Joe Biden

In the Space of One Minute, Joe Biden Defends the Death Penalty for Drug Dealers, Asset Forfeiture, and Mandatory Minimums

This 1991 Senate floor speech shows Biden's central role in crafting disastrous crime policies.

|

Abaca Press/Douliery Olivier/Abaca/Sipa USA/Newscom

Right now most of the news about likely 2020 contender Joe Biden involves his history of being handsy with people at public events. Yet another, far more problematic element of his history has been popping up too: his record on criminal justice.

On Wednesday, the same day Biden put out a video statement responding to criticisms of his wandering hands, journalist Ziad Jilani tweeted a 1991 Senate floor speech made by the then-senator from Delaware.

Though the clip is only a minute long, Biden manages to brag about his role in some of the worst tough-on-crime policies around, including civil asset forfeiture, mandatory minimum sentencing, and an expanded federal death penalty.

"There is now a death penalty. If you are a major drug dealer, involved in the trafficking of drugs, and murder results in your activities, you go to death," said Biden at the beginning of his remarks, in what appears to be a reference to the 1988 Anti-Drug Abuse Act.

That law expanded the federal death penalty to apply to murders committed as part of a drug trafficking conspiracy. Biden would go on to help write the 1994 crime bill, which "authorized the death penalty for dozens of existing and new federal crimes."

Biden also sought credit for expanding civil asset forfeiture—a practice that allows the government to seize your property even if you've been convicted of no crime.

"We changed the law so that if you are arrested, and you are a drug dealer, under our forfeiture statutes, you can, the government can take everything you own," said Biden, referencing the 1984 Comprehensive Crime Control Act, which the then-senator from Delaware sponsored alongside Sen. Strom Thurmond (R–S.C.).

"Everything from your car to your house, your bank account, not merely what they confiscate in terms of the dollars from the transaction you just got caught engaging in," added Biden.

Reason has written endlessly about the abuses of civil asset forfeiture (see here, here, and here for some examples), and there is now a growing bipartisan consensus that that the practice is dire need of reform or even abolition.

As if defending the death penalty and civil asset forfeiture weren't enough, Biden manages to squeeze in a glowing reference to mandatory minimum sentencing at the tail end of his remarks.

"We have laws that don't allow judges discretion to sentence people, flat time sentencing. You get caught, you go to jail," says Biden before the clip cuts off.

Needless to say, all three of these policies are anathema to many Democratic primary voters today, and indeed many Republicans too, who've come around to seeing the error of the tough-on-crime approach so zealously pursed by Biden.

Attitudes have shifted so far on criminal justice issues that even Biden himself has had to engage in a little self-reflection.

"I haven't always been right. I know we haven't always gotten things right, but I've always tried," said Biden during a January speech, referring to his record on criminal justice issues.

In one sense, Biden's expression of regret is a sign of tremendous progress. The primary voters he needs to get the Democratic nomination are increasingly turned off by the policies he used to champion.

Will a few brief expressions of regret be enough for those same voters to give Biden a pass for his central role in creating an era of mass incarceration? That remains to be seen.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they 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 for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

116 responses to “In the Space of One Minute, Joe Biden Defends the Death Penalty for Drug Dealers, Asset Forfeiture, and Mandatory Minimums

  1. .. but I’ve always tried.
    So give him a participation award and send him packing.

    1. A spot in the Special Olympics?

      1. More like the Spatial Olympics. But actually I’m hoping he gets the nomination, for reasons that’ve already been stated here: the repudiation of socialism & as the safety net in case Trump loses.

      2. I am making 7 to 6 dollar par hour at home on laptop ,, This is make happy But now i am Working 4 hour Dailly and make 40 dollar Easily .. This is enough for me to happy my family..how ??
        i am making this so u can do it Easily…. http://www.Aprocoin.com

    2. I am making 7 to 6 dollar par hour at home on laptop ,, This is make happy But now i am Working 4 hour Dailly and make 40 dollar Easily .. This is enough for me to happy my family..how ??
      i am making this so u can do it Easily…. http://xurl.es/6haxp

  2. Nothing is more infuriating than Democrats’ ability get away with supporting horrible failures and terrible laws and policies, and then when they go wrong blaming them all on racist, sexist, Republicans.

    Look at the Iraq War. Congress had all the same intel Bush did. Clinton and Gore told us the same exact thing about Saddam starting up his WMD program again and bombed the hell out of Iraq in 1998 because of it. But no, Bush lied to them and they’re not responsible.

