If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WFAA Fort Worth)   Texas Pro-Pot Republicans meet in Houston. "The drug war goes against every principle we have of smaller government, fiscal responsibility and less intrusion in your private life"   (wfaa.com) divider line 193
    More: Interesting, Texas Pro-Pot Republicans, Republicans, Texas, balanced budgets, US Border Patrol, GOP leaders, marijuana legalization  
•       •       •

3860 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Mar 2014 at 1:27 AM (26 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



193 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-15 09:49:26 PM
Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.
 
2014-03-15 09:50:50 PM
These fringe Rino's apparently arent getting the talking points.
 
2014-03-15 10:04:50 PM

fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.


Hope you reiterate this sentiment when the discussion about, "and now what do we do with all of the homeless druggies?" comes up.

/For some degree of drug legalization
/But don't ask taxpayers to pay for your consequences
 
2014-03-15 10:20:38 PM
Get a job, hippie
 
2014-03-15 10:24:52 PM
I, for one, would like a copy of their brochure and be placed on a mailing list of some sort.
 
2014-03-15 10:29:20 PM
Initially read the headline as "Texas Pol Pot Republicans...", then shook my head, and had another look.
 
2014-03-15 10:30:42 PM

StanTheMan: fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.

Hope you reiterate this sentiment when the discussion about, "and now what do we do with all of the homeless druggies?" comes up.

/For some degree of drug legalization
/But don't ask taxpayers to pay for your consequences


Logical fallacy.
 
2014-03-15 10:33:31 PM
Congratulations on finally figuring that out, dumbasses.
 
2014-03-15 10:35:58 PM
They must have noticed the tax dollars Colorado is collecting. I'm sure they have a plan to somehow divert some of that into their pockets.
 
2014-03-15 10:41:51 PM
Awesome. Now hold a meeting about keeping religious fundamentalism out of our science textbooks.
 
2014-03-15 10:58:07 PM

"The drug war goe$ again$t every principle we have of $maller government, fi$cal re$pon$ibility and le$$ intru$ion in your private life"


/You don't $ay?
 
2014-03-15 11:00:31 PM
"...and since the liberals have made great progress and sacrifices we have decided at the 13th hour that we were the ones with this view the entire time"
 
2014-03-15 11:06:53 PM
So two rinos meeting at an IHOP in hell's sphincter is newsworthy?
 
2014-03-15 11:08:14 PM
So how do they now feel about a woman's reproductive options?
 
2014-03-15 11:11:28 PM
Says the Houston dirtweed buyers club.
 
2014-03-15 11:12:48 PM

SilentStrider: Congratulations on finally figuring that out, dumbasses.


They just had to lock up a critical mass of white people to figure out that prohibition is highly regressive.
 
2014-03-15 11:14:20 PM

Peter von Nostrand: So two rinos meeting at an IHOP in hell's sphincter is newsworthy?


Were these rhinos bleck?  Or were they wide?  Or did they have big butts?

You cannot lie.
 
2014-03-15 11:14:57 PM
And for the Jesus Republicans, Genesis 1:29
 
2014-03-15 11:16:49 PM

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: And for the Jesus Republicans, Genesis 1:29


I never did understand why anyone calling themselves an Xtian would reference anything from a text of the peoples that killed their savior.
 
2014-03-15 11:22:35 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Peter von Nostrand: So two rinos meeting at an IHOP in hell's sphincter is newsworthy?

Were these rhinos bleck?  Or were they wide?  Or did they have big butts?

You cannot lie.


Something something cherry tree
 
2014-03-15 11:26:08 PM
Pretty damn much. It's fiscally irresponsible to hook so much of our justice system, not to mention our state and Federal budgets to combating this huge "threat" that essentially has created a century of lost revenue and business opportunities for not seizing upon the commercial uses for hemp and the tax revenue and business opportunities that we could have had because of this ridiculousness.

Summer Glau's Love Slave: "The drug war goe$ again$t every principle we have of $maller government, fi$cal re$pon$ibility and le$$ intru$ion in your private life"
/You don't $ay?


