OBAMA AND WEED

[Guest]

KingPiff - I never said I was fighting or voting for Obama - the only thing I have been fighting for is to keep this thread on topic - the topic again is;

" OBAMA AND WEED "

How about you go talk to the people who brought this thread off topic if your so concerned about it. I was just defending my case thats all.

- but take your views out of this thread unless you have something to add about Barak Obama and Weed. Some people may not know and it is good to have facts about the people who will likely be presented to the voters for president.

BTW - I am a libertarian, so stop assuming

I believe I stated some good facts about Obama. Maybe you didn't take the time to read them. I never assumed anything about you being a libertarian. But if you are a libertarian you would not be supporting Obama because he is the biggest Liberal running with Clinton and McCain close behind. A Liberal and Libertarian are the total opposite.

Liberal-
Liberals are in favor of government-funded programs, most specifically those that address inequalities that they view as having derived from historical discrimination. Liberals believe that prejudice and stereotyping in society can hamper the opportunities for some citizens.
For this reason, liberals have been labeled "bleeding hearts" and "tax and spenders" in reference to their support of public policies that address restricted access to health care, housing, and jobs.

Libertarian-
The political platform of the Libertarian Party reflects that group's particular brand of libertarianism, favoring minimally regulated, laissez-faire markets, strong civil liberties, minimally regulated migration across borders, and non-interventionism in foreign policy that respects freedom of trade and travel to all foreign countries.

There is 1 candidate running with a Libertarian view of things. I will let you decide that 1.

 

[Lune TNS]

In time I believe 100% of what he says will get done. \

Sorry man, that is just not possible. Not when every other person in Washington would be fighting him tooth and nail on his entire platform. If you truely believe that, well then I can't really argue against you, the only thing I can say is that you are calling the kettle black by calling others ignorant, Washington just doesnt work like that and one man cannot change it completely...

He would be President - not KING.

I was at an Obama rally yesterday, and the Paul supporters that were passing out flyers even admitted this. One guy put it best: "it's about keeping his ideas alive more than anything else"

 

[Guest]

Sorry man, that is just not possible. Not when every other person in Washington would be fighting him tooth and nail on his entire platform. If you truely believe that, well then I can't really argue against you, the only thing I can say is that you are calling the kettle black by calling others ignorant, Washington just doesnt work like that and one man cannot change it completely...

He would be President - not KING.

I was at an Obama rally yesterday, and the Paul supporters that were passing out flyers even admitted this. One guy put it best: "it's about keeping his ideas alive more than anything else"

Of course 1 man can not change everything on his own. That is why he have a bunch of people running for office and winning. We don't call it a revolution for nothing. We are the Republican Party, we have changed it back to its roots. That is why no Republican will win this election unless Ron Paul is the candidate. Whats wrong with keeping the constitution alive? Why would you ask me a question and then bash my answer? When did I call somebody ignorant?

 

[Lune TNS]

I wasn't trying to be an ass or anything, I was just trying to make a point. Some people seem to think that RP is like superman and he's going to magically fix politics forever, but if he was elected tomorrow how many of his goals could he follow through on? Not too many...

As far as a RP revolution, I say good luck my friend, but it's not going well so far. I doubt that the majority of registered republican agree with RP views. Hell, I KNOW this. What other libertarians are you talking about?

 

[Guest]

I wasn't trying to be an ass or anything, I was just trying to make a point. Some people seem to think that RP is like superman and he's going to magically fix politics forever, but if he was elected tomorrow how many of his goals could he follow through on? Not too many...

As far as a RP revolution, I say good luck my friend, but it's not going well so far. I doubt that the majority of registered republican agree with RP views. Hell, I KNOW this. What other libertarians are you talking about?

I don't think he is superman. I do believe he is fixing and changing the Republican Party and I wouldn't call it magic. Last I checked magic is fake. Why do you say the revolution ain't going to well? Our supporters are swarming county and state conventions. If all the registered republicans knew who Ron Paul was and what he really stands for he would have x10 more support. Its sad that the big corporations censor him because he doesn't do favors for special interest and lobbyist. What do you want to know about libertarians? Who the only libertarian minded candidate is? Ron Paul. If thats not what you were asking than you lost me there.