    Look at the War on Drugs. Charlie Rangel supported executing crack dealers until the early 2000s! The War on Drugs was a hugely popular bipartisan policy that many black Dem leaders supported. But no, now the entire thing was an evil racist scheme from the start. People who criticized it were met with cries of “Why do you want children to die!?”

    Which brings me to my next point: gun control. Watch Dems crack down on illegal guns and pass gun control. Who commits the majority of gun crimes & murders? Who is most likely to have illegal guns? In ten years when hundreds of thousands of black men are in prison for victim-less crimes of possession, they will then blame it on racist Republicans, and the media will play right along.

    1. All of these things were responses to huge public outcry to “do something!” to what were at the time serious problems. Good intentions are more dangerous than bad intentions, and even more dangerous when the people with “good intentions” deny they ever supported the things to begin with, because they will then just do the same thing in the future: i.e. gun control.

      The TSA, prohibition, the war on drugs; all of these things were government responses to the masses screaming to “do something!”, and people who opposed them were accused of hating children and wanting people to die.

      1. By the way, gun crime is not a “serious problem”. It is at historic lows, and your chances of being killed in a mass shooting are about the same as being killed by a previously deported illegal immigrant. Both are irrational fears.

        1. ” It is at historic lows, and your chances of being killed in a mass shooting are about the same as being killed by a previously deported illegal immigrant. Both are irrational fears”

          True enough, but when did facts ever get in the way of a good narrative, or government initiative [having a solution and needing a problem]?

    2. You don’t seem very color blind to me.

      1. Democrats’ and the press’s refusal to acknowledge the reality of black crime rates is going to end with even more black men in prison for absolutely no fucking reason at all. That is a huge problem, and denying it is far more racist and dangerous to black people than pointing out the racial disparity in crime rates to begin with.

        1. Why is it “racist” to note the facts that blacks are far more likely to commit inter-racial crimes of violence than whites?

          Or that a negress is far more likely to give birth to a baby out of wedlock?

          Or that negroes, in general, are far more apt to engage in socially dysfunctional behavior?

          1. Because you’re attributing those things to their race and not to how their race has been treated by people like you.

            1. Tony, am I attributing it to their race? I am only pointing out the facts.

            2. “Because you’re attributing those things to their race and not to how their race has been treated by people like you.”

              That’s still attributing it to their race…

          2. “Negress?” Wtf are you 80 years old? Hahahaaaaaahaha!

        2. If one racial group has a higher crime rate than average, you can posit one of two explanations. Either that racial group is genetically predisposed to crime, or that racial group has been disproportionately harmed by society, resulting in relatively poor metrics, including crime rate (and others).

          People who posit the genetic cause need to offer some biological evidence. They also need to explain how society should respond to this problem. You can’t fairly expect people to pull themselves up from their bootstraps if they are genetically predisposed to being less able to do so.

          1. There are numerous other demographic and population groups in US society with similar poverty and education levels, but a murder rate 8X lower than black Americans. As I’ve said many time on this site, much of the reason for the poverty gap is because of historical racism and some of the crime discrepancy, but it does not explain most of it. The notion that black people who are poor just can’t help murdering each other at astronomical rates is extraordinarily racist and patronizing, as if they are brainless animals who have no control over their actions.

            1. The notion that black people who are poor just can’t help murdering each other at astronomical rates is extraordinarily racist and patronizing, as if they are brainless animals who have no control over their actions.

              It’s also Democratic dogma.

              And it goes the same for every “marginalized” group that, if you add them all together, make up about 95% of the population. None of them are responsible for their actions as they have no agency, it’s only upper middle-class and rich straight white middle-aged men who are responsible for all the troubles in the world and responsible for fixing them. They are the only ones whose consciousness is not innately fixed by virtue of the characteristics they were born with.

              Which, as I’ve explained before, would seem to make these white men a higher life form endowed with free will and capable of choosing what to think and believe whereas everybody else merely responds in an instinctual manner, your membership in a given identity group dictates what you think or believe and failure to think or believe in this prescribed manner is a sure sign of some sort of mental illness.

          2. There are numerous other demographic and population groups in US society with similar poverty and education levels, but a murder rate 8X lower than black Americans. As I’ve said many time on this site, much of the reason for the poverty gap is because of historical racism and some of the crime discrepancy, but it does not explain most of it. The notion that black people who are poor just can’t help murdering each other at astronomical rates is extraordinarily racist and patronizing, as if they are brainless animals who have no control over their actions.