Yes, it IS about money. Not just money for tax revenue, but money NOT needed to pay for prisoners, money that could go to better use in police departments, money better spent for public defenders, and lessened court costs that are choking the system. The stalwart "defenders" of keeping criminalization like the current waste in our justice system, the opportunities to scoop up property from auctions, they like the fat "for profit" prison contracts, they like the toys and goodies that police sink into their departments, and they certainly like attorney fees and all the lovely costs that go into testing and the like. Not to mention, keeping cotton and paper without serious competition. It has always been about money. That a few new folks were added to the rolls to speak in favor of criminalization to secure their portion of the gravy train is just a sign of the feeding frenzy that it has always been. It's NEVER been about public safety. Heck, the same folks who testified at the original hearings even realized that their arguments were bogus--the same "expert" witnesses who testified that marijuana would make folks all loopy and kill crazy, then later argued that it was a scourge because it would make menfolk too pacific to fight our wars only years later. It has always been about confusing the public and keeping them from the real reasons: folks made a heap ton of money making and keeping it illegal. At first it was just a simple anti-competitive measure to keep hemp from being commercially viable, and give police an excuse to bust some heads and throw some folks in jail, and then folks began to realize that as easy as it is to grow, and as popular, it was a darned handy way to give the right folks a taste by creating an industry in KEEPING it illegal, and not to mention, useful for disenfranchising generations of folks.

It is long past time for this to pass away. And yeah, I used to be Republican. And my reasons for wanting to see it legalized are based on dollars. Dollars not wasted. Dollars in potential revenue and increased entrepreneurship. Well, dollars, and wanting to see our police go after real criminals, and focus our justice system better. I want to see better competition in the markets. I want to see our justice system stripped of waste and some of the corruption that this prohibition has led to. It has always been about filthy lucre, and you can mock that, I suppose, but that doesn't change the fact. I would rather see the money in private hands, and our tax dollars better spent. I don't care if someone smokes weed. Cripes, I work in an industry where pretty much my entire staff, across jobs going back over 25 years, have all smoked weed. And they were amazing chefs. Amazing cooks. Brilliant folks who I trusted again and again, and their industry and hard work wasn't dulled by pot. Not MY drug of choice--I'm far more in favor of nicotine, caffeine, and alcohol, and in fairness, cocaine scared the bejeebus out of me NOT because it was terrible, but because it was fantastic, and my own addictive personality realized that if let myself, I would put a huge amount of money and time to getting more, and that was just too big a risk, so I've never tried it again--but I don't care what folks use in recreation, so long as they are ready to be at work the next day, and are productive.
 
2014-03-15 11:34:07 PM
Oh hey, the wars we started in the past 40 years are unpopular. Maybe we should stop going to war under the guidance of this party?
 
2014-03-15 11:53:18 PM
Conservatives supporting legalization is nothing new.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDWpdLEbc1s
 
2014-03-15 11:57:11 PM

Farxist Marxist: StanTheMan: fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.

Hope you reiterate this sentiment when the discussion about, "and now what do we do with all of the homeless druggies?" comes up.

/For some degree of drug legalization
/But don't ask taxpayers to pay for your consequences

Logical fallacy.


So now, apparently, the level of debate on Fark has fallen so low that doesn't even require that you identify a specific logical fallacy.
 
2014-03-16 12:13:58 AM

StanTheMan: Hope you reiterate this sentiment when the discussion about, "and now what do we do with all of the homeless druggies?" comes up.


How would that be different from now?
 
2014-03-16 12:18:51 AM

StanTheMan: Farxist Marxist: StanTheMan: fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.

Hope you reiterate this sentiment when the discussion about, "and now what do we do with all of the homeless druggies?" comes up.

/For some degree of drug legalization
/But don't ask taxpayers to pay for your consequences

Logical fallacy.

So now, apparently, the level of debate on Fark has fallen so low that doesn't even require that you identify a specific logical fallacy.


I'll take a stab at it: how many people are homeless because they're addicted to marijuana?
 
2014-03-16 12:22:58 AM

fusillade762: StanTheMan: Farxist Marxist: StanTheMan: fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.

Hope you reiterate this sentiment when the discussion about, "and now what do we do with all of the homeless druggies?" comes up.

/For some degree of drug legalization
/But don't ask taxpayers to pay for your consequences

Logical fallacy.

So now, apparently, the level of debate on Fark has fallen so low that doesn't even require that you identify a specific logical fallacy.

I'll take a stab at it: how many people are homeless because they're addicted to marijuana?


Well, I don't know about homeless, but there's those 37 people who OD'd on marijuana in Colorado on the first day of legal sales.
 
2014-03-16 12:53:47 AM

StanTheMan: Farxist Marxist: StanTheMan: fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.

Hope you reiterate this sentiment when the discussion about, "and now what do we do with all of the homeless druggies?" comes up.

