Sanders Says He'd Remove Marijuana From Federal Drug List

[Norby]

like^

[phaquetoo]

so uh what? you arent gonna vote?

Im not quite sure how old you are t-pain, but we havent even had the primary's yet!  I have never thrown my vote to some one this early, they all make promises they never keep during the mud slinging part of this silly process!

 

I understand how you feel it may help other's running say the same thing, ,will it make me beleive them also?  NO!

 

I will be voting, I havent missed a vote since I was 18, I will be voting for the person I think is right for the job of president, and Im very sorry mm has nothing to do with my vote for prez, it would be a nice bonus though!

 

Peace

[Restorium2]

Im not quite sure how old you are t-pain, but we havent even had the primary's yet!  I have never thrown my vote to some one this early, they all make promises they never keep during the mud slinging part of this silly process!

 

I understand how you feel it may help other's running say the same thing, ,will it make me beleive them also?  NO!

 

I will be voting, I havent missed a vote since I was 18, I will be voting for the person I think is right for the job of president, and Im very sorry mm has nothing to do with my vote for prez, it would be a nice bonus though!

 

Peace

Exactly. I'm more concerned about getting in more wars and spending trillions chasing some Arabs around. Been there and done that now. I think it's Russia and Iran's turn in The Barrel. I don't have any hope that Bernie will be able to help out marijuana much after The States have already set up their marijuana slave trade. It would be hard enough to wean Michigan off our Medical fees if marijuana ended up legal (really legal). Can you imagine how hard it would be to wean Colorado off all that they are making on their slave trade? They would fight real legalization with all they have. Real legalization hopes are fading fast. I believe that ship might have sailed with greed head pirates at the helm. 

[zaphod]

Exactly. I'm more concerned about getting in more wars and spending trillions chasing some Arabs around. Been there and done that now. I think it's Russia and Iran's turn in The Barrel. I don't have any hope that Bernie will be able to help out marijuana much after The States have already set up their marijuana slave trade. It would be hard enough to wean Michigan off our Medical fees if marijuana ended up legal (really legal). Can you imagine how hard it would be to wean Colorado off all that they are making on their slave trade? They would fight real legalization with all they have. Real legalization hopes are fading fast. I believe that ship might have sailed with greed head pirates at the helm. 

What makes you think Bernie is a hawk?  Who do you think might be better at keeping us out of war?  I think that perhaps you don't understand how Fed/State/Local laws work. 

[zaphod]

Im not quite sure how old you are t-pain, but we havent even had the primary's yet!  I have never thrown my vote to some one this early, they all make promises they never keep during the mud slinging part of this silly process!

 

I understand how you feel it may help other's running say the same thing, ,will it make me beleive them also?  NO!

 

I will be voting, I havent missed a vote since I was 18, I will be voting for the person I think is right for the job of president, and Im very sorry mm has nothing to do with my vote for prez, it would be a nice bonus though!

 

Peace

I'm pretty sure you're old enough to know that this is the primary season.  This is the time to pick the candidate who supports your positions rather than waiting for a general election with a choice of "the lesser of two evils" or throwing your vote away on a fringe third party candidate.  I'm also pretty sure you would never vote for a "democratic socialist even if he gets the Democratic nomination.  I doubt you'd ever vote for a Democratic nominee. All of this "they're all the same" trope is total b***s***.

[t-pain]

I have never thrown my vote to some one this early, they all make promises they never keep during the mud slinging part of this silly process!

you ever change your mind up between primary and voting time, phaqman ?

[phaquetoo]

I'm pretty sure you're old enough to know that this is the primary season.  This is the time to pick the candidate who supports your positions rather than waiting for a general election with a choice of "the lesser of two evils" or throwing your vote away on a fringe third party candidate.  I'm also pretty sure you would never vote for a "democratic socialist even if he gets the Democratic nomination.  I doubt you'd ever vote for a Democratic nominee. All of this "they're all the same" trope is total b***s***.

All Im gonna say about this is it sure has been different this time around than any other time I can remember. mostly that has to do with trump, but im pretty sure I would not vote for him, and I would not vote for hillary either, I dont think I would vote for bush either!

 

I am neither a dem or repub, I dont like it when people slam either party though, as far as im concerned they both sux!

 

unfortunatly I have always voted for the best of two evils, that is all I have had to vote for in the last 38 yrs!