 

[SinsemillaJones]

E-mail lies about Obama are a breeding ground for uncritical thinking

E-mail lies about Obama are a breeding ground for uncritical thinking

Feb. 29, 2008, 6:57AM
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle

Hit delete
E-mail lies about Obama are a breeding ground for uncritical thinking

Maybe you've gotten one. Perhaps you know someone who was recently infected. Possibly, you've hit "forward" and transmitted one yourself.

By now, most people have heard at least some of the lies, often spread on the Internet, about Barack Obama. It's not chance that these breathless, nonsensical rumors have multiplied as Obama's campaign has gained strength.

Different from the normal hype and mudslinging that candidates must be immune to, the fictions signal something dangerous. Not for Obama, but for our culture.

Often internally illogical, the e-mails purport to prove Obama is not patriotic, isn't really Christian or was schooled in extremist "madrassas" to one day make America Islamic.

Popular personalities are magnets for people's fantasy, and Obama himself knows this, observing that he sometimes serves as a blank screen for people's projections.

Yet the particular smear campaign against Obama has little to do with what people might speculate about the inner Obama. The e-mails are not founded on conflicting accounts from contemporaries, as were the Swiftboat attacks against Purple Heart-winner John Kerry during his 2004 campaign for the presidency.

Instead, the e-mails about Obama contradict some of the most easily provable, widely witnessed and documented events of his biography.

He wouldn't recite the Pledge of Allegiance? He was actually listening to the national anthem, and it's on Youtube.

His mostly black church is "separatist" or "racist"? It is indeed a controversial church. But one of the nation's most respected (white) theologians, Martin E. Marty, attends on occasion and has said, "Like all other nonblacks [we] are enthusiastically welcomed."

If one doesn't feel like sifting through Google or Nexis, try handy sites such as FactCheck.org or Snopes.com — nonpartisan sites devoted to checking out urban myths and political claims.

How about the Indonesia madrassa Obama supposedly went to — the one that teaches Wahabi Islam, the extreme form of Islam found in Saudi Arabia? It didn't exist.

Like millions of Americans, Obama has blood relatives and step-relatives who are Muslim, as well as Christian. But the elementary school he attended in Indonesia, home to Earth's largest Muslim population, actually was "a public school. We don't focus on religion," the headmaster confirmed to CNN.

Obama, who has attended the same church for two decades, has said as much for years.

What about the outfit Obama wore in Kenya? Even the Clinton campaign — which has now denied leaking the image of Obama in the dress of an African tribal elder — acknowledges that wearing local clothing is the sign of statesmanship. We want more of these respectful encounters with foreign cultures, whoever becomes president.

The fictions about Obama, instantly killed with the slightest research, are dangerous precisely because they are so thoughtlessly transmitted.

That many people seem ready to believe them, despite longstanding proof of their falsity, suggests these fictions are falling on predisposed minds.

This year's campaign boasts three excellent candidates. It's a race whose very suspense reflects the best, most enlightened and critical thinking in U.S. electoral history. Yet the lies about Obama are throwbacks to ancient fears of otherness: of another monotheistic religion, ethnic difference, or foreign experience that somehow suggests disloyalty.

Spread like germs to unresisting minds, those fears weaken a whole society's ability to think straight.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/5580305.html

 

[Guest]

^^^ See thats the whole problem with the Obama campaign. They try so hard to ignore the real issues facing America. They talk about his childhood, family, religion etc. And when someone questions his personal life he makes a big deal about it and calls it fear fear fear and gives a 30 minute speech about it. When there is no question on his past and personal life he will give a speech about change change change for 30 minutes.

I want every Obama supporter reading this to explain to me HOW and WHAT will he do to fix our
1) Economy
2) Foreign Policy
3) Illegal Imigration
4) Health Care
5) Monetary Policy
6) National Debt
7) Personal Liberty
8) Social Security
9) Education
10) War on drugs

 

[Lune TNS]

Why do you say the revolution ain't going to well?

Because there is a 0% chance of him winning.

 

[DirtDevil]

am i blogging???

 

[greenhead]

This is straight from the mouth of the ignorant person that likes to repeat the word change over and over again.

"I'm concerned about folks just kind of growing their own and, you know, saying it's for medicinal purposes, 'cause you know that's kind of a slippery slope there."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejErbwiDBaA

 

[greenhead]

Please do yourself a favor and watch the documentary Freedom to Fascism.

Going to have to disagree with you on that one. I had the displeasure of watching a few minutes of that movie a couple of days ago. Somebody gave me a DVD copy, and after a few minutes I already noticed numerous factual errors and even quotes attributed to people that are false. And some of the people in that movie, including one so-called 'tax expert' is currently locked up behind bars for many years, lol.

