1 Trillion Later, The Failed War On Drugs
supporter
Posted by Kelly (+2743) 12 years ago
Interesting and quick read...

http://hosted.ap.org/dyna...TE=DEFAULT
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17731) 12 years ago
If there ever is a place to eliminate wasteful government spending, it is to stop the war on drugs. What a colossal waste of taxpayer dollars.
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6114) 12 years ago
Wait ... did you say a TRILLION dollars!? Isn't that the magic number that just sets the Teabaggers right the procreate off?

Where are the tea parties and marches in protest of that? Are they afraid that an anti-drug war (anti-anti-drug?) movement might attract some, um, swarthier people to the cause? I suppose we can't have that, can we? Have to keep things pure, you know. Ideologically, of course. Anyway ...

I guess if it has to do with "war," no one cares how much it costs, right?
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5101) 12 years ago
Huh Huh Huh

Brian said "Teabaggers"

Huh Huh Huh
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6114) 12 years ago
I have learned from my Tea Party friends that Teabaggers don't particularly enjoy being called Teabaggers. So, out of respect for Teabaggers and the message that Teabaggers want to convey, I do my part to assist the Teabaggers disseminate their Teabaggery to non-teabaggers and those who might be persuaded into joining the Teabaggers' cause and become Teabaggers themselves.

Either that, or I just like calling the morans Teabaggers. I haven't decided yet. Regardless, Teabaggers.

Teabaggers.
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6114) 12 years ago
When Teabaggers are outlawed, I will still call Teabaggers Teabaggers.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5101) 12 years ago
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr (+15082) 12 years ago
This is a huge waste of money. I find the concept of declaring "war" or a "police action" a little over the top. The notion that this is some sort of "combat" isn't really that helpful.

Rather than operating a "catch and release" program that incarcerates people for "smoking weed" or selling weed, we ought to take actions that remove the profit motive.

Also, IMO, using messages such as "95 % of your neighbors don't do drugs" that re-enforce positive behavior would be much more effective than the punitive approach taken by a "war" model.
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6114) 12 years ago
Damn, Richard. Since I came back, I have found you downright agreeable. WTF?
Top
Posted by Tracy Walters (+297) 12 years ago
Folks who are against running up the debt have not excluded the money spent on the drug wars. There are so many places that spending is wildly out of control it's difficult to identify them all.

So...Brian, upon finding out that people don't appreciate being referred to by a term they consider derogatory and devaluing, you make an extra effort to use the term as much as possible.

Well, really mature of you.. is it just desensitzing everyone to the term so you can freely insult them as much as possible, undermine their credibility a little more, or are you just trying to get someone to respond in anger for (add your reason here)
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17731) 12 years ago
You're playing the injured party again.
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr (+15082) 12 years ago
I really don't understand people who want to argue over whether the guy with the bottle of Windex is a window washer or a vision control engineer.
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6114) 12 years ago
Tracy, I know who my audience is. And they know what to expect from me. I have posted once or twice before. In other words, I keeps it real. If you're not careful, I'll drop a Haiku on you.

Life must suck without a sense of humor.

And I have to call bulls**t on your "Teabaggers don't like the war on drugs" comment. Had the Teabaggers come out in full force ANYTIME prior to the Obama presidency, I might be inclined to give your comment some merit. But no one ever heard of the Tea Party (or its 'Baggers) prior to this administration, so you'll have to forgive me if I respectfully disagree with your premise.

Unless you can convince me otherwise, I will continue to believe that Teabaggers only dislike government spending that might actually do some good for people other than themselves. Any spending that leads to the spilling of blood is A-OK.

[This message has been edited by Brian A. Reed (5/13/2010)]
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5101) 12 years ago
Teabaggers also don't like it when them coloreds hold political office.
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6114) 12 years ago
Bob, they're called "Negroes" or "Kenyans."

Get it right or the ACORN shock troops will come take you away on their chemtrail-producing black helicopters. You know, the ones that the Muzzlims use to take away your guns.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bob L. (+5101) 12 years ago
Bob, they're called "Negroes" or "Kenyans."


Really? I've heard the teabaggers around here use a different word.

HINT: It rhymes with "trigger"
Top
Posted by Brian A. Reed (+6114) 12 years ago
Buh buh buh but that would mean that there are RACISTS amongst the Teabaggers' ranks! And that couldn't possibly be true, could it?
Top
supporter
Posted by Kelly (+2743) 12 years ago
Bigger? as in endowment?
Top
Posted by Tracy Walters (+297) 12 years ago
Brian,
Haiku away...

"And "And I have to call bulls**t on your "Teabaggers don't like the war on drugs" comment."

That's not exactly what I said, and supporting the war on drugs does not mean I think the outrageous spending on it is justified. I don't support Meth, I don't support Cocaine, I don't support Heroin, I don't support designer drugs, and I sure don't support the crime that goes with it.

I don't like spilling blood, and I don't believe funding 'anything' that supports it is good. I spent twelve years in the military, and didn't want to die any more than the next guy. Once again, a few people on the far right are taken to be conscience of anyone slight to the right...and this is just wrong.

As to convincing you that Tea Party people don't support funding for anything that doesn't help themselves, well, you'll just have to see the kind of real people who attend a tea party...not the loonies or plants (and yes, there have been some caught). These real people donate significant amounts of time and money in supporting others...and if you don't believe me, we'll have to compare notes sometime.

I don't support legalizing any of the above. As to marijuana, I'm not sure where I stand, I don't think outright legalizing it going to work unless we can find a way to regulate it as we do alcohol...and because of the ease of producing it, compared to alcohol, I think it would take a lot of research to determine what driving under the influence is, and who gets it (specifically regarding underage people).

As to the color of a person's skin, I hardly think that matters, but it seems to be a rallying cry against the conservatives because people 'believe' they are racist. Are there racists among the ranks of the Tea Party folks, yes...are they the majority, or even a significant minority? You would have to prove that to me, and a lot of others...and while you are doing the research, check into the same thing for liberal side.

Interesting. Again, we'll have to compare notes on your 'racism' comment and see where we stand.

[This message has been edited by Tracy Walters (5/13/2010)]
Top
Posted by Matt - Schmitz (+173) 12 years ago
I think I remember reading that fully 1/3 of the people in our prison system throughout this country are in those prisons for marijuana offenses. As a nation, are we really that stupid? Good God man. Give it a rest.
"Disclaimer - I think that was what I read. I'm old, and don't remember stuff like I used too"
Top
supporter
Posted by Levi Forman (+3707) 12 years ago
I think the 1/3 number might be arrests, not prison population. Not that many people go to prison over pot unless it's large quantities or there is related violence. I have heard 20% of prison inmates are there for drug-related crimes, but that includes a lot more than marijuana.
Top