 

you ever change your mind up between primary and voting time, phaqman ?

Yes my dumb donkey voted for ross perott, or how ever you spell dumbo ears name!

 

Peace

[cristinew]

Keeo it illegal  vote Hillary  or republican,

[phaquetoo]

Keeo it illegal  vote Hillary  or republican,

its not ilegal for me!  Is it ilegal for you?

 

mm is legal to qualifying pt's and c.g's are legal when apointed to grow for said pt's!

 

If we all voted for some one who's only promise was to legalize mj what would that do for our country, ssi. ssdi, ect?

 

There is way more involved in voting in a prez than weed!

 

Peace

[t-pain]

marijuana is illegal under state law, phaq.

[Restorium2]

its not ilegal for me!  Is it ilegal for you?

 

mm is legal to qualifying pt's and c.g's are legal when apointed to grow for said pt's!

 

If we all voted for some one who's only promise was to legalize mj what would that do for our country, ssi. ssdi, ect?

 

There is way more involved in voting in a prez than weed!

 

Peace

Bernie would be good for that too. Just sayin'.

[zaphod]

All Im gonna say about this is it sure has been different this time around than any other time I can remember. mostly that has to do with trump, but im pretty sure I would not vote for him, and I would not vote for hillary either, I dont think I would vote for bush either!

 

I am neither a dem or repub, I dont like it when people slam either party though, as far as im concerned they both sux!

 

unfortunatly I have always voted for the best of two evils, that is all I have had to vote for in the last 38 yrs!

 

Yes my dumb donkey voted for ross perott, or how ever you spell dumbo ears name!

 

Peace

Stop the BS Jim.  Bernie is an independent running against Hillary in an effort to get the Democratic nomination,  His policies across the board are consistently progressive.  But you already knew that, but had to throw out the "they both suck" spiel.  Stop pretending to be an ignoramus.

Edited October 31, 2015 by zaphod

[cristinew]

Stop pretending to be an ignoramus.  Ha,..  He is just wanting the best  person to keep him safe from the boogie man  and the best man for that is a republican, No matter how much money they spend and how many new programs they create , They need big brother to think for them and guild them , And they call us the socialist , ha 

[phaquetoo]

Stop pretending to be an ignoramus.  Ha,..  He is just wanting the best  person to keep him safe from the boogie man  and the best man for that is a republican, No matter how much money they spend and how many new programs they create , They need big brother to think for them and guild them , And they call us the socialist , ha 

Ok Ok you got me!

 

I want jeb, I like watching 24 hr news about bushes wars! 

 

No peace for you lol!  < soup nazi

[Greg Rx]

Can we get back to the original topic?

OK, if Bernie can do it, why hasn't your Messieh , Obumer already done it? I will tell you. It is a classic wedge issue that will motivate democrat voters.

[t-pain]

because obama never campaigned on legalizing marijuana.

 

Back when he was running in 2008, Obama said he supported the “basic concept of using medical marijuana for the same purposes and with the same controls as other drugs” and that he was “not going to be using Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws.” He didn’t go farther. But he also didn’t do anything to dissuade speculation among medical marijuana proponents who took this as a sign that the man headed to the Oval Office was on their side.

 

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/04/obamas-pot-promise-a-pipe-dream-075421

 

letting the states handle it is finally what has happened. you know, because he was busy fixing the stock market, pulling the world out of a financial meltdown. all that boring stuff.

 

thats why its so interesting that bernie has said he would making whoopee decrim. if people would actually look at what candidates say instead of some moo poo that activists ( me included ) were hoping a candidate would do, this process would be a lot simpler.

 

what i hoped would happen:

obama legalize marijuana

 

instead what happened:

4 states legalized marijuana and its now a states right issue. maybe if we are lucky ohio will join up in a few days.

 

so, was i wrong to vote obama to get better marijuana laws? dunno.

romney sure wasnt for marijuana.

 

http://2012.republican-candidates.org/Romney/Marijuana.php

Romney opposes the legalization of marijuana, including medical marijuana.

 

“People talk about medicinal marijuana. And you know, you hear that story that people who are sick need medicinal marijuana. But marijuana is the entry drug for people trying to get kids hooked on drugs. I don't want medicinal marijuana; there are synthetic forms of marijuana that are available for people who need it for prescription. Don't open the doorway to medicinal marijuana.”

