Free Republic 1st Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $36,355
41%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 41% is in!! Thank you all very much!!

Posts by DiogenesLamp

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/31/2015 9:20:24 AM PST · 169 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to WildHighlander57
    IMHO he’s eligible, and I will vote for him.

    I believe eligibility no longer means anything and I will vote for him too.

  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/30/2015 5:39:31 PM PST · 160 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to Fantasywriter
    You got a very mild hissy fit. To see our resident liberal get really wound up, you would need to ping him to a thread that illustrates how much Obama loves terrorists and hates Americans. Then the wailing, whining, griping and sniveling really kicks into gear.

    No need. This is what he has always looked like in my mind's eye.

  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/30/2015 5:35:57 PM PST · 159 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to CpnHook
    Of course not. That way you can pretend your argument remains intact. I'm very familiar with that avoidance technique: the ostrich pose.

    And you've been saying that from the beginning too. You are like the little dog that thinks he chased the car away.

  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/30/2015 1:54:41 PM PST · 156 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to CpnHook

    Another one of these walls of text? I’m not going to read it.

  • Loretta Lynch nomination gathering GOP support

    01/30/2015 8:24:51 AM PST · 50 of 60
    DiogenesLamp to Zakeet

    Why?

  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/30/2015 8:18:10 AM PST · 153 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to Fantasywriter
    Idiot Troll wrote:

    ‘I’m saying the fact of occupancy is itself evidence of eligibility because the rather adversarial process (one candidate versus another, one party versus another, the media versus all) raises the stakes for having an ineligible person run or nominated. That’s not to say there can’t be counter evidence.’

    Now where else on FR could you possibly learn that the press is evenhandedly ‘versus all’? I bet you thought the press was pro-liberal and anti-conservative. Our resident liberal ‘teaches’ us otherwise.

    What he says is a non-sequitur. Raising stakes does not necessarily produce evidence. Occupying the office is not "proof." A majority often just means that all the fools were on the same side. Oh, and no conservative believes the press is objective. Liberal Democrat Union Members from New York City are not objective. They are extremely biased towards their party.

    Perhaps sometime our trouble-making disrupter will flesh out his comments. Meanwhile I ask you, where else on FR could you learn that Obama has the option of deporting legal US citizens?

    And this is just another reason why no one should waste their time reading his drivel. He really should have been zotted a long time ago.

  • The GOP's Long Love Affair With Schmucks

    01/30/2015 8:09:02 AM PST · 40 of 92
    DiogenesLamp to HMS Surprise
    Nick would have no doubt been on the “Reagan is a lightweight actor” bus.

    That was what I was thinking. Indeed, I said something similar up above. Reagan was a great thinker whom many portrayed as a lightweight. I recall some conservative columnists (Ann Coulter I think) pointing out that the media has ALWAYS portrayed Republican Presidents as Dumb, or simple.

    They did it to Eisenhower, affable, but not a great thinker, Nixon they portrayed as corrupt, Ford was a bumbling fool, Reagan was a senile old man, HW Bush was out of touch, G W Bush was a simpleton, and so on.

    That they constantly do it to Palin tells me whom they fear the most. They do not waste their time on Paul or Huckabee.

  • The GOP's Long Love Affair With Schmucks

    01/30/2015 8:04:03 AM PST · 39 of 92
    DiogenesLamp to elpadre
    Walker and Perry, both of whom have been not just good governors, but outstanding. So much for my considered opinion.

    I agree with you about Walker and to a lesser extent about Perry, but do not discount the efforts that Ted Cruz has made on behalf of restoring sanity to the nation. Ted Cruz strikes me as an effective leader because he doesn't constantly look behind himself to see who might be following. He just leads.

  • The GOP's Long Love Affair With Schmucks

    01/30/2015 8:00:30 AM PST · 36 of 92
    DiogenesLamp to bigdaddy45
    Prepare for the onslaught of those who will tell you that Mrs. Palin is the greatest political thinker of our generation.

