Ron Paul on GOP Fear of Pot Legalization: 'They still perceive that it's a risky political position to take'
On Wednesday's episode of The Independents, three-time presidential candidate, retired congressman, and hero of freedom Ron Paul appeared on the show (yet again!), this time to talk about the effects of drug legalization—and prohibition—on Mexico, and on U.S. foreign policy. At the 2:45 mark, I asked him when he thought Republicans—for instance those whose names rhyme with "grand fall"—would gin up the courage to go full legalization. Paul's answer below:
Reason on Ron Paul here.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"...gin up the courage to go full legalization. "
Gin up the courage to legalize pot. Good one!
And, of course, the political considerations are paramount.
The real question is: where are the morning links?
Gone. Forever.
I'm waiting with bated breath to see who takes over for Matthew. Sloopy? FIST?!
I think HM has the best links going, I doubt we'd be able to get him up this early though.
Fist AM links would have no links, just him commenting to himself until one of us comes along to post.
Today on Derpbook, a prog responds to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCdgv7n9xCY
"People like getting checks in the mail. This proves that the program is good and works. Suck it rightwing haters!"
Those who rob Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul.
Yep. But what amazes me is the amount of progs who think that Paul's support for a program is an argument. I've heard it many times.
"Why don't you go ask all the people who's jobs were saved by the GM bailout if they thought it was a good idea? Huh. Yeah, that's what I thought."
It used to be they made some kind of argument that the redistribution of wealth was better for the country as a whole. Which was bullshit, but at least it was debatable. Now apparently all one has to do is ask the leeches if the blood is to their taste.
I see that argument all the time. It is based upon the premise that accumulations of wealth are a bad thing. Whenever I ask them to explain their premise, they look at me like I've got three heads. It's self evident that accumulations of wealth are bad because, uh, WEALTH APOLOGIST! YOU LICK THE CORPORATE BOOTS THAT HOLD YOU DOWN!
"Why don't you go ask the king if he thinks paying the king's tax is a bad idea?"
I bet his parents are so proud. Nice to know the little twat you housed, fed, clothed and cared for for 18 years isn't willing to return the favor.
Sadly, I don't think this jerk would even feel any shame if they told him he had to go collect the money personally from his neighbors to pay for his parents.
Twat: "Hey neighbor, under the new decentralized Social Security Act I'm empowered to come over and have you give me some cash to take care of my parents. If you don't fork over, the goon behind me will beat you and jail you. "
What's the goon's cut? Offer him more than that to beat the twerp instead. You just saved money.
Problem is that there are more goons in line to take the place of the one you bought off. Goons all the way down...
Cont'd
I have told this fool before about Fleming v Nestor, which established the govt has no obligation to pay Social Security.
Except for any intelligent person below the age of 30 who can recognize a Ponzi scheme when he sees one.
Bloomberg Bimbo is talking about Sterling the RACIST. Apparently, there is some bizarre thing called "due process" which may hinder the NBA's attempts to arbitrarily wrest control of the Clippers from the guy who owns them.
What is this country coming to?
Well IANAL but from what I understand, the NBA is set up in such a way that a 3/4 majority of the owners can vote to force a sale. But obviously the current owner would keep all proceeds of said sale.
I wish someone would punish me by writing me a check for (probably) between 500 and 900 million. Maybe even more.
It's a private membership he's being stripped of by the private group whose agreement he signed. He is not being oppressed by the government and is afforded no due process in this matter. If 23 of 30 owners want him out, he's out. He'll fight it because that's what he does.
Except of course the government never runs out of money.
Somebody is going to be quite disagreeably surprised, one of these days.
Well, the government will never run out of money, that's true. You'll just need a wheelbarrow to carry your pocket change.
Some people don't understand that money, wealth and value are not synonyms.
I wish someone would punish me by writing me a check for (probably) between 500 and 900 million. Maybe even more.
I suspect some of my neighbors consider me a detriment to their property values. I would gladly allow them to buy me out for 500k.
You'll just need a wheelbarrow to carry your pocket change.
This is why banning cigarettes is a bad idea.
One of my favorite hyper inflation stories was of a German man who left his wheelbarrow full of marks outside of a store. When he came back some one had stolen his wheelbarrow, but left all the money lying on the sidewalk.