July 25, 2007, Romney speaking at a town hall meeting in Bedford, New Hampshire

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/02/mitt-romney-marijuana_n_1931995.html

Mitt Romney: Marijuana 'For Recreational Use' Is Bad, But I Also Oppose It For All Purposes

Posted: 10/02/2012 9:46 am EDT

 

(right before the election in november)

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012

popular vote, meaning 65million people voted for obama and 60 million people voted for romney.

obama ----- romney

65,915,796 60,933,500

 

so since we only have a two party system in america, the choice was a candidate who lets the states decide and a candidate who wants marijuana , even medical marijuana illegal.

 

i voted for obama in 2012 and i stand by that vote. did you vote for the prohibitionist in the 2012 election gregrx ?

[Restorium2]

And he didn't want it to be part of the first black president's legacy. Can you imagine the immature name calling then? You have to take into account how hateful some of our fellow Americans are and how ugly they can get. 

[imiubu]

Editing out my off topic post

[t-pain]

nooo take your off topic nonsense elsewhere. to a new thread.

[imiubu]

Are you following me around this morning t? lol

 

Good mornin'!

 

I will edit my post hun

[Norby]

because obama never campaigned on legalizing marijuana.

 

Back when he was running in 2008, Obama said he supported the “basic concept of using medical marijuana for the same purposes and with the same controls as other drugs” and that he was “not going to be using Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws.” He didn’t go farther. But he also didn’t do anything to dissuade speculation among medical marijuana proponents who took this as a sign that the man headed to the Oval Office was on their side.

 

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/04/obamas-pot-promise-a-pipe-dream-075421

 

letting the states handle it is finally what has happened. you know, because he was busy fixing the stock market, pulling the world out of a financial meltdown. all that boring stuff.

 

thats why its so interesting that bernie has said he would making whoopee decrim. if people would actually look at what candidates say instead of some moo poo that activists ( me included ) were hoping a candidate would do, this process would be a lot simpler.

 

what i hoped would happen:

obama legalize marijuana

 

instead what happened:

4 states legalized marijuana and its now a states right issue. maybe if we are lucky ohio will join up in a few days.

 

so, was i wrong to vote obama to get better marijuana laws? dunno.

romney sure wasnt for marijuana.

 

http://2012.republican-candidates.org/Romney/Marijuana.php

Romney opposes the legalization of marijuana, including medical marijuana.

 

“People talk about medicinal marijuana. And you know, you hear that story that people who are sick need medicinal marijuana. But marijuana is the entry drug for people trying to get kids hooked on drugs. I don't want medicinal marijuana; there are synthetic forms of marijuana that are available for people who need it for prescription. Don't open the doorway to medicinal marijuana.”

July 25, 2007, Romney speaking at a town hall meeting in Bedford, New Hampshire

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/02/mitt-romney-marijuana_n_1931995.html

Mitt Romney: Marijuana 'For Recreational Use' Is Bad, But I Also Oppose It For All Purposes

Posted: 10/02/2012 9:46 am EDT

 

(right before the election in november)

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012

popular vote, meaning 65million people voted for obama and 60 million people voted for romney.

obama ----- romney

65,915,796 60,933,500

 

so since we only have a two party system in america, the choice was a candidate who lets the states decide and a candidate who wants marijuana , even medical marijuana illegal.

 

i voted for obama in 2012 and i stand by that vote. did you vote for the prohibitionist in the 2012 election gregrx ?

There was a green party candidate.  Obama didn't address what I wanted in teh first presidency so I voted 3rd party to keep with the MJ vote.  I voted for him in 08 though

Ha, and Resto voted for Obama and gives him a pass on mj decrim because people would've made fun of him.

You guys are all too anti pot for me!

[zaphod]

OK, if Bernie can do it, why hasn't your Messieh , Obumer already done it? I will tell you. It is a classic wedge issue that will motivate democrat voters.

The topic is Bernie Sanders, not the "second coming".

Who exactly is this "classic wedge issue" targeting, and why the childish name calling?

[beourbud]

"i voted for obama in 2012 and i stand by that vote. did you vote for the prohibitionist i ,m election gregrx .,

 

T you give the republicans too much credit.

 

Republicans don't have answers.