    No, that would be Ronald Reagan, but Palin is certainly near the top of the heap as near as I can tell. Gingrinch (despite all his nonsense) is still a pretty good political thinker too, and I would give Cruz and Walker some very deserved props as well.

  • The GOP's Long Love Affair With Schmucks

    01/30/2015 7:58:49 AM PST · 35 of 92
    DiogenesLamp to Redbob
    Palin is clearly an intellectual lightweight - but so is the current occupier of the White House

    Really? Well she nailed Obama in her Convention speech when everyone else was hiding. She accurately predicted the invasion of Ukraine, She accurately predicted "Death Panels" she was right about "Drill baby Drill!" And so far has been able to run rings around all the super geniuses out there.

    If she is a lightweight, all the rest of the field is no-weights.

  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/30/2015 7:23:29 AM PST · 151 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to lonestar
    Staley Ann Dunham wasn’t of “legal age” was supposed to be Obama’s problem...even if born in Hawaii.

    Stanley Ann's age is irrelevant if he was born inside the United States. Her age is only pertinent if he was not.

  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/30/2015 7:22:14 AM PST · 150 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to CpnHook
    Starting around September, 2013, I recall several persons who were implacable in their assertion that Vattel sec. 212 was incorporated into Art. II, sec. 1 of the Constitution being shown the door. Yours is a minority position even here. I'm just showing why it's a minority position stretching back to the time of the Constitution as well.

    You are deliberately misleading people. It was not a minority position in 1787, it was a majority position. I find good provenance for it going back to Franklin, Washington, Wilson, Madison, Marshall, and so on. All your side ever comes up with is much later day lawyers with no good connection to the constitutional convention, and as often as not decades after the fact. (Like Rawle. 1825)

    You studiously ignore the very good authorities who are directly traceable back to the Philadelphia convention or the ratifying legislatures among the various states. You constantly assert what people not involved with the debates think about things, and ignore what those who were intimately involved in the debates had to say.

    You advocate an interpretation that has no useful purpose and is therefore in violation of the Supreme Court's long stated principle that the constitution cannot be read in such a manner as to have no effect.

    You advocate an interpretation that is even now causing the nation to be overrun by false "Americans" in the guise of anchor babies and birth tourists, none of whom have any loyalty to the nation at all.

    You are nothing but a trouble maker intent on spreading incorrect and ignorant information about the topic, and I suspect you are probably part of the Obama defense team because it is the most plausible explanation for your obsession with this topic to the exclusion of pretty much any other subject. If you talk about anything other than defending Obama, I can't recall seeing it. A quick check of your postings show them to be on no other topic than defending Obama's legitimacy.

    Why do you feel so compelled to justify this man? Why do you feel so compelled to explain away anything that smacks of a criticism of his legitimacy? Obama Team member explains your actions very well.

  • Jesse Ventura blasts 'American Sniper' as work of fiction

    01/29/2015 1:31:13 PM PST · 44 of 74
    DiogenesLamp to Laissez-faire capitalist

    He needs his @$$ beat again.

  • My Problem with Sarah Palin

    01/29/2015 12:29:38 PM PST · 101 of 110
    DiogenesLamp to LeoMcNeil
    I guess the question is whether conservative Republicans can aspire to something greater than the Obama equivalent in our party? I think we owe it to ourselves to want something better.

    One need not try hard to exceed Obama. I do not currently favor Palin for President, but not because I don't think she is capable. Indeed, I think she would be better than most of the field because she fights, but I believe the enemy (and our Rino Country club elite) has done too thorough of a job damaging her to be effectively refuted in absence of a conservative takeover of the enemy media industry.

    I currently favor Walker, Cruz, and then Perry. Regarding Bush, Rubio, Romney, Huckabee, Cristie and any of the other dwarfs, a warm bucket of piss I do not give.

  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/29/2015 12:24:35 PM PST · 147 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to CpnHook
    You can't teach anybody anything because you have nothing of value that anyone should want to know.

