dagblog - Comments for "An Open Letter to Richard, and Other Young Black People"

It seems important to you to

rmrd0000 — Tue, 01 Apr 2014 21:07:31 +0000

It seems important to you to find Conservatives who wanted to legalize marijuana. Enjoy.

I pointed you to the link because it reflected how Conservatives viewed Cronkite. I provided means you could use to find Cronkite's own words and the words of one of Cronkite's producers. Cronkite felt that journalists were liberals. The producer said Cronkite was a New Deal Liberal. You did not avail yourself of these sources. You satisfied yourself with the single link.

George Soros donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to the marijuana legalization program in California and Arizona. Both Soros and Progressive Peter Lewis helped fund efforts that aided passing legislation in Washington state and Colorado.

You keep looking for the Conservatives who got nothing passed. I'll look to the Left where some success occurred.

Can you provide a a link showing Buckley's monetary contributions to legalization programs?

You include Cronkite as a

ocean-kat — Tue, 01 Apr 2014 18:51:34 +0000

In reply to You include Cronkite as a

You include Cronkite as a Conservative. I point out that is incorrect, You say nothing to see here. You pointed out your imagined political affiliation I corrected it.

Well, you offered a link to what you consider a knowledgeable, authoritative and trusted source. You consider your source definitive and I don't. I don't trust O'Reilly as a knowledgeable or authoritative source.

I do think Paul, Buckley, Cronkite, and others, like Carl Sagan, risked something but that wasn't my main point. My main point was that they took a stand early in the fight and given their popularity and large numbers of readers and followers they influenced minds and began the shift that led to laws beginning to be changed today. As I said, before laws can be changed minds must be changed.

You keep telling the lie that I support Paul and Buckley even though I've repeatedly explained that I do not support them. I merely note the influence they had on the debate over drug prohibition. I understand that you cannot consider anything they've said or done as influential because you see them as racist. I can disagree with most everything they're said and done and still see how they changed minds with their stand of drug legalization.

For example, I consider Bill O'Reilly as an influential pundit who has used that influence in many negative ways. I see him as influential even though I consider him a racist. You of course would disagree since you would never trust a racist or use him as a authoritative source.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/chris-hayes-blasts-bill-oreillys-super-racist...

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

There is no question that

rmrd0000 — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 23:11:53 +0000

In reply to Eric Holder was busting

There is no question that drug laws need to change. An adviser to the state Washington's marijuana bill notes that only the University of Mississippi is allowed to research marijuana. He points out the changing marijuana from Schedule to Schedule II or III requires safety studies. Even with change in schedule class, the drugs would be illegal. Holder is somewhat obligated to work states regarding local drug laws.

I know that half of federal drug arrests are drug related. I'm trying to determine the current percentages of arrests for possession versus distribution in the federal system. The annual FBI Crime report is taking some time to find the specific numbers. If you have them at hand I'd appreciate it. I will keep digging.

You include Cronkite as a

rmrd0000 — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 22:13:30 +0000

In reply to You brought Cronkite into the

You include Cronkite as a Conservative. I point out that is incorrect, You say nothing to see here. You pointed out your imagined political affiliation I corrected it.

You want the main point to be that Ron Paul and Buckley risked something. What exactly did they risk politically or financially by taking their stance on marijuana?

You brought Cronkite into the

ocean-kat — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:06:33 +0000

In reply to I think medical marijuana had

You brought Cronkite into the discussion. Now you are saying that he is unimportant?

This is how you lie. What I said was that I don't see much value in discussing whether Cronkite is conservative or liberal. As I've pointed out numerous times I see Cronkite and others as influential in changing people's minds and getting us to the place where laws can be changed. I linked to some of the work he's done in this area that I think was very important.

This is how you play your game of obfuscation. Lie, side track, change the topic, anything to waste people's time. Clearly you're smart enough to know I didn't say Cronkite was unimportant. Clearly you're smart enough to know I said he was very important in influencing the debate over the drug war. Clearly you're smart enough to know I only said that I didn't consider a discussion of his political affiliation valuable. It clearly wasn't stupidity. You are clearly lying.

So why did post this lie?

Eric Holder was busting

PeraclesPlease — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:51:23 +0000

In reply to I think medical marijuana had

Eric Holder was busting medical marijuana dispensaries - tell us about how major an impact it had and how your enlightened hero *considering* a reduction in sentencing that would reduce prison population by an estimated 6500 inmates is so much better than the work of Ron Paul and others in actually passing legislation that was copied by the Senate and passed into law?

"The Sentencing Commission won't vote on the move until April, but in the meantime Holder will be instructing federal prosecutors not to oppose defense motions seeking lower sentences for drug charges - as per his proposal."

Versus:

Proposal and passage of the bill

President Barack Obama at the signing ceremony for the Act.

On July 29, 2009, the United States House Committee on the Judiciary passed proposed legislation, the Fairness in Cocaine Sentencing Act (H.R.3245), a bill sponsored by Bobby Scott. Co-sponsored by a group of 62 members of the U.S. House of Representatives, including Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul, the bill would have completely eliminated the sentencing disparity.^[25] The Fair Sentencing Act was introduced as compromise legislation to get bipartisan and unanimous support, amended to merely reduce the 100:1 disparity to 18:1.^[26]

The Fair Sentencing Act (S. 1789) was authored by Assistant Senate Majority Leader Dick Durbin (D-IL) and cosponsored by Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and ranking member Jeff Sessions (R-AL).^[3] The bill passed the U.S. Senate on March 17, 2010 and passed the U.S. House of Representatives on July 27, 2010,^[1] with House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn (D-SC) and Bobby Scott (D-VA) as key supporters.^[4] The bill was then sent to President Obama and signed into law on August 3, 2010.^[27]

And how did this law do under Holder's DoJ?