            1. Essentially all of the extra murder rate is attributable to gang violence, a very specific cultural phenomenon. So we need to explain black gangs, that’s all. I suggest ghettoization and resulting lack of opportunity might have something to do with it.

              1. Let’s look at Rhodesia / Zimbabwe. Compare life before and after black rule.

                Why has the standard of living declined so precipitously after the whites abdicated and black communism took control?

                You would have much preferred to live in Rhodesia in the 1960s than today’s Zimbabwe.

                One thing is for sure: only intellectual lightweights and dedicated anti-whites blame whitey or colonialism for the nightmare which has ensued.

              2. The sad thing is that you’re agreeing with the notion that black people are more prone to crime and you don’t even realize it. Just because you relabel it ‘gang violence’ doesn’t change the point.

                I’m not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing, just noting that you don’t seem to realize that you’re agreeing with colorblind while pretending to disagree.

                Interesting.

                1. Baltimore, Camden, Detroit, Gary, IN, Newark, et al are all shitholes. Chicago is headed in that direction.

                  Pointing out the correlation between black run political entities and those places being shitholes is stating fact. Labeling the assertion of such facts as racist is intellectual clap-trap as well as groupthink apologia.

                  Maybe, just maybe, black ain’t so beautiful.

            2. I don’t think it’s so much historical racism, as that for historical reasons, blacks were unusually badly placed to be harmed by the negative cultural effects of “the war on poverty”.

              It harmed other people similarly situated, too, but no group was situated in that way in as high of numbers.

              And, yes, THAT had to do with a history of racism, but the harm wasn’t done by the racism. It just put them in harm’s way when the Democrats decided to go to war on poverty, and the poor themselves became collateral damage.

              1. Whatever you need to tell yourself to blame Democrats.

                Jesus fuck, what a fruitless conversation this obviously is.

                The existence of gangs is obviously a result of decades and centuries of racist public policy and social attitudes. At least half of this you can attribute to government and pat yourself on the back for it.

                I happen to live in a city that once boasted one of the wealthiest black populations in the country. The white people found an excuse to literally burn it all to the ground. Now the black people are all ghettoized in the poorest neighborhood where, surprise, crime is highest.

                But maybe it’s all because they are bad mothers, culturally.

                1. I mean, factually speaking it was historically Democrats doing the things you’re talking about.

                  Also, I don’t suppose it’s ever occurred to you that maybe the wealthy black people left your city instead of they suddenly became poor. But, of course, without knowing where you live it’s impossible to say.

                  1. No, I’m pretty sure they were murdered by the hundreds and their businesses burned to the ground because of a rumor one of them touched a white woman.

                    But it could be they are inherently bad parents.

          3. There are more than those two explanations. There can be deeply seated cultural differences that are not genetic, for one. And it can be a combination of all of those things.

            I like to think that most large differences between racial groups are mostly cultural and historical. But I certainly don’t know that for sure. And it would be surprising if all racial groups were exactly the same on average on every single metric you can think of.

            One think I agree with Libertymike on is that these uncomfortable facts about different racial groups should be discussed more openly. The assumption that a lot of people seem to operate under, that all racial differences are because of oppression by other racial groups, is far from proven.

            Of course, in any discussion like this, it is important to keep in mind that the fact that you can observe differences between racial groups does not mean that you can say anything about any individual because of the racial groups they belong to. That’s when it becomes racism and/or bigotry.

            1. Most of the zealousness manifested in my posts on this issue is motivated by what you refer to in your third paragraph.

              Too many people have bought and accepted the progressive narrative that racism is a one-way street with whitey going in the wrong direction.

              Of course, it goes without saying, or as the French put it, cela va sans dire, that each and every individual should be assessed, judged, regarded, and viewed as an individual.

              1. Well our universities teach people that white people “invented” racism, because they invented the scientific methods to differentiate or some bullshit. They teach that Europeans are why slavery spread around the world, instead of every civilization and culture in history having histories rife with racism, genocide, and slavery.

                It is all a newly resurgent version of the “noble savage” fallacy, that involves an extraordinary amount of historical revisionism, rooted in misplaced white guilt.

                1. The Ds, and progressives (and those reflexively or inclined to be so) more broadly, have never given up on the tenets of The Noble Savage or White Man’s Burden. It’s just spoken of in a different, less direct way.
                  Just look at chemjeff’s and chipper morning eunuch’s posts on illegal immigration to see the MILD version of those ideas. It’s a key component of their paradigm, and largely unconscious.
                  It should be noted that the above, this time excluding jeff and eunuch, also haven’t given up on eugenic and caste beliefs either.