 

[messn'n'gommin']

^^^ See thats the whole problem with the Obama campaign. They try so hard to ignore the real issues facing America. They talk about his childhood, family, religion etc. And when someone questions his personal life he makes a big deal about it and calls it fear fear fear and gives a 30 minute speech about it. When there is no question on his past and personal life he will give a speech about change change change for 30 minutes.

I want every Obama supporter reading this to explain to me HOW and WHAT will he do to fix our
1) Economy
2) Foreign Policy
3) Illegal Imigration
4) Health Care
5) Monetary Policy
6) National Debt
7) Personal Liberty
8) Social Security
9) Education
10) War on drugs

If one took the time to listen to what he has to say you would find the answer to your questions. But that is the problem with knee-jerk reactionaries, they rarely listen to anyone save their own panic-filled voices. Be that as it may, fixing them won't be easy, and may not even come to fruition. But it WILL require a lot of sacrifice from those who can least afford it. But if it weren't for the Bush administration and a "Do-nothing" Republican controlled congress we wouldn't be in this mess, now would we?

The Bush Legacy:
1) Half of the $100 a barrel of oil we use goes to making fertilizers and other assorted and sundry chemicals, which equals inflation THRUOGHOUT a viable economy
2) 9/12/01 the world stood by our side, today we stand alone.
3) Our borders are a sieve and Republicans want a fence? It didn't work for the Chinese a thousand years ago and it won't work for us now.
4) A few get excellent health care and the rest of us get little or none.
5) Oil companies get $20 billion in tax breaks and Bush vetoes (twice) legislation to provide a modicum of health care for children of families making less than $75k/year
6) Republicans took a $400 billion surplus and turned into a $9 TRILLION debt in 7 years.
7) PATRIOT ACT! (nuff said!)
8) Tried to give all of it to wall street
9) "No Child left behind" doesn't teach our children the "3R's" they are taught how to pass the test. And we are falling further and further behind the rest of the world.
10) We just locked up our 25 millionth prisoner, I wonder how many were convicted of possession?

And you're bad mouthing Obama and "liberals" because they care more about people than money? Or preach love instead of hate? Speak of hope and faith instead of creating fear and suspicion? "Get thee behind me Satan!"

"The sage who learns wisdom, follows it diligently. The common man who learns wisdom, follows it on occasion. But the mean man who learns wisdom just laughs. And the one who doesn't laugh doesn't learn anything at all." Lao Tse

 

[Guest]

dude you didn't name 1 thing he would do to change any of those problems better yet how. You basically named some of the problems lol

I don't have problems with liberals I just cant stand them and don't agree. I am a conservative which is the polar opposite of a liberal.

 

[Guest]

lol didn't obama vote for the patriot act? or was unable to vote against it because he was busy?

 

[Guest]

^yes I believe he did, he voted for the patriot act. If he didn't I know for sure he didn't vote against it

 

[minds_I]

Hello all,

I believe there were only a handful of senetors that voted against the patriot act.

I am still dizzy by how ill-concieved this was and how easily it was passed. Well, as Tommy said the natural progression of liberty is to yield to terreny(sp).

minds_I

 

[SinsemillaJones]

Barack Obama on USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization

Barack Obama on USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization

Floor Statement of Senator Barack Obama on S.2271 - USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization
Thursday, February 16, 2006

Mr. President, four years ago, following one of the most devastating attacks in our nation's history, Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act to give our nation's law enforcement the tools they needed to track down terrorists who plot and lurk within our own borders and all over the world - terrorists who, right now, are looking to exploit weaknesses in our laws and our security to carry out even deadlier attacks than we saw on September 11th.

We all agreed that we needed legislation to make it harder for suspected terrorists to go undetected in this country. Americans everywhere wanted that.

But soon after the PATRIOT Act passed, a few years before I ever arrived in the Senate, I began hearing concerns from people of every background and political leaning that this law didn't just provide law enforcement the powers it needed to keep us safe, but powers it didn't need to invade our privacy without cause or suspicion.

Now, at times this issue has tended to degenerate into an "either-or" type of debate. Either we protect our people from terror or we protect our most cherished principles. But that is a false choice. It asks too little of us and assumes too little about America.

