out for all of us.
Crime went up 400% during prohibition.
Just like it has gone up during the “Drug War”
The Drug war failed as soon as it started. I grew up in the middle of it. You could get heroin cocaine whatever in my high school. It is easier to get Acid as a kid than it is Alchohol.
When my generation is in power we WILL repeal this insanity if we cannot get it done quicker.
Doubt my conclusion?
Ask any 20-30 year old what they think of the “War on Drugs”
Paul is the last, best hope for America to resuscitate the republic. We need something like this…
link
Yay!! I’m normal too and I’m voting for Ron Paul, lol.
Who knew a politician could be honest and principled?
Add one more normal person to the list of folks supporting Ron Paul. He hit the nail on the head when he mocks the other sellout candidates: “I’m a compassionate conservative- I want you to SUFFER!” Hilarious! Ron Paul actually uses logic when supporting his positions- something that the other candidates seem incapable of doing. Check out McCain’s response to the same question and you’ll see what I mean.
I am an attorney and philosophically crime has been described as harm by one individual to another that effects their life , liberty or property. The mere possession of something should NEVER be criminalized. The currant laws were promoted by corporate pigs who want a non violent jail population to work at the price of slave labor. The “war on drugs” is nothing more than the fascist government enslaving mostly minorities for the purpose of corporate greed. Where are the “cocaine cowboys”? The CIA is the drug dealer and they have gotten rid of he compeation. Ron Paul is the only honest man in Washington. We are at a crossroad and our choice is Live Free or Die.! EMCK
Thanksgiving went well, so in addition to my three siblings who are committed, you can add 9 of my elders that liked what they heard (and read. I have plenty of campaign lit, of course.) I’ll ask for commitments at Christmas.
BTW, the same guy into Hillary recently. You’ll love her typical Clintonian non-answer. Hat tip
He also gets more money from the military than any other candidate. I wonder what that says about him?
911 truther - I’m not one.
white supremist - I’m not one.
the pot-head - I’m not one.
pimp - I’m not one.
hooker - I’m not one.
Ron Paul supporter - I am one.
When enough normal people finally learn of Ron Paul, he may actually have enough support to win.
geez! All you normal people are making me sick. Outcasts matter too!
I’m curious. If Ron Paul doesn’t make the cut this time around, do all of you have a second choice candidate you will rally behind? Of course, I wouldn’t expect it to be as passionately. Just curious.
There is no second choice candidate.
Yeah.. Pitty for all the dopers that support Dr. Paul… Since its THE STATES that have laws that would not change… I guess its just the logic in sending federal agents into states that “don’t do a good enough job” that works for you huh?
Sorry… something to point out… In 1985 cocaine sold for $120. gram… Today it sells for $30.
In 1985 the FEDERAL government had like 17,000 inmates in federal prison… today its over HALF MILLION and… most drug inmates are in FEDERAL prison for DISGUSTINGLY small amounts of drugs…. They should be in their state prisons… not on MY dime..
Now we have to KEEP arresting many to keep the prisons operating and the industries and workers fully employed… This is sad
I’m one more person here who considers himself “normal” and supports Ron Paul. It’s a pretty simple analysis I go through: who is telling the truth here? I happen to agree with most of Paul’s points, but two things would sell me on him even if I didn’t: (1) Paul has been telling the truth for 30 years and (2) frankly, he is a lot smarter and more well read than I am (as well as all of the other candidates). When an honest man (for the first time in my life), who is also brilliant, takes a firm position on an issue I am not well informed on, I give him the benefit of the doubt as compared to a liar who will say anythiing to buy a vote.
Even a blind pig, and all that.
*heh*
Frankly, on Constitutional limits on Federal authority, Ron Paul is the best of the candidates. Unfortunately, he goes all nutso on too many issues.
The so-called “War on Drugs” is not one of the issues he’s nutso on, though. Note: open disclosure: I use one–and only one–very potent drug called “alcohol”–one or two beers a day of a fluid that varies between 3% and 7% alcohol by volume (depending on just how I brew it or what I might have bought). It’s the only drug I use, but it–and even its manufacture for my own use–is perfectly legal… now that Carrie Nation’s idiosyncratic little campaign against individual liberty and personal responsibility has passed the way of the dodo.
And alcohol use–and the failure of Prohibtion–is a very good example of why the “feddle gummint” should be out of regulating what people choose to put into their bodies–beyond just the Constitutional issue that it’s none of the “feddle gummint’s” (”feddle” rhymes with “meddle” you see :-)) business. The local level is a much better realm of control. I live in a “wet” county with “dry” counties on two sides and “wet” counties on three (yes, it’s not a plain old square). If I want to buy my beer instead of brew my own, I must either buy it here or in one of the other wet counties. Good, local, regulation of the sale of a dangerous substance.
