American Thinker: The Democrat’s 2012 Victory Plan from September 2011.
I was about a year and a half early. So it is not like I wasn’t warning Republicans of the upcoming danger of sticking with Prohibition. Not to mention my words around here for the last couple of years.
Thank The Maker for the Rand Paul faction. If they can convince the rest of the Party. What are the odds?
You might also like the comments at American Digest. They reprise exactly what is wrong with the Republican Party. The Republicans believe Reefer Madness was a documentary. Well that and the Republicans seem to have an aversion to winning elections.
And it is not like this is the first time some one noticed the Republicans trying to preserve progressive policies:
The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected. Even when the revolutionist might himself repent of his revolution, the traditionalist is already defending it as part of his tradition. Thus we have two great types — the advanced person who rushes us into ruin, and the retrospective person who admires the ruins. He admires them especially by moonlight, not to say moonshine. Each new blunder of the progressive or prig becomes instantly a legend of immemorial antiquity for the snob. This is called the balance, or mutual check, in our Constitution. — G.K. Chesterton
So this has been going on for over 80 years. We are fooked (or doomed if you prefer).
This post is due in part to the discussion at It Begins.
Update:
Here is what it is all about.
Whether he meant to or not, Obama is positioning himself and his party in such a way that “many Democrats feel could reap serious political rewards in the coming months and years,” writes Zornick.
And this: Ending the War on Pot Would Help Complete Martin Luther King’s Call for Civil Rights
As Jacob Sullum noted eariler today, the president candidly told The New Yorker than pot is no more dangerous than booze and that the war on pot is prosecuted in such a way that minorities, especially African Americans, are arrested and prosecuted for drug crimes at far higher rates than whites.
Comments
21 responses to “An Oldie But Goodie”
Its dr. martin luther king day why no post? I didn’t know you hated dr king or is it all “negroes”?
Meds wear off again, cap? And when did you start admiring republicans?
Sitting back and complaining because there are conservatives in the Republican party isn’t going to win anything. Kicking conservatives out of the Republican party isn’t going to win anything. Voting Libertarian isn’t going to win anything. You have chosen actions which can only result in failure.
Here’s a message that is more likely to, you know, win votes.
The fact is that libertarianism is conservative-friendly, because conservative social values are likely to flourish with economic and social freedom. That’s why Progressives work so hard to penalize conservative behavior–it’s because Progressive behavior can’t compete. At the very least, conservatives will have a better opportunity to advocate for their values if everybody knows they can’t force their values on anybody else.
Not coincidentally, this is pretty close to Rand Paul’s message.
If you choose to fail, then you will fail. If you choose to succeed, at least you’ve got a chance.
Neil,
I don’t mind failing. I’m choosing my overlords.
As Yama said in “Lord of Light” “at least the Gods of the City have some measure of grace in their unfair doings.”
And as I said if Republicans nominate Rand Paul I will hold my nose.
I’m not against the Republicans. They are against me.
At the very least, conservatives will have a better opportunity to advocate for their values if everybody knows they can’t force their values on anybody else.
Trouble is that they honestly believe they can. Despite repeated massive failures.
The flaw in your argument is this: libertarians are conservative friendly, conservatives are not libertarian friendly (generally).
Neil,
What you are advocating for is that I go along with a continued pogrom on dopers. So the Republicans can win.
I’m sorry. My morality won’t allow it.
I have done my very best to get the Republicans to change their minds (my American Thinker article was one such attempt). They insist. So be it.
I had an opportunity to do an American Thinker article on endocannabinoids. I still do. But what would be the point? The people I need to reach are immune to evidence.
When I originally approached the editor on the subject (bright fellow) he thought I was giving him a line of BS. Dope talk. He was also under the impression that calling pot prohibition a crime against humanity was a bit much. His readers wouldn’t like it. It is a crime against humanity. And his readers would surely blanch at having their morality assailed. It is a crime against humanity – denying the sick medicine freely available if treated like cabbage.
So from here on I intend to let the Rs fail on this. Let hard reality change their minds. Nothing else seems to work.
Neil,
Maybe you can do a better job convincing Republicans. Have at it.
From Aleister Crowley. http://deoxy.org/annex/Eight_Lectures_on_Yoga.pdf
I do not think that anything will save the country: unless through war and revolution, when those who wish to survive will have to think and act for themselves according to their desperate needs, and not by some rotten yardstick of convention.
You may also be amused at my comments here:
http://www.americandigest.org/mt/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=25068
I’m the first three. Now look at how the “conservatives” respond. Every point I made totally ignored.