    You are just one mass regurgitation of Dr. Conspiracy and his Obama justifying minions. Your assertions are contrary to the best interests of this nation, and you are effectively an enemy, just as is "citizen" Obama.

  • My Problem with Sarah Palin

    01/29/2015 11:27:48 AM PST · 90 of 110
    DiogenesLamp to LeoMcNeil
    Can’t we aspire to more than Obama?

    I fear the intelligence of the electorate has been too thoroughly watered down.

    That Hillary or Warren is even being considered for the position argues that we cannot. I think we reached our Apex under Reagan and it has been down hill ever since.

  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/29/2015 11:22:28 AM PST · 145 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to 4Zoltan
    They were not being declared natural born only that they had the same rights as natural born citizens. Just as naturalized US citizens today have the same rights as natural born US citizen except the ability to be President or Vice President.

    That you note this makes it all the more unfathomable as to why you thought quoting those decrees was relevant.

  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/29/2015 11:19:30 AM PST · 144 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to WildHighlander57
    a “natural born citizen” doesn’t need to look up the ‘definition’ in a statute somewhere, and/or see if his or her circumstances of birth are addressed in said statute.

    Exactly. Here is an example of conditional citizenship which was rescinded because the naturalized at birth citizen failed to adhere to the conditional requirements of his citizenship.

    That these requirements were later removed does not have any bearing on the artificial nature of this sort of citizenship. Congress can put them back on at any time they wish.

    Such citizenship is wholly at the mercy of whatever congress feels like doing with it.

  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/29/2015 11:12:09 AM PST · 142 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to John Valentine
    But i think that he can not be cosidered naturalized as there was no different citizenship from which he was converted or naturalized a a citizen of the US. He has never been a citizen of any other State or Nation.

    Naturalized at birth through statute. If you go back and look at the applicable statute, it will like as not say "naturalization" on the relevant section.

    Like this one.

    Title III-Nationality and Naturalization
    Chapter 1-Nationality at Birth and By Collective Naturalization
  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/29/2015 10:55:52 AM PST · 141 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to 4Zoltan

    This makes no relevant point. During this period in History, the terms were regarded as interchangeable, though a citizen and a subject have very different characters. “Subject” eventually fell out of usage.

  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/29/2015 10:50:05 AM PST · 140 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to CpnHook
    Right. I make points and ask questions that make your argument look bad. I understand.

    No, you cannot, but you persist anyway. You talk about Rawle and Story, but you completely ignore the far better qualified and knowledgeable Chief Justice John Marshall Or Washington's Nephew Justice Bushrod Washington, both of which explicitly cite Vattel as the authority on issues involving citizenship.

    No body wants to hear your rehash of your second string "authorities". You misstate and/or ignore anything which challenges your personal desire to believe an utterly pointless interpretation, and I have no interest in wasting my time with you.

    I have taken apart your stupid assertions so many times that I no longer bother even perusing your babble.

    Again, I don't care what you think, you are a loud mouthed idiot intent on spreading disinformation. I am only interested in what potentially objective people think, and you aren't one of them.

  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/29/2015 9:26:09 AM PST · 138 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to CpnHook
    I am not going to bother reading that either. You are an @$$ with an overinflated sense of your own intelligence and self importance. I am not interested in communicating with you because I have experience with the futility of doing so in the past.

    You cannot produce a single source that is as good as my sources and you simply keep repeating the same old crap ad infinitum.

    I am interested in what the other man has to say, I am not interested in anything you have to say. You are just a true-beliver shill, and evidence is pointless with you.

  • Jesse Ventura Won't See 'American Sniper'; Says Chris Kyle Is No Hero

    01/29/2015 9:18:56 AM PST · 102 of 107
    DiogenesLamp to TangledUpInBlue

    He needs his @$$ whipped again.

  • My Problem with Sarah Palin

    01/29/2015 9:15:57 AM PST · 66 of 110
    DiogenesLamp to LeoMcNeil
    Sarah Palin is an amusing red meat flame thrower. She is, however, not Presidential material.