          4. If one racial group has a higher crime rate than average, you can posit one of two explanations. Either that racial group is genetically predisposed to crime, or that racial group has been disproportionately harmed by society, resulting in relatively poor metrics, including crime rate (and others).

            Or culturally predisposed to crime. It doesn’t have to be genetics or oppression.

            1. Yeah, being oppressed and lynched and kept out of commerced for centuries might have some effects on culture.

            2. Yeah, being oppressed and lynched and kept out of commerce for centuries might have some effects on culture.

            3. Yeah, being oppressed and lynched and kept out of commerce for centuries might have some effects on culture.

            4. Yeah, being oppressed and lynched and kept out of commerce for centuries might have some effects on culture.

            5. Yeah, being oppressed and lynched and kept out of commerce for centuries might have some effects on culture.

              1. Fucking spring, I can’t escape the fucking squirrels.

                1. Neither can my dogs. They bark and chase and the squirrels always win.

                  Race is a myth. If we were dogs we would all be Labradors.

              2. Yes, exactly, Tony. So then what do you do about it? The broken cultures, that are in large part a result of historical racism, need to be fixed or we won’t have more racial equality. Finding the right people to blame doesn’t accomplish anything. Yet if anyone dares to say that there is something really wrong with a lot of African American culture, they get called racist.
                It’s a shame Cosby turned out to be a creep. He had some credibility on this issue and was harder to call a racist for criticizing black culture.

                1. “Finding the right people to blame doesn’t accomplish anything.”

                  I agree.

                  “Yet if anyone dares to say that there is something really wrong with a lot of African American culture, they get called racist.”

                  See your own comment above. What are you accomplishing by blaming black people for their problems? Think they’re gonna listen and have an epiphany and choose to be best?

                  In a perfect world we could solve a specific problem with targeted action (i.e., money), but we live in a country where if black people are perceived to be “taking” anything whatsoever from white people, horrible cunts get elected to office and make the problem worse. So we have to sneak in policies that boost black well-being by making sure white people get a share of the pie too, because we tend to be whiny little bitches about stuff like this.

              3. The oppression of Black Americans, in the context of world history, is not unique or particularly severe, and it was more brief than a lot of other historical oppression around the globe, but it is the only historical oppression that is treated like it is.

    3. BOTH SIDES SUCK!!!!!

  3. It’s a shame Joe Biden isn’t more like The Onion’s portrayal of him….he’d be pretty cool, then.

    1. The Onion? Are they still around? I figured their funny “headlines” had been upstaged by MSM for a while now.

  4. It’s possible he figures that there are so many primary candidates on the extreme left, that his best bet is to score some early plurality victories by being the only “tough on crime” candidate in the race.

  5. The whole point of politics is to kill the men and rape the women. Biden’s not perfect, but at least he’s moving in the right direction.

    1. At the risk of being banned by Reason again, I have to say: that’s pretty good, dajjal

    1. You seriously have a boner for her, don’t you?

      1. Seriously or literally?
        Definitely not figuratively or ironically though, right?

    2. Now, I know she is the best!

  6. I have no doubt that the Bernie cult will forgive Biden for his past moderation when they skewered Hillary for hers. Because they are sexists.

      1. I know a rewrite from a “Lenny” article when I see one, plagiarist!

        1. He obviously has a boner for the Goldwater girl.

          #Stillhardforher

          Meanwhile, Bill says

          #YoucanhaveherOBL

      2. You know who also still thinks she won?

        1. Hell, I’m impatient.
          Stacey Abrams

    1. Hey if Jefferson can’t get a pass, why should he?

  7. He is fucking terrible. As bad as Harris and that’s a low bar. At least the moronic socialist fantasists like Bernie and Warren are so detached from reality their plans have no chance of ever happening.

    Biden and Harris are actually going to be able to cause real lasting harm to people if they win.

    1. “socialist fantasists like Bernie and Warren are so detached from reality their plans have no chance of ever happening”

      Same people who said a reality TV star would never be president.

      1. Trump becoming president means that anything can happen now, because nothing can be stranger than that.

      2. I didn’t say they can’t win but that their plans have no chance of being implemented.

        1. This is why i don’t actually think Bernie is that terrible. His socialism simply won’t happen but a lot of things he will have executive control over are pretty good. Bombing foreign countries probably won’t happen, drug war efforts lessened if not outright ignored, anti-2A bills will be vetoed, etc. Meanwhile, Congress will never pass a bill to socialize the economy.