 

After witnessing the klusterfock that is the GOP debates it is apparent these bozo's (the best and brightest of the GOP and my appologies to Bozo) can't even run a debate much less a country.

They can't even answer a few questions from a moderator, why would anyone think they are capable of negotiating with Putin or china.

There isn't a particle of presidential matter between the whole lot of them.

[+Malamute]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/10/republican_presidential_candidates_attack_the_truth_in_cnbc_debate_ted_cruz.html

 

Leading GOP candidates aren’t at war with the press. They just have a problem with the truth.

 

 

 

Half an hour into Wednesday’s Republican presidential debate, Sen. Ted Cruz exploded at the CNBC moderators. “The questions that have been asked so far in this debate illustrate why the American people don’t trust the media,” Cruz fumed. “You look at the questions: ‘Donald Trump, are you a comic-book villain?’ ‘Ben Carson, can you do math?’ ‘John Kasich, will you insult two people over here?’ ‘Marco Rubio, why don't you resign?’ ‘Jeb Bush, why have your numbers fallen?’ How about talking about the substantive issues the people care about?”

 

 

By the end of the evening, Cruz, Carson, Trump, Rubio, and several other candidates had declared war on the press. They claimed to speak for the Republican Party, the American people, and the truth. These candidates are deluded. Many of their statements were falsified on the spot. Others were exposed as absurd by their opponents. It’s true that the debate exposed a division within the country. But the division isn’t between the press and the public. It’s between people who listen to evidence—reporters, policy analysts, and many Democrats and Republicans—and an impervious, defiant wing of the GOP.

 

 

Take Cruz’s speech. It doesn’t even match the debate transcript. To begin with, nobody called Trump a villain. CNBC’s John Harwood asked Trump how he would fulfill his promises to “build a wall and make another country pay for it” (Mexico), “send 11 million people out of the country” (undocumented immigrants), and “cut taxes $10 trillion without increasing the deficit.” Second, nobody asked Carson whether he could do math. CNBC’s Becky Quick asked Carson how he would close the $1 trillion gap between current federal spending and the revenue projected from Carson’s 15 percent flat tax. Third, nobody asked Kasich to insult his colleagues. Kasich volunteered that Trump’s and Carson’s promises were impractical and incoherent. All of these questions were substantive. In fact, Cruz’s speech was a diversion from the query that had been posed to him—namely, why did he oppose this week’s agreement to raise the debt limit?

 

Presented with facts and figures that didn’t fit their story, the leading Republican candidates accused the moderators of malice and deceit.

 

Trump had no answers to the questions about mass deportation, his $10 trillion shortfall, or the magical Mexican wall fund. He cited his own bankruptcies as a model for fixing the national debt. “I've used [bankruptcy] three times, maybe four times. Came out great,” said Trump. “That is what I could do for the country: We owe $19 trillion. Boy, am I good at solving debt problems.” Carson, when confronted with his own tax shortfall, suggested that his tax rate was flexible and claimed that he could make up the difference by cutting unspecified waste.

 

As the evening wore on, it became increasingly obvious that Trump, Carson, and their allies onstage didn’t just have a problem with the press. They had problems with fellow Republicans. Harwood brought up Ben Bernanke, the former Federal Reserve chairman who recently declared that the GOP, hijacked by the “know-nothingism of the far right,” had forfeited Bernanke’s allegiance. Sen. Rand Paul dismissed Bernanke’s criticism as “arrogance” and said it showed why the Fed should be audited. Paul, one-upping Cruz and Rubio—who had already celebrated the resignation of House Speaker John Boehner—spurned Boehner’s likely replacement, Paul Ryan, as “more of the same.”

 

Despite the efforts of Cruz, Carson, and Rubio to draw a wall of denial around all the candidates, reality leaked in. Kasich debunked his colleagues’ tax, budget, and deportation math. Bush backed up Harwood’s summary of a nonpartisan critique of Trump’s tax plan. When Trump insisted he could balance the budget without changing Medicare or Social Security, Bush corrected him. Two other presidential candidates who spoke during the 6 p.m. undercard debate—Sen. Lindsey Graham, who affirmed the truth of climate change, and former Gov. George Pataki, who criticized Republican foolishness about vaccines and carbon emissions—rounded out the GOP’s sanity caucus.