    The current occupant has made any objections based on "Presidential Material" irrelevant. We could not have found a more unqualified person than him who had a serious chance of winning.

  • Asking for prayers for Mrs. Seizethecarp who is having an operation today

    01/29/2015 9:12:38 AM PST · 27 of 76
    DiogenesLamp to Seizethecarp

    Done. I hope she has a quick recovery.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/29/2015 9:04:18 AM PST · 221 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to morphing libertarian
    The issue is that all the problems you cite and more are happening now.

    Having MORE of them will not be an improvement.

    How much longer do you want to support failed laws and expenditures in the billions for the same bad results?

    They are not "failed." You call them "failed" because of unrealistic expectations given the constraints. As I have pointed out before, asserting that 2% usage by the population is a "failure" ignores the fact that 98% of the population isn't using drugs. Usage has been held down to 2% for a hundred years. Without opposition, drug usage would have continued to rise year after year.

    Holding it down to a low number is a success given the tools they have to work with. Now the costs are getting out of control, but that has little to do with the mission and a *LOT* to do with the fact that all government costs are getting out of control. If you think Drug interdiction costs have gone crazy, you should look at entitlement costs.

    Here’s a hint. Prohibition does not stop people from using drugs, it makes gangsters rich, and it wastes law enforcement time and money.

    Prohibition does indeed stop people from using drugs. China demonstrated that conclusively by doing the converse. Gangsters are only getting rich because we tolerate this level of activity. If we made it a point to kill drug dealers, they wouldn't be getting rich because they wouldn't stay in such a risky business.

    While your sad stories about people being hurt by drugs are compelling, it is illogical to say that those stories justify the war on drugs.

    Individually they don't. Taken collectively they do. We have real historical examples of the alternative. That world is worse than this one.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 4:16:58 PM PST · 198 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to DiogenesLamp

    I am done with this stupid topic for today.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 4:15:18 PM PST · 197 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to tacticalogic
    So, how long do you think your child should be locked up for trying drugs?

    How long do you think a woman should be locked up for hitting a rapist?

    Why do you think it's appropriate to use such ASININE statements such as that? Anybody who is induced to using drugs is a victim. The criminal is the person who supplied and/or induced them to try it.

    I think drug suppliers ought to be killed. Make the price of doing business too high for them to keep doing it. It works in Singapore.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 4:11:46 PM PST · 196 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to morphing libertarian
    so, you’re admitting that under drug prohibition too many people are getting hurt?

    Look how you twist my words in an attempt to get your conclusions.

    I am admitting that the small percentage of drugs that get through the system hurt the small percentage of people with whom they come into contact.

    I am admitting that a larger percentage of drugs getting through the system will hurt a larger percentage of people with whom they come into contact.

    I am admitting that we are suffering a small loss of people due to drugs that get through. Let's call this the "frying pan."

    I am admitting that the frying pan is better than the fire.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 4:08:10 PM PST · 194 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to St_Thomas_Aquinas
    I support drug decriminalization because I believe that it will result in less vice in society, overall.

    And what leads you to believe this? I would suggest it is the endless stream of libertarians saying so, and not any real world concrete data.

    The example of the Sitzplatz in Zurich doesn't support such a conclusion. The experience with China and Opium does not support such a conclusion. Where in history do you know of a place that legalization worked?

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 4:04:45 PM PST · 192 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to KoRn
    You’re basically a ‘busy-body’, but you do a good job of justifying it to yourself.

    This is what all poison spreading libertarians say to people who want them to stop spreading poison.

    I'm sure rapists and murderers don't like being interfered with either.

    Drugs are not victimless crimes. I have known and seen far too many people hurt by that sh*t.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 4:02:46 PM PST · 190 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to HiTech RedNeck
    Why are you not concerned about the problem of self-poisoners, who if they cannot find poison A, will then go to poison B?

    If you want an answer to that question you are going to have to provide a better context. It sounds like an assumption coupled with undefined terms.

    How about we just get rid of as many poisons as we can? How about we kill people who bring poison to us?