Fortunately, last year, the Senate recognized that this was a false choice. We put patriotism before partisanship and engaged in a real, open, and substantive debate about how to fix the PATRIOT Act. And Republicans and Democrats came together to propose sensible improvements to the Act. Unfortunately, the House was resistant to these changes, and that's why we're voting on the compromise before us.

Let me be clear: this compromise is not as good as the Senate version of the bill, nor is it as good as the SAFE Act that I have cosponsored. I suspect the vast majority of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle feel the same way. But, it's still better than what the House originally proposed.

This compromise does modestly improve the PATRIOT Act by strengthening civil liberties protections without sacrificing the tools that law enforcement needs to keep us safe. In this compromise:


* We strengthened judicial review of both National Security Letters, the administrative subpoenas used by the FBI, and Section 215 orders, which can be used to obtain medical, financial and other personal records.

* We established hard time limits on sneak-and-peak searches and limits on roving wiretaps.

* We protected most libraries from being subject to National Security Letters.

* We preserved an individual's right to seek counsel and hire an attorney without fearing the FBI's wrath.

* And we allowed judicial review of the gag orders that accompany Section 215 searches.

The compromise is far from perfect. I would have liked to see stronger judicial review of National Security Letters and shorter time limits on sneak and peak searches, among other things.

Sen. Feingold has proposed several sensible amendments - that I support - to address these issues. Unfortunately, the Majority Leader is preventing Sen. Feingold from offering these amendments through procedural tactics. That is regrettable because it flies in the face of the bipartisan cooperation that allowed the Senate to pass unanimously its version of the Patriot Act - a version that balanced security and civil liberties, partisanship and patriotism.

The Majority Leader's tactics are even more troubling because we will need to work on a bipartisan basis to address national security challenges in the weeks and months to come. In particular, members on both sides of the aisle will need to take a careful look at President Bush's use of warrantless wiretaps and determine the right balance between protecting our security and safeguarding our civil liberties. This is a complex issue. But only by working together and avoiding election-year politicking will we be able to give our government the necessary tools to wage the war on terror without sacrificing the rule of law.

So, I will be supporting the Patriot Act compromise. But I urge my colleagues to continue working on ways to improve the civil liberties protections in the Patriot Act after it is reauthorized.

I thank the chair and yield the floor

http://obama.senate.gov/speech/060216-floor_statement_2/

 

[Guest]

Fact Check

Fact Check

Promised to repeal Patriot Act, then voted for it
Clinton took direct aim at Obama and connects fairly solidly: "You said you would vote against the Patriot Act; you came to the Senate, you voted for it." Clinton is correct to say that Obama opposed the Patriot Act during his run for the Senate. She's relying on a 2003 Illinois National Organization for Women questionnaire in which Obama wrote that he would vote to "repeal the Patriot Act" or replace it with a "new, carefully crafted proposal." When it came time to reauthorize the law in 2005, though, Obama voted in favor of it. He started out opposing it: In Dec. 2005, Obama voted against ending debate--a position equivalent to declaring a lack of support for the measure. Then in February of that year, Obama said on the floor that he would support the Patriot Act's reauthorization. In March 2006, Obama both voted for cloture and for the Patriot Act reauthorization conference report.

 

[greenhead]

And let's not even mention the highly suspicious church that he belongs to.

 

[sugabear_II]

I believe I stated some good facts about Obama. Maybe you didn't take the time to read them. I never assumed anything about you being a libertarian. But if you are a libertarian you would not be supporting Obama because he is the biggest Liberal running with Clinton and McCain close behind.

again you are assuming I support Obama

A Liberal and Libertarian are the total opposite.

Liberal-
Liberals are in favor of government-funded programs, most specifically those that address inequalities that they view as having derived from historical discrimination. Liberals believe that prejudice and stereotyping in society can hamper the opportunities for some citizens.
For this reason, liberals have been labeled "bleeding hearts" and "tax and spenders" in reference to their support of public policies that address restricted access to health care, housing, and jobs.

Libertarian-
The political platform of the Libertarian Party reflects that group's particular brand of libertarianism, favoring minimally regulated, laissez-faire markets, strong civil liberties, minimally regulated migration across borders, and non-interventionism in foreign policy that respects freedom of trade and travel to all foreign countries.

There is 1 candidate running with a Libertarian view of things. I will let you decide that 1.

Give me a break - I'm not a fucking idiot KINGPIFF - I know what libertarianism is and I've been a libertarian long before Ron Paul came around as a presidential candidate.