The arguments against the “feddle gummint’s” so-called “War on Drugs” are much more potent than either Paul cites in the video or the small line I hint at here. But that “War on Drugs” is just one of many, many areas where our national government is operating with no constitutional justification whatsoever. If conservatives were serious, elimination of ALL illegitimate usurpation of the powers that are rightfully the States’ or the People’s by the “feddle gummint” would be a high, high priority. Instead, we have calls for federally-imposed bans of smoking; constitutional amendments concerning marriage, abortion, and a host of other things that should simply be removed from the national government’s plate and sent back to the Sates and counties and cities and towns to deal with.
Issues of national security, foreign trade and diplomatic relations, basic interstate infrastructure and mediation between States: these are constitutionally legitimate areas of national government concern.
Ron Paul’s a nut on many things, but he’s 100% correct about the “War on Drugs”.
Second choice? Like who? They are all so different than the guy we support. We support him because he represents us crazy SOBs that appreciate the Constitution, love freedom, and desire peace and prosperity. The others do not.
Not really, Jay.
Aside from the rabid anti-government types, Ron Paul is reuniting fiscal conservatives and there’s no one else on the ballot that’s even paying lip-service to us, let alone has any sort of track-record.
If Paul doesn’t win, most of us will protest with a 3rd party vote or just stay home. You see, we don’t lose any sleep over Hillary. Bush screwed us a lot harder than Bill ever dreamed of. We’re doing our best to accomplish our goal without putting a Dem in office, but one way or another, we aim to cripple the neocons.
Marijuana was originally criminalized (via taxation) in the 1930’s as a result of a crusade equating it’s effects as equivalent to Heroin and COcaine by William Randolph Hearst utilizing his vast media empire. This was not due to Mr. Hearst’s altruistic nature and concern for humanity. You see, his Jute farms and rope factories in the far east were taking a big hit from the domestic hemp industry, which produced a far superior product at a much cheaper price. Mind you, hemp is and never was a drug- it contains little or no THC! But it is in the same family as marijuana, so that provided the opening for Mr. Hearst to squash his competitors and monopolize the rope industry. As my economics professor always said, ‘If you want to find out WHY something happens, FOLLOW THE MONEY!’.
xtrabiggg
++++++++++++++++++++++++
David, what is Ron Paul nuts about? Wants a sound economy and monetary unit. Wants an end to the Iraq War because they had nothing to do with 9/11 and it should have been declared as a war if we were to fight it at all. Wants to issue letters of Marque and Reprisal to catch Osama bin Laden (someone knows where he is but we are still fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, why?) Wants states to decide most issues as you seem to support. Wants to uphold our social security and medicare responsibilities for those that depend on them and yet let young people opt out to invest for their retirement as they see fit. Wants to reduce government spending and cut or eliminate most taxes (the income tax only pays the interest on the national debt which we wouldn’t need if we could just cut spending to year 2000 levels, not that hard to do with some Congressional restraint or a veto pen with some ink in it). Wants to end foreign aid to everyone and use that money here cuz over there (in most countries) it is given to corrupt politicians who pocket it, which is why we give billions and those countries still have the same problems or more than when we started giving to them.
Seriously, what is nuts about his positions? And for the room, no he did not blame American for 9/11, he blamed bad policy from inept politicians for the last 60 years for “contributing” to the anger of a bunch of sickos that we could have avoided if we minded our own business. He also wants to make the Second Amendment legal again, not “managed” as it is now.
Jay asks: I’m curious. If Ron Paul doesn’t make the cut this time around, do all of you have a second choice candidate you will rally behind? Of course, I wouldn’t expect it to be as passionately. Just curious.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but if Ron Paul is not the GOP nominee, I will vote for whomever the Libertarian party candidate is. I will absolutely not waste my vote casting it for the lesser of two evils. I would encourage any and all Ron Paul supporters to have a look at the Libertarian Party’s stand on the issues (http://www.lp.org/issues/current.shtml) and the party platform (http://www.lp.org/issues/platform_all.shtml) and recognize that there IS still a choice for your voice to be heard.
“He’s gathering up all the outcasts isn’t he?”
Really: and if so, why does it matter? The very question implies that you take your credo from the trough, and don’t have the guts to think beyond guilt-by-association.
The corollary to guilt-by-association, of course, is anointment-by-association; and therefore your tastes are dictated by the opinions of others: the opinions of opinion-makers, as a matter of fact.