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 4:00:02 PM PST · 188 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to KoRn
    How in the hell could any “Conservative” possibly support this?

    We don't. It's one big straw man based on a whole bunch of faulty assumptions and conclusions. We aren't using your faulty assumptions, we are using real world examples in history, and they do not conform to what you wish to believe.

    You might as well be trying to claim that autism is caused by vaccines. (Though there seems to be a much stronger linkage to pot.)

    A nation with legalized drugs is far worse than a nation that bans them.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 3:53:51 PM PST · 186 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to HiTech RedNeck
    Ad hominems are childish (is that redundant)

    Pointing out that a two data point projection (with one number made up) is childish constitutes an ad hominem?

    Well do you have anything nice to say about someone who tries to draw conclusions from two data points with one of them "estimated"? You're supposed to be HiTech, presumably you know something about math and plotting data points?

    Do you really think a function describing drug usage is going to be linear with a downward slope? If you do, then the problem is solved, because based on that two point projection it would have reached zero after 108 years, which would have been ~2008. Did we eliminate drugs and nobody told me?

    Any rational person will recognize that it won't be linear, and it won't have a negative slope. I am not arguing that he is wrong because he is a bad person, I am arguing that he is wrong because his methodology is fundamentally flawed as if a child would have proposed it.

    Seriously, I can't think of anyone but a child who would assert such a thing. It is simpleminded.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 3:36:26 PM PST · 181 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to KoRn
    ....And WHY is it a problem of YOURS?

    Well to quote Bhagat Singh, "I am a man and all that affects mankind concerns me."

    It *IS* my business when troublemakers are spreading poison through my community.

    I don’t concern myself with what other people do with their personal lives, as long as it doesn’t affect me or my family.

    You may not mind paying bills for drug addled indolents, but I don't want to do it. I am harmed by government guns forcing me to pay bills for people.

    If one of my children is induced to try drugs, I am harmed, as is my child. There is no spread of addiction without harm.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 3:25:05 PM PST · 177 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to Ken H
    No, it's a number cited by the people charged with combating drug addiction. And it puts lie to your claim.

    No it doesn't, despite your assertions to the contrary. Your two data point extrapolation with one number made up is childish. That you expect it to be accepted and "prove" something is even more childish.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 3:03:44 PM PST · 174 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to Ken H
    The Institute of Medicine estimated that by 1900, perhaps 300,000 Americans were addicted to opiates.

    "Estimated" is not a real number. It's a number pulled out of your @$$.

    So addiction WAS declining between 1880 and 1900.

    Extrapolating with an absence of real data. Civil war soldiers (those 400,000 addicts who created the initial market) died off. A 20 year old in 1861 would be ~60 by 1900. With war injuries I suspect the attrition rate would be higher than the normal population, especially if they managed to feed their habit.

    Anyone who seriously argues that adding numerous cocainoids and opiates to the market is going to result in a decrease in addiction is a person not to be taken seriously. Narcotic laced Patent medicines exploded during this period, and only an idiot would believe this was resulting in lower usage.

    You don't have any real numbers.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 2:48:19 PM PST · 170 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to ConservingFreedom
    As you've said, "

    You can keep quoting me out of context all you want, but you still don't have any good numbers. *MY* numbers are good because they have provenance . We know where they came from and how and why they got recorded.

  • Open request to Senator Cruz

    01/28/2015 2:44:26 PM PST · 136 of 195
    DiogenesLamp to CpnHook

    I am not going to read your wall of text.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 2:39:04 PM PST · 166 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to ConservingFreedom
    I never said nor implied otherwise - of course they are, as are alcohol and tobacco.

    And the fact that alcohol and tobacco are legal has no bearing on whether other even more dangerous and deleterious drugs should be legal. We have no obligation to be "fair" to other drugs. Alcohol and Tobacco do quite enough damage already. Anyone wanting more drugs to add to the death toll is just evil.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 2:36:21 PM PST · 165 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to ConservingFreedom
    No, that's your functional illiteracy at work again.

