Best Part of Last Night's Republican Debate: Ron Paul on Heroin

Ron Paul on Heroin
posted by ELI SANDERS on FRI, MAY 6, 2011 at 6:00 AM

..............

And the best part of the best part:

As Ron Paul starts in on his heroin lecture he's basically being laughed off the South Carolina stage. Then, in just two minutes and thirty seconds, he manages to gently point out the GIANT contradiction in a bunch of small-government, freedom-first conservatives cheering for government to interfere in people's private lives.

Now, the presence of this kind of contradiction isn't news or a revelation to anyone who pays attention to politics. But it's not easy to explain the contradiction to a crowd like this, to basically tell a bunch of South Carolina conservatives that they're being unthinkingly inconsistent. Ron Paul does that, and at the end of his two minutes and thirty seconds he essentially has a hall full of Republicans cheering for heroin legalization.

USA!

WATCH THE VIDEO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9n4nwxgaQg&feature=player_embedded

MORE:
http://slog.thestranger.com/blogs/slog/

That deserves some coverage....

That would explain a lot now that I think about it....

anyone who thinks that ron paul is exhibiting human like empathy or emotions, need to look know further than his stance on SS and medicare.

The guy is a fuck, plain and simple.

And when he was still morally courageous to call himself a Libertarian, I liked him even more (as much as it's possible for me to like a Libertarian). There are a couple of his positions he holds that I actually agree with. And that's why he'll never be the Republican Party's nominee. He doesn't kowtow to the whacko fringe that the rest of the Party considers their "base."

right on pot and pulling out of the wars.

Completely wrong on womens rights, taxes, IRS, SS and medicare and a whole list of others.

paul is all about paul. if the conversation isn't about him, he will make it about him.

I live in Austin and have and the displeasure of listening to the glad handing idiot for a very long time.

I have had the displeasure of having to educate halfwit 20 something college students who follow after paul like puppies because he wants to legalize pot but fail to look deeper into his actual platform.

this guy is a blight with a smile. He's a a disease with a handshake.

it's the likes of paul and his spawn that make the john birch society now part of the conversation.

he is a disgusting individual.

it's really very hard to claim that paul is in any sense liberal.

Getting out of the war would save money and legalizing pot would make money. That is his reasoning.

don't ever confuse those stances with being liberal. Because they are not.

A liberal stance would be: get out of the war because it's killing people and legalize pot because it's ridiculous to lock up people for it.

He has never ever made statments that even hint of a liberal bent.

on many issues he is rational and sincere. And he is also consistent.

And, to those who say he lacks compassion, he used to, not sure if he still does, treat the poor in his district for free (he's a Dr.). He is wrong about healthcare though. He's far too idealistic as he believes that the government doesn't need to provide it, if we lived in a society where doctors, like him, would treat people who can't afford it. Now, that's crazy thinking :-).

But, he's a decent guy and it's a shame that people feel the need in politics to attack those they disagree with rather than just disagree and explain why. It would have a much better effect imo.

for liberalism -- or "decency".

At least he has always opposed the wars and torture and all of our other colonialist foreign policies. As we have seen, both parties are only too happy to keep the war machine running and all of our other 'wars' such as the Drug War. I don't find him any more offensive than most of the rest of our politicians.

If it takes a teabagger to show the teabaggers what idiots they are, then fine by me.

To explain why corporations should be able to aggressively market heroin to the public.


Why was gay marriage, prostitution, and pot bundled in with heroin and cocaine? Why are they conflating nearly harmless acts with pandemic drug use?

We have plenty of laws for going past the person's nose. We have laws for DUI, theft, murder, manslaughter, and about anything else a person might do that brings harm to another.

If folks want to use heroin then it is none of our affair.

We also have speed limits, environmental regulations, gun control, housing codes..... The people who suffer through the harm probably don't just pass it off as a vice, the neglected children, the distraught parents, and the broken lives.

What you are really saving is "I don't want to bear the burden of making other people's lives better."

as if he ever had any LOL

"This is the American political debate process; this is the American political debate process on drugs."

Or, like Obama, going after sick people and their caregivers who grow marijuana for them.

Decriminalized heroin will not cause heroin usage to spike. But we can't have people saying that..they have to say approved soundbites.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mgjZK46_uw
worst thing is, the Rondroids I know are also fundie "Jayzus luvs you" Xtians
BTW, Murray Rothbard said narcotics should be legalized, that police be privatized (he acknowledges they will be in perpetual conflict--but, hey, they can't create death camps if they're disorganized, amirite?), and that it's more moral to let a retarded child starve to death than to tax someone else to feed them