info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Why is Pot so expensive?
0 views
Skip to first unread message
A Veteran
Nov 24, 2011, 3:42:04 PM11/24/11
to
well, if don't grow it yourself, how difficult could it be to grow a
Weed?
and O.T.
States Rights!
In article <jamabu$qaa$1...@dont-email.me>, Hisler <His...@cocks.net>
wrote:
> On 11/24/2011 8:46 AM, Deucalion wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 07:30:58 -0700, A Veteran<geor...@toast.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Ron Paul: Pot Policy Should Be Set By The States
> >> This sort of thing is so much fun to watch. If the Republican Party is
> >> ever going to crack the youth vote, they have to start talking this way
> >> about the drug war. It's just another big-government program. And it
> >> violates all the principles conservatives espouse in other areas. The
> >> challenge to Obamacare rests on the same legal argument as the challenge
> >> to the federal drug war. But no one else on the stage has either the
> >> brains or the bollocks to say this sort of thing out loud.
> >>
> >> http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2011/11/ron_paul_on_pot.html
> >
> > While I agree with Ron Paul's position on drug laws, it is not the
> > policy of the Republican Party to limit the size of government when
> > they are the majority. Nor is it their policy for the federal
> > government to be less intrusive in citizens daily lives when they are
> > in charge. You only have to look at the six years of the Bush
> > administration when the Republicans controlled Congress to see how
> > much they like to intrude into the lives of the people.
> >
> > However, if you want to pretend that this example was just a Bush
> > action that was required by the "War of Terrorism," you can go back to
> > the Regan administration and look at how much civil liberties eroded
> > when we began the "War on Drugs."
>
> A "Progressive" acquaintance sent me this:
>
> Ron Paul has been totally ignored by the mainstream corporate press
> because he has never been a Washington insider. He is hated by the
> leadership of the Democratic and Republican parties, who we all know by
> now are completely controlled by the corporate
> military/medical/chemical/war machine. He is the new breed of political
> leader, who like Ralph Nader knows how to think for himself and has
> been a lifetime student of history. And it is likely that Ralph Nader
> will support him in his campaign for President. Ron Paul is also closely
> aligned with Cynthia McKinney and her anti-militarism efforts. There is
> even a possibility that if he wins the Republican primary, Ron Paul will
> choose Cynthia as his VP. Ron served in the Vietnam War as a medic and
> knows first hand the horrors of war. He is a humanitarian who worked for
> twenty years as a doctor, before the HMOs destroyed the medical system
> by jacking up costs and making it unaffordable.
>
>
>
> The D's and R's are painting a false picture of Ron Paul since they know
> he is a brilliant anti-war voice who will cut the military budget by
> half and return our civil liberties, ending US torture around the world
> and US weapon sales and wars. His libertarian views are simply an
> acknowledgment that the Federal Reserve system has ripped off the
> American workers for way too long and needs to be replaced by government
> control of the monetary system, rather than private control by an
> unelected cabal that has no allegiance to the American people. For this
> he has been lambasted by the media, which works every day to perpetuate
> US wars abroad and angry dissent at home. As a long-time Libertarian,
> Ron Paul, will have a good chance to get that party's nomination for the
> general election if he loses to the corporate Republican (probably
> Romney) in the primary. In a three-way race, with Ron Paul playing the
> role of Ross Perot, Ron Paul would have an excellent chance of defeating
> the war candidates, Obama and Romney!
>
>
>
> Ron Paul is the Ralph Nader of the 21st Century. The only real
> difference is that Ron Paul has a chance of winning! Ralph could only
> get 3% at best! You can bet that people like Ralph Nader and Cynthia
> McKinney will be part of a Ron Paul administration if Ron Paul is
> elected. Unfortunately, Ralph Nader will never be elected President but
> giving Ralph a direct voice in US policies will be the next best thing.
>
>
>
> Ron Paul clearly sees the need for government programs, but only where
> necessary. Can you imagine how much money will be available for social
> programs if we cut the military budget in half? Not to mention all the
> lives of foreigners who are being destroyed by US wars and weapons sales?
>
>
>
> Please look more closely at Ron Paul's speeches and politics and you
> will realize that he may be the last caring person we will have the
> chance to elect president for a long time.
>
>
>
> Let's not give up this opportunity. Do not be tricked (again) by the
> corporate media and the two-party corporate cronies. Ron Paul is the
> real deal. He is an intelligent, experienced civil rights advocate!
>
>
>
> For peace and justice,
>
> xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx
But, isn't it highly unlikely that the "Gawd Oldster's Party would
nominate him? and if he went 3rd party ,wouldn't that hand it to Obama?
--
Karma, What a concept!
Weed?
and O.T.
States Rights!
In article <jamabu$qaa$1...@dont-email.me>, Hisler <His...@cocks.net>
wrote:
> On 11/24/2011 8:46 AM, Deucalion wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 07:30:58 -0700, A Veteran<geor...@toast.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Ron Paul: Pot Policy Should Be Set By The States
> >> This sort of thing is so much fun to watch. If the Republican Party is
> >> ever going to crack the youth vote, they have to start talking this way
> >> about the drug war. It's just another big-government program. And it
> >> violates all the principles conservatives espouse in other areas. The
> >> challenge to Obamacare rests on the same legal argument as the challenge
> >> to the federal drug war. But no one else on the stage has either the
> >> brains or the bollocks to say this sort of thing out loud.
> >>
> >> http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2011/11/ron_paul_on_pot.html
> >
> > While I agree with Ron Paul's position on drug laws, it is not the
> > policy of the Republican Party to limit the size of government when
> > they are the majority. Nor is it their policy for the federal
> > government to be less intrusive in citizens daily lives when they are
> > in charge. You only have to look at the six years of the Bush
> > administration when the Republicans controlled Congress to see how
> > much they like to intrude into the lives of the people.