          1. “Bombing foreign countries probably won’t happen”

            Sanders is not an non-interventionist. He will play along with whoever the baddie du jour is that week (as he did with Russia and then used that to justify his agnosticism toward withdrawing from Syria). Ignorance of foreign policy does not always equal a restrained foreign policy. Remember that Obama was suppose to end wars and instead increased wars.

            “Meanwhile, Congress will never pass a bill to socialize the economy.”

            I just don’t think that’s true. People thought that the Democrats would never tackle healthcare reform after Clinton’s failure in the 90’s and it was literally the first thing they did once they regained power. And once it’s there- it’s impossible to eliminate

            1. I can’t say you’re wrong about that. Those are valid considerations.

            2. “I just don’t think that’s true. People thought that the Democrats would never tackle healthcare reform after Clinton’s failure in the 90’s and it was literally the first thing they did once they regained power. And once it’s there- it’s impossible to eliminate”

              Not impossible, just bloody.
              I fear and detest the slow creep much more than the outright travesty.
              Socialist policies are fatal, but not always immediate. Their “moderate” implementation allows those policies and mindsets to entrench, while productive individuals keep things afloat.
              The progressive era has lasted more than a century. Every now and then, we roll it back a tiny bit here or there, but totalitarianism continuously marches on. Trump has done less to combat it than I’d hoped for, but he has successfully exposed the seams and shown us our fighting spirit.
              There must be a reckoning at some point, and I don’t necessarily think later is better than sooner. I’m unsure if this can be achieved without bloodshed.

    2. Correct, chipper me timbers.

      *you gotta change your name, brah – I have to write out “chipper me timbers” or “chipper morning eunuch” fully whenever I refer to you, when just writing “chipper” would be so much more convenient

      1. Oops

        whenever referring to *either of* you

  8. Terrible news.

    ICE arrests 280 at Texas firm, biggest immigration bust in a decade

    As Shikha Dalmia has explained, events like this prove we’re literally living under a fascist regime.

    #AbolishICE
    #OpenBorders
    #NoBanNoWall
    #BorderEnforcementIsFascism

    1. I still have yet to see any Democrat explain how they plan on enforcing a higher minimum wage without cracking down on businesses who hire illegal immigrants for lower wages. Of course, that would require a journalist to ask the question, and that would involve possibly making Democrats look bad, so it will never happen.

    2. That should create lot of job openings for homeless Americans.

      1. Don’t care. I wouldn’t want to live in the Fascist States of AmeriKKKa even if such a country had full employment and zero homelessness.

        1. Still hoping for an economic recession to devastate working people so Orange Man doesn’t win again?

    3. You spelled “screeched” wrong.

  9. eating their own is fun to watch … Mutual of Omaha presents: Democrat Kingdom

  10. Some campaign is certainly unhappy about Biden possibly joining the race. Tulsi remains the only Democrat in that primary worthy of a vote, although that one guy from South Bend called for eliminating government backed student loans so he’s pretty awesome, but also screwed now since he’s saying we should stop financially supporting progressive churches.

    1. Mayor Buttisex?

    2. >>>so he’s pretty awesome

      dude no.

  11. Biden just sways whichever way he thinks the wind is blowing. What he said previously is no worse than all the shit Hill-Dogg was spouting for years. What he’ll do now is flounder about trying to appeal to Justice Democrats Woke Brigade and boomer centrists at the same time and become entangled in his own contradictions while Kamala Harris does the same but wins hearts and minds because woman and possibly African-American (about as authentic as Liz Warren’s Cherokee heritage), and identity is important.

    1. Holy run-on sentence, Batperson!

      1. punctuation unnecessary

      2. I think “Justice Democrats Woke Brigade” is actually the official title of a unit in the Progressive Paramilitary Political Forces

  12. So a democrat did, and probably still does, espouse policies that reduce individual freedom, trample on the Constitution, and enlarge the federal government.
    How is this news?

  13. “In the Space of One Minute, Joe Biden Defends the Death Penalty for Drug Dealers, Asset Forfeiture, and Mandatory Minimums
    This 1991 Senate floor speech shows Biden’s central role in crafting disastrous crime policies.”

    A democrat was in favor of these awful policies?
    What’s the difference between the two parties again?

      1. We already habe free college.

        West Point, Annapolis, Colorado Springs, Kings Point, New London….

        1. You and I have different definitions of “free”

          1. In what way are the colleges I mentioned not free?

    1. “What’s the difference between the two parties again?”