 

The main debate had its share of nonsense. Former Gov. Mike Huckabee said he would cut health care costs by curing Alzheimer’s, diabetes, heart disease, and cancer. Carly Fiorina, the former Hewlett-Packard CEO, tried to blame the collapse of her company’s stock on the NASDAQ slide, even though, as Quick pointed out, HP’s stock “was a much worse performer” than the market as a whole. Bush calculated how many people had fallen into poverty since “the day that Barack Obama got elected,” thereby blaming Obama for what happened in the last two and a half months of Bush’s brother’s administration.

 

 

The candidate who attacked the media most directly and self-destructively was Trump. He accused Harwood of lying about CNBC’s original plan for a two-hour debate. Carson later joined in the accusation. But after the debate, the Washington Post’s Erik Wemple quoted an archived press release that vindicated Harwood. Trump also said the military servicemen killed by an attacker in Chattanooga, Tennessee, in July died because “they weren’t allowed on a military base to have guns.”* But the Post’s fact checkers pointed out that the servicemen had weapons, and at least one fired back. Most egregiously, Trump denied that he had called Rubio “Mark Zuckerberg’s personal senator” for promoting immigrant tech-worker visas, and he suggested that Quick had concocted the allegation. When Quick read aloud the quote from Trump’s own website, Trump shrugged it off.

 

 

But the biggest surprise of the night wasn’t Trump. It was Rubio. Having clawed his way above Bush in the electable-candidates bracket, the Florida senator chose to stand not with the sanity caucus, but with the deniers. When Harwood quoted a nonpartisan assessment of how Rubio’s tax plan would affect after-tax income—a 28 percent increase for the top 1 percent of earners, and a 15 percent increase for the middle class—Rubio dismissed the gap, falsely, as an artifact of scale, since “5 percent of a million is a lot more than 5 percent of a thousand.” When Rubio was asked about his messy finances—a second-home foreclosure, a prematurely liquidated retirement fund, campaign money accidentally mixed with personal money—he pleaded poverty. He ignored Quick’s reminder that “you made over a million dollars on a book deal, and some of these problems came after that.”

 

 

Then Rubio went ballistic. He exclaimed: “Democrats have the ultimate super PAC. It’s called the mainstream media.” As evidence, Rubio said the press had covered up Hillary Clinton’s lies about Benghazi. “She spent over a week telling the families of those victims and the American people that [the attack] was because of a video,” said Rubio.

 

That’s completely false. Clinton’s first statement on Benghazi, delivered on the night of the attack, didn’t specify a motive. It spoke of people who used an anti-Muslim video to justify the attack, not to motivate it. The next day, Clinton said the victims died when “heavily armed militants assaulted the compound.” A thorough review by Factcheck.org found no evidence Clinton had blamed the video during that time.

 

What happened in this debate wasn’t an attack by the press on the candidates. It was an attack by the candidates on the press. Harwood, Quick, and the other CNBC panelists were no harsher to the Republicans on Wednesday than CNN’s Anderson Cooper was to Clinton and other Democrats in their debate two weeks ago. What was different this time was the reaction. Presented with facts and figures that didn’t fit their story, the leading Republican candidates accused the moderators of malice and deceit.

 

 

Arguing with the press is a constitutional right, and it’s part of a healthy society. But when the topic is economics, and when everyone is watching, you’re taking a risk. The risk is that your assertions can be checked against the historical record and the calculator. Your story can be falsified.

 

Yes, reporters sometimes screw up. But they have a troublesome habit of checking things. That’s what makes their statements, on the whole, more reliable than yours. It’s not true, as Stephen Colbert once joked, that reality has a liberal bias. But it is true that reality has a bias toward journalists. That’s because journalists spend a lot of time with reality. They get to know it.

 

 

Over the course of a campaign, you can learn a lot. Some of what you learn is about truth: which tax plan adds up, which promises are realistic, which view of the world most closely matches what’s being reported. But much of what you learn is about people: which candidates adjust to reality, and which don’t. In this cohort of Republicans, a bubble seems to be forming. On the outside are Kasich, Bush, Pataki, and Graham. On the inside are Trump, Carson, and Cruz. The candidates inside the bubble are doing well. Rubio is trying to join them. But bubbles don’t last.

[t-pain]

ok time to watch the debate. i just thought it was some weird debate format that people got upset about , but this sounds hilarious now...