> >
> > However, if you want to pretend that this example was just a Bush
> > action that was required by the "War of Terrorism," you can go back to
> > the Regan administration and look at how much civil liberties eroded
> > when we began the "War on Drugs."
>
> A "Progressive" acquaintance sent me this:
>
> Ron Paul has been totally ignored by the mainstream corporate press
> because he has never been a Washington insider. He is hated by the
> leadership of the Democratic and Republican parties, who we all know by
> now are completely controlled by the corporate
> military/medical/chemical/war machine. He is the new breed of political
> leader, who like Ralph Nader knows how to think for himself and has
> been a lifetime student of history. And it is likely that Ralph Nader
> will support him in his campaign for President. Ron Paul is also closely
> aligned with Cynthia McKinney and her anti-militarism efforts. There is
> even a possibility that if he wins the Republican primary, Ron Paul will
> choose Cynthia as his VP. Ron served in the Vietnam War as a medic and
> knows first hand the horrors of war. He is a humanitarian who worked for
> twenty years as a doctor, before the HMOs destroyed the medical system
> by jacking up costs and making it unaffordable.
>
>
>
> The D's and R's are painting a false picture of Ron Paul since they know
> he is a brilliant anti-war voice who will cut the military budget by
> half and return our civil liberties, ending US torture around the world
> and US weapon sales and wars. His libertarian views are simply an
> acknowledgment that the Federal Reserve system has ripped off the
> American workers for way too long and needs to be replaced by government
> control of the monetary system, rather than private control by an
> unelected cabal that has no allegiance to the American people. For this
> he has been lambasted by the media, which works every day to perpetuate
> US wars abroad and angry dissent at home. As a long-time Libertarian,
> Ron Paul, will have a good chance to get that party's nomination for the
> general election if he loses to the corporate Republican (probably
> Romney) in the primary. In a three-way race, with Ron Paul playing the
> role of Ross Perot, Ron Paul would have an excellent chance of defeating
> the war candidates, Obama and Romney!
>
>
>
> Ron Paul is the Ralph Nader of the 21st Century. The only real
> difference is that Ron Paul has a chance of winning! Ralph could only
> get 3% at best! You can bet that people like Ralph Nader and Cynthia
> McKinney will be part of a Ron Paul administration if Ron Paul is
> elected. Unfortunately, Ralph Nader will never be elected President but
> giving Ralph a direct voice in US policies will be the next best thing.
>
>
>
> Ron Paul clearly sees the need for government programs, but only where
> necessary. Can you imagine how much money will be available for social
> programs if we cut the military budget in half? Not to mention all the
> lives of foreigners who are being destroyed by US wars and weapons sales?
>
>
>
> Please look more closely at Ron Paul's speeches and politics and you
> will realize that he may be the last caring person we will have the
> chance to elect president for a long time.
>
>
>
> Let's not give up this opportunity. Do not be tricked (again) by the
> corporate media and the two-party corporate cronies. Ron Paul is the
> real deal. He is an intelligent, experienced civil rights advocate!
>
>
>
> For peace and justice,
>
> xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx
But, isn't it highly unlikely that the "Gawd Oldster's Party would
nominate him? and if he went 3rd party ,wouldn't that hand it to Obama?
--
Karma, What a concept!
Message has been deleted
Max
Nov 25, 2011, 10:26:21 AM11/25/11
to
On Nov 24, 3:42 pm, A Veteran <george...@toast.net> wrote:
> well, if don't grow it yourself, how difficult could it be to grow a
> Weed?
> and O.T.
> States Rights!
> In article <jamabu$qa...@dont-email.me>, Hisler <His...@cocks.net>
> well, if don't grow it yourself, how difficult could it be to grow a
> Weed?
> and O.T.
> States Rights!
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 11/24/2011 8:46 AM, Deucalion wrote:
> > > On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 07:30:58 -0700, A Veteran<george...@toast.net>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 11/24/2011 8:46 AM, Deucalion wrote:
A Veteran
Nov 28, 2011, 2:52:39 PM11/28/11
to
In article <5fOdncdRbsVaWlPT...@earthlink.com>,
Derald <der...@invalid.net> wrote:
> A Veteran <geor...@toast.net> wrote:
>
> >But, isn't it highly unlikely that the "Gawd Oldster's Party would
> >nominate him? and if he went 3rd party ,wouldn't that hand it to Obama?
> LOL! Did you actually read that load of crap that you posted? "Ron
> Paul is the Ralph Nader of the 21st Century", indeed. Whoever wrote that
> might be as looney as Paul who is major whacked. The worst thing that
> old coot could do is to sprout a hair and run as a 3rd party candidate.
> Paul could be the "Ross Perot of the 21st Century".
> Besides, what does that have to do with pot prices? Pot is
> expensive because it is illegal and because people pay the prices.
sounds lie Prohibition at it's worst.
Derald <der...@invalid.net> wrote:
> A Veteran <geor...@toast.net> wrote:
>
> >But, isn't it highly unlikely that the "Gawd Oldster's Party would
> >nominate him? and if he went 3rd party ,wouldn't that hand it to Obama?
> Paul is the Ralph Nader of the 21st Century", indeed. Whoever wrote that
> might be as looney as Paul who is major whacked. The worst thing that
> old coot could do is to sprout a hair and run as a 3rd party candidate.
> Paul could be the "Ross Perot of the 21st Century".
> Besides, what does that have to do with pot prices? Pot is
> expensive because it is illegal and because people pay the prices.
sounds lie Prohibition at it's worst.
Message has been deleted
Rod Speed
Nov 29, 2011, 3:37:25 AM11/29/11
to
0 new messages