Simon,
There are conservatives who comment on teh intertubes and don’t like drugs or druggies. There are people like cap* who want to see every conservative slaughtered. Literally.
So what? There will always be internet blowhards. They’re not dangerous.
If the Republicans don’t win big in 2014, the Progressives will run roughshod over every freedom we have. You can kiss property, speech, and self-defense goodbye, for starters. The Progressives may end drug prohibition, but if so it will be because they don’t need it anymore–they will have institutionalized all the unconstitutional search and seizure practices. They’re very dangerous.
If the Republicans DO win big in 2014, that’s not going to stop the anti-prohibition movement. Far from it. With Republicans in power, the media will be much more supportive of anything that can embarrass them. The Republicans are less dangerous.
In my opinion, the rational strategy is to support the Republican party, at least one more time in 2014. After that it may be a different story. And I’ll point it out again–the only possible pro-liberty voting bloc in America is a libertarian-conservative coalition.
Oh, and I found a left-wing prohibitionist. With a big name. And he’s actually in a position of power:
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/patrick-kennedy-president-obama-marijuana-102412.html
By your standards, that makes Progressives evil too, huh?
As an aside, I have to point out the overwhelming irony of a Kennedy endorsing not just drug prohibition, but implying that he’d like another crack at alcohol prohibition!
I admire lincoln ;but republican party trade him for strom thurmond probably before they knew he had a black daughter. The republican partys problem is this 100,000 minorty american kids turn 18(voting age) every month if you ad dreamers thats another 35,000 a month and 40,000 republicans die off every month! Sen mccain was censored by maricopa county republican party for bringing this unplesent fact up!
Simon,
It looks like Christie reads your blog:
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/01/21/chris-christies-gubernatorial-inauguration-speech-its-time-to-end-the-failed-war-on-drugs/
In general I’m not a big Christie fan, but this could defuse the issue for the Dems.
Neil,
And the Republicans have worked very hard to create a police state. Some lessons need to be taught. The hard way.
Sorry ’bout that.
In ’14 I’m voting for every one on my ballot who promises an end to drug prohibition.
My preferences – the top of the list is my most preferred
Republican – anti-prohibition
Democrat – anti-prohibition
Libertarian – where my heart is
Republican – not too bad on the other issues
Democrat – if the R is bad on the other issues
I don’t like pogroms. And the Republicans are in favor of the most obvious ones.
====
David – I think that deserves a post.
Neil,
I don’t care about the big names. I care about votes. And the Kennedy family made its money from alcohol prohibition. I wouldn’t be surprised if the had a drug concession or three.
[…] Booker. Isn’t he from New Jersey? Yes he is. And who else is from New Jersey? Commenter David alerted me to this one. Governor Chris Christie is from New Jersey and he has come out against pot […]
Simon-
It’s depressing that so many Baby Boomers want to fight their ancient fights, with the result that my kids will grow up as slaves.
It’s not as if the Republicans aren’t perfectly capable of enslaving the population on their own. All one has to do is look at what happened to the size and intrusiveness of gov’t when the GOP held all 3 branches under GWB.
I actually had a GOP activist call me to contribute to the party. I knew more about the issues than he did. And we joke about ‘Bammer blaming Bush 6 years on. Well this GOP activist was still blaming the Dems when the GOP controlled all 3 branches.
The sad fact of the matter is that Establishment GOP is hell-bent on the same Progressive destination as the Democrats. Not too startling given that the E-GOP ARE Progressives. The only difference between their approach to enslavement and the Dems approach is what comes first. In the end, total control is their goal, whether Democrat or Establishment GOP. And unless the E-GOP is harshly reined in or removed from the party apparatus, there will scant difference in the ultimate outcome.
Didn’t you read my post your vote doesn’t matter! Its like two people on a cattle car to auschwitz talking about what they will do when they are resettled in the east! I used people and not jews for a reason if you do not know what that reason is I feel sorry for you.
Well cap, if it doesn’t matter then why do you care?
c andrew,
That is my take as well. Look at Ted Cruz:
http://classicalvalues.com/2014/01/republicans-are-trying-for-an-own-goal/
He wants the Feds to go after individual dopers. Something they have never done except incidentally.
The Feds are supposed to be about interstate and international commerce. Federalism. But Ted doesn’t care. He don’t like dopers. And given the way the laws are enforced he don’t like black and brown dopers especially. Obama noticed that. I have written about it extensively. How come Ted didn’t notice?