    It is exactly your intent. You potheads appear to be working off the same sheet of music because all the other usual suspects pushing drug legalization are also making the same point.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 2:34:31 PM PST · 164 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to ConservingFreedom
    And yet you keep coming around ...

    Because the spreading of dangerous lies needs to be countered by confrontation with the truth. I would rather be doing something else, but sometimes you have to do the right thing even when you don't want to.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 2:32:57 PM PST · 163 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to ConservingFreedom
    So you keep claiming although the only available numbers say the opposite.

    The 400,000 addict number comes from perscriptions written by Union and Confederate doctors regarding the dispensation of painkillers. This addiction later became known as "the soldier's disease."

    You don't have any good numbers, but you have to be a special class of fool to believe that cocaine laced carbonated beverages (Coca-Cola) would not cause deep and widespread addiction.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 2:28:16 PM PST · 158 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to rawcatslyentist
    Do you really want to defend the black market, or would you take away their profit motive through capitalism?

    Yeah, like in China where the Capitalistic enterprise ran by the British East India company wrecked China's economy and demographics by spreading poisonous death and misery throughout the nation for Fun and Profit!

    I can just see pharmaceutical companies racing to produce ever more addicting substances which they can manufacture at low costs and thereby gain control of their markets. Why they could make Ketracel white into a reality!

    Note the drug pump in his neck? Good ole Capitalism!

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 2:17:23 PM PST · 154 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to ConservingFreedom
    And continued to drop when pot was legalized. Some "debacle."

    But as usual, you are *IMPLYING* that the legalization of pot had something to do with the decrease in traffic fatalities. This is what you do. You make implications without getting the facts straight about what really happened.

    That not everything is going bad in Colorado is irrelevant to the point. Those things directly attributable to marijuana appear to be going bad.

    Don't recall that one

    You mean to say that you missed a pot article? You must be slipping. I don't even make a point to look for them, but like queerness, you can't avoid seeing them flaunting their weirdity.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 2:12:30 PM PST · 152 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to ConservingFreedom
    Ah, the whiny song of one who's been @$$-whupped in debate - sing me another verse!

    You haven't whupped anyone in debate, because you don't debate. You simply chant a mantra like a lunatic Hare Krishna. You also waste freepers time reading your pro-drug drivel instead of discussion more important and more substantial issues.

    The ascendency of your pro-pot mindset is simply another system of the evil rot pervading our society, and as I have said before, is exactly like Homosexuality.

    All this stuff comes out in a society which is in decline. Drugs, Perverts, Kooks and nuts of every size and flavor. You are just another one.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 2:07:47 PM PST · 150 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to stephenjohnbanker
    You aren’t funny, troll.

    When you get the ZOT this time, you won’t get a third chance.

    I wish he would get the ZOT. Virtually all he does is get on here and push drug legalization using the same rehashed nonsense arguments.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 2:05:20 PM PST · 147 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to ConservingFreedom
    Already addressed in post #76.

    You misspelled the word "Dodged".

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 2:03:59 PM PST · 146 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to ConservingFreedom
    Smoking tobacco, staying up too late, or regularly eating fast food have deleterious effects - that's up to adults to choose for themselves.

    The negative effects produced by such things pale in comparison to the negative effects produced by drugs. Like it or not, severity is a significant factor in deciding what to ban or legalize.

  • Obama Says Treating Drug Use As a Criminal Problem Is "Counterproductive"

    01/28/2015 2:01:33 PM PST · 145 of 225
    DiogenesLamp to Vigilanteman
    I admitted the war on drugs was a failure.

    It is just as much of a failure as the war on murder. Anyone thinking that "success" is the total elimination of all drug use is irrational. Like murder, it can only be kept down to a low level (using current methodology) but it cannot be eliminated.

    The "War on Drugs" is not an actual war, it is a holding action. So far it has successfully held drug addiction down to 2% of the population for over 100 years.

    In China, drug addiction had risen to 50% in a 60-70 year period.