Cognitive autonomy dictates that you judge Ron Paul by issues before association; otherwise, you’re languishing in the me-tooism of playground politics.
Oh, wow, some whacko still thinks the War on Drugs is a good idea! I didn’t know you people existed! I thought you died out in the late 1930s. Cool.
> no he did not blame American for 9/11, he blamed bad policy from inept politicians for the last 60 years for “contributing†to the anger of a bunch of sickos that we could have avoided if we minded our own business.
“Bad policy” … “‘contributing’ to the anger”??
I’ll grant you that bad policy, particularly the results of the Frank Church committee that hamstrung our intelligence contributed to the problems we’re having today. But our policy made them mad at us?
Did our isolationist policy of the early 20th century keep us out of WWI or WWII? By that logic, it did.
But thinking that we made them mad at us, so they attacked us? Yeah, that’s nuts.
You see, bad people are, well, bad people. Not paying attention to them doesn’t make them good people. Not paying attention to bad people makes you vulnerable.
You don’t have to like that, but it’s true, like it or not.
He said he wouldn’t use the federal government against ANYONE using marijuana. That almost made me cry. If you do not agree with his view of the drug war, you are brainwashed, because the current policy makes absolutely no sense.
Rolland: I’d go with the Constitutionalist candidate, myself. I actually support RP more for his constitutionalism than his libertarianism.
Freedom is popular. I think its a telling statement by the mainstream media when they won’t mention Ron Paul in a “legitimate” article about politics, but will mention him in a “tabloid” style sensationalist article about one puny supporter who runs a brothel.
I like Ron Paul more when I hear this kind of stuff.
Guliania, McBought, and Romneya* (and most of the Dems) are sleeping all over the place, especially with the pharmaceutical industry.
And they would rather have you “juiced up” or “healed up” on some sort of synthetic poppy or NSAID(meds that kill and injure daily, even when used correctly)than use an Ancient Herbal that has never killed.
Morphine and cocaine-based drugs, are ABSOLUTE MEDICAL MIRACLES for so many patients and so many medical situations, like surgery and post surgery, for instance.
BUT, for many people and for many medical situations, MARIJUANA IS MORE EFFECTIVE AND MUCH SAFER.
Politicians, like the three Repugs I mentioned above, are true bottom-dwellers: keeping safe medication from sick people to further their warped agenda. Sick sh*t.
Conventional medications kill approx. 100,000 people a year — from properly prescribed and properly taken meds — (this figure doesn’t even begin to touch on the deaths caused by improperly taken, improperly prescribed, illegally taken, etc…)
Approx. 100,000 people die each year from FOLLOWING DOCTORS’ RECOMMENDATIONS!!! (JAMA study that looked at all the hospital deaths sometime in the early 90s.).
Death by medication or by prescription is one of the leading causes of death in the U.S. (JAMA info).
According to DEA Judge Francis Young, in his conclusion to years and years of court battles about rescheduling marijuana — to allow it to be prescribed, like morphine and cocaine:
“Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis cannabis can be safely used with a supervised routine of medical care…There are simply no credible medical reports to suggest that consuming cannabis has caused a single death.”
No frickin’ deaths from marijuana toxicity in 5,000 years; but for some reason (hmm?), Docs are shoveling potentially deadly meds down patients’ gullets by the tonnage.
Even the DEA Judges are asking their attack dogs to stop torturing medical marijuana patients; but $ makes the world go around…
Patients suffer and die daily, because of this illogical and irrational war on patients; and despite the FACTS, people perpetuate the kakati/Reefer Madness a million times a day (frickin’ zombies).
It is interesting. Most nurses and med techs that I’ve met know the real story on medical marijuana — usually they know more than the docs here — though most of them did have to do a little additional homework (in addition to their “pot is bad” curriculum), to uncover the truth.
Can’t stop learning, just cuz ya got the piece of paper.
*Interesting tidbit for the conspiracy theorists, romneya (noun) is a shrub akin to the poppy. (Plastic-Poppy-Pushers from Pluto?).
Normal or not, I’m human, I support Ron Paul.
“No frickin’ deaths from marijuana toxicity in 5,000 years; but for some reason (hmm?), Docs are shoveling potentially deadly meds down patients’ gullets by the tonnage.” Adam
I am going to say someone full of hot air because I ask who has been collecting statistics for 5000 years?
In addition there are other deaths and injuries associated with drug use than toxicity. Driving why intoxicated for instance. You also have negligent parents who are too high to properly care for themselves much less their children.