      One party runs on smaller government, and betrays their voters.
      The other party runs on totalitarian government, and dutifully acts on it.

      Neither are good, or even acceptable, but the party that at least runs on smaller government is, albeit minimally, somewhat restrained on how much they can grow government and remain in office.
      The party that runs on totalitarian government faces no such check.

  14. You know what else happened in the space of one minute?

    1. The conception of Donald Jr.?

      1. I was gonna say my marriage, but sure, that works too.

  15. You’ll forfeit your ass, if you know what I mean.

  16. “I haven’t always been right. I know we haven’t always gotten things right, but I’ve always tried,”

    Yeah, that’s the problem. There’s such a thing as learning from your mistakes and when you make enough mistakes and enough catastrophic mistakes, the lesson to be learned is to keep your mouth shut and your hands to yourself and quit fucking with shit you’re too stupid to know you’re too ignorant to understand. If you give a 10-year old a Maserati and trust he’ll learn from his mistakes, after about the third Maserati you should be able to figure out that you are the one who should be learning from your mistake of trusting a 10-year old would learn from his mistakes.

    As they say: “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. And then give up, there’s no use being a damn fool about it.”

  17. So in other words, Joe Biden was Trump before Trump was Trump…

    1. Well notably, at that point, Donald Trump was a Democrat. One might expect that Trump would have been happy to vote for Biden back then.

  18. I don’t think this is fair to Biden. Just because he supported something nearly 30 years ago doesn’t mean he supports it now. I think it is okay for politicians to actually change their minds and (gasp) think about things. What does Biden think today? If he still believes this, then that is a good reason to object to his candidacy. If he doesn’t, then unless you can show me a reason why he is more likely to be lying about that than any other politician who claims something, I don’t think this matters.

    1. Q:What does Joe Biden think today?
      A: I don’t think he does

      1. He does sound more than a bit touched with dementia.

      2. “Q:What does Joe Biden think today?”
        A: Mmm, your hair smells pretty

    2. Yeah, seems to me that it’s a good thing if a politician changes some nasty views he had 30 years ago.

      Shouldn’t completely forget about them either. But being consistent in every political position for your whole life isn’t really much of a virtue.

  19. Good. 1991 was a war zone. Rothbard had the same opinion. We’re sitting pretty lamenting that some of the actions that got us to a place of safety went too far, but just go look at Baltimore to see how fast things can reverse.

    1. Yeah, boy, you could barely go outside without getting shot by a crack dealer in 1991.

  20. It’s rare to get primaried as a Democrat for being too tough on crime. It’s even more rare as a Republican.

  21. Keep this in mind about Biden

    Joe Biden coined the term ‘Drug Czar’ after watching ‘Reefer Madness.’

    According to Biden, the movie set him on a path to have the government warn the nation’s youth about the dangerous marijuana plant.

    Biden is in constant contact with past and present Drug Czars, who say that the current marijuana is much more powerful than the hippie weed. So much so, that it’s now considered to be not only highly addictive, but a gateway drug to LSD.

    Unnamed sources say Biden was maneuvered to be Obama’s Vice President so Biden could keep an eye on president pot head. There was a feeling that Obama would start smoking marijuana again, even though he swore he was off the stuff. So Biden was placed there to make sure Obama behaved and did not reclassify marijuana.

    1. Mark Halperin returned from exile to proclaim that Biden is an extremely overrated candidate, and I agree with the boner rubber.

  22. How about putting the guys that enacted these horrible laws that any rational person could have foreseen the consequences of, in prison for criminal negligence?????????

    1. Yeah, first you have to get those same guys to pass a law that will put them in prison. Seems unlikely.

  23. This is a rewind to what Biden was doing in 1987 to make the Republican Crash and Depression deeper and longer.

  24. Yes, we do need the death penalty for asset forfeiture.

  25. ?Google pay 95$ consistently my last pay check was $8200 working 10 hours out of every week on the web. My more young kin buddy has been averaging 15k all through ongoing months and he works around 24 hours consistently. I can’t confide in how straightforward it was once I endeavored it out.This is my primary concern…GOOD LUCK .

    click here =====?? http://www.Geosalary.com

  26. ?Google pay 95$ consistently my last pay check was $8200 working 10 hours out of every week on the web. My more young kin buddy has been averaging 15k all through ongoing months and he works around 24 hours consistently. I can’t confide in how straightforward it was once I endeavored it out.This is my primary concern…GOOD LUCK .

    click here =====?? http://www.Geosalary.com

Please to post comments