/For some degree of drug legalization
/But don't ask taxpayers to pay for your consequences

Logical fallacy.

So now, apparently, the level of debate on Fark has fallen so low that doesn't even require that you identify a specific logical fallacy.


I'll give you a clue: it relates to your proposition that legalization will result in homeless druggies.
 
2014-03-16 12:55:07 AM

StanTheMan: Farxist Marxist: StanTheMan: fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.

Hope you reiterate this sentiment when the discussion about, "and now what do we do with all of the homeless druggies?" comes up.

/For some degree of drug legalization
/But don't ask taxpayers to pay for your consequences

Logical fallacy.

So now, apparently, the level of debate on Fark has fallen so low that doesn't even require that you identify a specific logical fallacy.


I'm not sure what fallacy was being referenced, but I would submit that any consequences of legalized drugs will be far cheaper for taxpayers than the amount we currently spend on prohibition (which, as far as I can tell, has not stopped very many people from using drugs if they want to).
 
2014-03-16 12:58:33 AM

StanTheMan: So now, apparently, the level of debate on Fark has fallen so low that doesn't even require that you identify a specific logical fallacy.


Or your intelligence and experience are insufficient to the task of seeing your own glaring mistake and perhaps you should double check your work.
 
2014-03-16 01:25:39 AM

propasaurus: Well, I don't know about homeless, but there's those 37 people who OD'd on marijuana in Colorado on the first day of legal sales.


Not sure if serious....
 
2014-03-16 01:26:30 AM

fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.


This.

The only real hope that the GOP has to win another national election is to become more socially moderate and go back to smaller government and personal responsibility.  The social right extremism is alienating far more voters than they could actually lose.
 
2014-03-16 01:30:55 AM

slayer199: fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.

This.

The only real hope that the GOP has to win another national election is to become more socially moderate and go back to smaller government and personal responsibility.  The social right extremism is alienating far more voters than they could actually lose.


Or just let Democrats continue to ruin everything. Your boy is not so popular now, nor are his policies.

Right extremists are pretty rare, and not real important. Romney for instance, not a right extremist, his only crime was he was successful in business, something the left hates.
 
2014-03-16 01:31:15 AM

hubiestubert: Yes, it IS about money. Not just money for tax revenue, but money NOT needed to pay for prisoners, money that could go to better use in police departments, money better spent for public defenders, and lessened court costs that are choking the system.


...and if you think that's the reason why these Republicans are pro-legalization, you need your head examined.
 
2014-03-16 01:35:55 AM

Thunderpipes: Your boy is not so popular now


i.imgur.com
 
2014-03-16 01:37:01 AM

Thunderpipes: slayer199: fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.

This.

The only real hope that the GOP has to win another national election is to become more socially moderate and go back to smaller government and personal responsibility.  The social right extremism is alienating far more voters than they could actually lose.

Or just let Democrats continue to ruin everything. Your boy is not so popular now, nor are his policies.

Right extremists are pretty rare, and not real important. Romney for instance, not a right extremist, his only crime was he was successful in business, something the left hates.


I think we found a pro-grass republican, and he's got some killer stuff too.
 
2014-03-16 01:42:09 AM

Thunderpipes: slayer199: fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.

This.

The only real hope that the GOP has to win another national election is to become more socially moderate and go back to smaller government and personal responsibility.  The social right extremism is alienating far more voters than they could actually lose.

Or just let Democrats continue to ruin everything. Your boy is not so popular now, nor are his policies.

Right extremists are pretty rare, and not real important. Romney for instance, not a right extremist, his only crime was he was successful in business, something the left hates.


You really want a sociopath like Romney calling the shots?  You thing Bush Junior's buddies raided the country's till, the corporate give-aways under Romney/Ryan would have made Cheney blush.
 
2014-03-16 01:43:13 AM

StanTheMan: fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.

Hope you reiterate this sentiment when the discussion about, "and now what do we do with all of the homeless druggies?" comes up.

/For some degree of drug legalization
/But don't ask taxpayers to pay for your consequences


static01.nyt.com

Yeah, that sounds like a real drag.
 