Second, the Act does not address the enforcement prerogatives of federal criminal justice agencies: while African-American defendants account for roughly 80% of those arrested for crack-related offenses, public health data has found that two-thirds of crack cocaine users are white or Hispanic.^[35]

Well ain't that grand - Congress mandated reducing the discrepancy in sentencing, but Holder's DoJ can still arrest 80% blacks when 70% of users are white - give the man an "F" for "Effort"

I think medical marijuana had

rmrd0000 — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:27:48 +0000

In reply to Let's look at where this all

I think medical marijuana had the major impact. The difference between how White college students and Black teens smoking marijuana were treated legally played the major roles in changing opinion.

I will respond regarding Walter Cronkite when I get home this evening. For grins, please Google Cronkite and New Deal Liberal. I don't have time to find the exact reference now but I will later. It was from one one of his producers on the occasion of Cronkite's death. Also Google Cronkite quotes and liberal. Cronkite felt journalists had to be liberal in the Classic sense. You brought Cronkite into the discussion. Now you are saying that he is unimportant?

You are supporting racists and I'm rolling in the mud? Thanks for bringing humor to my day again.

Let's look at where this all

ocean-kat — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 19:43:32 +0000

In reply to I know you believe Ron Paul

Let's look at where this all began. I posted:

Paul and William F Buckley were extreme influential, especially Buckley, by speaking out as conservatives for marijuana legalization and other prohibition related issues. By speaking first and loudly they gave others cover to join them. Before laws can be changed minds have to be changed. They and others were leaders on drug prohibition issues when it was risky to take such a stand.

Its a pretty uncontroversial statement. Most of those "hippies" that you claim did all the work changing drug laws would be the first to cite Buckley when trying to convince people to accept legalization.

But I broke one of your two commandments. Thou shall not ever praise a conservative. You've tried to side track this dialog to anything but whether they might have had some influence.

Now you want to talk about whether Cronkite is a conservative or a liberal. A discussion I don't see any value in. Your link to Bill O'Reilly and Faux news doesn't convinced me Cronkite is liberal. What is so amusing is that in any other context you would laugh at anyone citing Faux news as a valid source. Here you are rolling in the mud with the ultra right Faux pundits and grunting out their talking points for them. Its amazing that you would sink so low to embrace them just so you can avoid a topic or "win" an "argument."

You should be embarrassed to display your lack of integrity in public in such a fashion. But I'm rotflmao. I never expected you would show your true colors so clearly.

I know you believe Ron Paul

rmrd0000 — Sat, 29 Mar 2014 13:59:08 +0000

In reply to You leveled an insult at me,

I know you believe Ron Paul is racist but I have consistently referred to William F Buckley as well as Ron Paul. I have also frequently mentioned Cronkite.

You lumped Ron Paul, Buckley and Cronkite together. Given the fact that you appear to be clueless about Ron Paul and William F Buckley, I figured that you were ignorant enough to label Cronkite a Conservative.Your sentence was not clear. You could have noted that you were clearly separating Cronkite by "On the other hand" or another signal of a direction change.

Buckley and the National Review hadhave a reputation for racial bias. Buckley attacked Martin Luther King 's tactics. Buckley's view of King is well known, but you were unaware. Cheech and Chong movies probably had more impact on changing opinions as Ron Paul. The idea that marijuana had medicinal value prolly did more than Paul and Cheech and Chong. Heck Cheech was accepted enough to play a detective on a TV series "Nash Bridges" Marijuana use was less of a stigma. I have the same amount of data to praise Cheech Marin as you have to support Ron Paul.

The paragraphs above are a dodge. You asked for information about both Buckley and Wright. You did not know about Buckley, Paul, Paul's newsletters or the National Review, did you?

You leveled an insult at me,

ocean-kat — Sat, 29 Mar 2014 07:35:49 +0000

In reply to Response to ocean-kat from

You leveled an insult at me, suggesting that I needed to study history.

lol I certainly did. You posted, "You're confused. Let me help." I responded, "You're confused. You need to study history." Look dude. If you're going to snipe at people you can't whine like a 3 year old baby when people snipe back. Try not insulting people you don't like and they might not insult you return. Or you can cry like a baby when you get treated like you treat people. I find that tremendously amusing.

Opinions vary. I've always found CBS to be the most conservative of the 3 major mainstream networks. But if you consider Cronkite a liberal why are you whining that I'm only listing conservatives? By your standards I have been totally non partisan. In just one comment you're telling me I'm wrong because Cronkite is a liberal and in the next breath you're telling me I'm wrong for not mentioning any liberals. Its funny stuff like this that keeps me responding.

I don't tell myself pious lies about my supposed virtue. Buying and selling is a voluntary association and people do have a right to discriminate. I've done it as a handyman. Not against certain races, genders, or sexual orientation but I have refused to do any more work for a couple people who annoyed me on a previous job. They have all been older white men. I simply tell them I'm too busy to take on any more work. I wouldn't bake a cake for a KKK party or photograph a KKK wedding.

I live near the border and once a border control militia group wanted to rent space for their group to camp on the land I caretake. Luckily the owners are liberals too and they turned them down. It would have been hell for me to have to deal with those racist gun nuts for a weekend.

Discrimination? Absolutely! And I will hold onto my right to discriminate against those I don't like. Yet I support all the Civil Rights legislation. Yes I'm sometimes inconsistent.

Sometimes the rights of the many out way the rights of the few. Sometimes we're even depriving the majority of their rights to protect the rights of the minority. Sometimes to do what's right you have to do something a little wrong. Hopefully in the end we'll get to a better place. But I'm not going to pretend to some pious bullshit that we're not weighing rights and deciding to deprive a few of their rights for the betterment of society as a whole.