2014-03-16 01:45:04 AM
This is one of the reasons why I stopped being a Republican and will refuse to vote for any (R) anymore. Drug legalization is a perfect argument for libertarianism. Something the Establishment Right hates, but that if they truly followed their stated principles of small government and the federal government's strict adherence to the Constitution, they would have to be in favor of. There is no Constitutional basis for drug prohibition being an appropriate federal power. The real reason isn't just money, but power. Felons cannot vote* or own firearms, the two real powers any citizen has over their own government. Being a felon limits what jobs you can hold, clearances, running for office, etc. And drug prohibition is a very easy way to classify huge swaths of otherwise harmless and law abiding citizens as felons and effectively neuter their say in government policy. Granted being in bed with Big Pharma and the hundreds of millions of dollars that go into the drug war are probably a bigger reason why the Establishment Right opposes drug legalization, but it sure is nice to be able to remove their right to vote or own firearms for such a huge portion of their political enemies.


*Yes I know that some felons can regain their right to vote after a very lengthy and laborious process. But not all can, and not all will even try.
 
2014-03-16 01:45:41 AM

StanTheMan: fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.

Hope you reiterate this sentiment when the discussion about, "and now what do we do with all of the homeless druggies?" comes up.

/For some degree of drug legalization
/But don't ask taxpayers to pay for your consequences


Same as we do now except we only put them in prison when there's an actual crime, I expect. As for the taxpayers, I for one would be thrilled if I only had to pay to house and feed them, since that's a hell of a lot cheaper than locking them in to boot.
 
2014-03-16 01:49:45 AM

Thunderpipes: slayer199: fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.

This.

The only real hope that the GOP has to win another national election is to become more socially moderate and go back to smaller government and personal responsibility.  The social right extremism is alienating far more voters than they could actually lose.

Or just let Democrats continue to ruin everything. Your boy is not so popular now, nor are his policies.

Right extremists are pretty rare, and not real important. Romney for instance, not a right extremist, his only crime was he was successful in business, something the left hates.


It's easy to be successful in business if you started with daddy's millions and didn't pay taxes for 10 years.
 
2014-03-16 01:50:16 AM
STFU you pathetic turds. Your party has had decades to figure this out. Welcome to the world of adults.
 
2014-03-16 01:54:22 AM

fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.


They're not.

I mean, they can say whatever words they like, but they're still Republicans. They're still going to do whatever they're told to do. It's like GOProud or whatever. Ultimately they know their place, and it's to give power to Republicans.

They can surprise me if they like.
 
2014-03-16 01:55:10 AM
taurusowner:


*Yes I know that some felons can regain their right to vote after a very lengthy and laborious process. But not all can, and not all will even try.

why should I even try?

fark a bunch of trolls / pussy don't care
 
2014-03-16 02:04:01 AM
img.fark.net

Republicans should be seeing nothing but dollar signs from decriminalization of cannabis.  Despite the possibility of medical uses there are lots of ways to make money off the plant (and didn't William Randolph Hearst know it).
 
2014-03-16 02:04:17 AM

StanTheMan: fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.

Hope you reiterate this sentiment when the discussion about, "and now what do we do with all of the homeless druggies?" comes up.

/For some degree of drug legalization
/But don't ask taxpayers to pay for your consequences


Because having taxpayers pay to have drug offenders incarcerated is much more cost effective.
 
2014-03-16 02:06:46 AM
On another message board, we had a thread on what states would be the last to legalize marijuana.  The consensus was it would be Utah and Texas.  I realize there are pockets in the state (e.g., Austin) where there's support for legalization and the small group mentioned in the article indicates that the movement crosses party lines but there's something about marijuana that seems to especially rile up Texans.  Right now, I still think it's more likely Mississippi and Alabama will liberalize their marijuana laws before Texas does.
 
2014-03-16 02:09:16 AM

StanTheMan: fusillade762: Nice to see the "small government" folks acting consistently for once.

Hope you reiterate this sentiment when the discussion about, "and now what do we do with all of the homeless druggies?" comes up.

/For some degree of drug legalization
/But don't ask taxpayers to pay for your consequences


All evidence indicates that legalization reduces consumption of hard drugs and decreases negative consequences of marijuana use.

Keep farking that chicken, though.
 
2014-03-16 02:10:49 AM

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: And for the Jesus Republicans, Genesis 1:29


Wait, wait... so, God says to eat hemlock and poison oak? Seems legit...


Oh, right, Politics thread, sorry! Uh, *grumble grumble* Republicans, *grumble* Democrats, 'Murica...
 
2014-03-16 02:10:56 AM
Talk about blood in the water.

Even the Texas Pro-Pot Republicans detect Obammy's weakness.
 
Displayed 50 of 193 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report