Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 71 to 77 of 77

Thread: "Legal" Pot Taxing CO Law Enforcement

  1. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by This_person View Post
    The states can make that happen. They can do this much easier than "the people", because the people are only given two viable choices, and due to gerrymandering they are only given one viable choice. The parties control the primaries, the primaries determine the outcome of the election due to gerrymandering.
    So, what do you think it is; we really don't want term limits or we just want the other to have term limits?
    Nepotism begins at home

  2. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by Larry Gude View Post
    So, what do you think it is; we really don't want term limits or we just want the other to have term limits?
    I think the vast majority of people want term limits, but that's not on the ballot. On the ballot is "same ol', same ol'" vs. "oh my goodness I could NEVER vote for that person". We've been gerrymandered to ensure that the people who think like that make up the majority of each district. Therefore, all each party has to do is offer up a strongly controllable person of the winning party, with essentially no competition within the party in the primary. They'll run JPC against Steny, but when was Steny last really challenged from a strong contender on the left? Since our district is so strongly gerrymandered to minimize the conservative vote under 45%, Steny wins because Steny has no competition in the primary, not because Steny has no competition in the election.
    It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society.
    Jiddu Krisnamurti

  3. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by This_person View Post
    THAT!!!! We don't disagree overall - THAT is what I've been saying all along.

    See, the federal government has outgrown its own limits. The ONLY way to stop it is to have the states reassert their control.

    The states should NOT do this the worst way first - failure to work within the rules. They should do this the best, least confrontational, least revolutionary, most legal way first - use the authority they actually have to fix the problems.
    People spoke with their votes in their own states. They asserted their control by voting it in, establishing a system and regulatory scheme for it, and raking in the tax money from it.

    But this whole time you've been advocating for that same govt. you admit has outgrown its own limits to step in a force states to comply with their rules, or else.

    You can't have both.
    Crybaby Cripplecrow Hanging on a Monkey's Toe Club

  4. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris0nllyn View Post
    People spoke with their votes in their own states. They asserted their control by voting it in, establishing a system and regulatory scheme for it, and raking in the tax money from it.

    But this whole time you've been advocating for that same govt. you admit has outgrown its own limits to step in a force states to comply with their rules, or else.

    You can't have both.
    I can. In fact, any thinking person MUST have it both ways.

    The federal government must enforce the laws it passes lest it become irrelevant, and people be even more upset that laws are arbitrarily enforced - that is to say, we know right now that people with strong political clout will not be held accountable for their crimes, and that "big business" runs things, etc., etc. All pot is right now is a special interest group that gets special favors in some states. Therefore, the federal government MUST enforce the laws it has on the books, otherwise it is just more crony capitalism and all the other crap people say.

    Meanwhile, if the people of those states want it, they need to make a valid argument. If that valid argument falls on deaf ears in the federal government, then they need their state to take action. The states made the mistake of ratifying their irrelevance in the federal government, (well, 41 have) and nothing good has come from that. They need to take their relevance back (repeal the 17th) so they can have a say in "bad" laws again. If they don't do that, they need to exert their authority over we, the people, by putting term limits on federal representation to limit the corruption. If we, the people, don't like that, we change the STATE representation to fix THAT issue.

    If it's not both way, it doesn't work. What we have now is a too authoritative federal government that is tolerated because on special-interest issues the government kinda-sorta looks the other way. Did you ever read Cat's Cradle but Vonnegut? This pot action is the special favors given to the big guys to beat up other islanders (if you've read the book, you'll remember that part).
    It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society.
    Jiddu Krisnamurti

  5. #75
    Visualize whirled peas Merlin99's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jul 2006
    Location
    California, MD
    Posts
    12,433
    Quote Originally Posted by This_person View Post
    THAT!!!! We don't disagree overall - THAT is what I've been saying all along.

    See, the federal government has outgrown its own limits. The ONLY way to stop it is to have the states reassert their control.

    The states should NOT do this the worst way first - failure to work within the rules. They should do this the best, least confrontational, least revolutionary, most legal way first - use the authority they actually have to fix the problems.
    Why not, civil disobedience has been shown to work time and again. The mayor of Baltimore kept the cops to give the citizens room to riot, the black panthers have carte blanch to intimidate voters. Hell, a lot of people look forward to a good cop shooting just to get the shopping trip.
    ‎"I've learned that pleasing everyone is impossible, but pissing everyone off is a piece of cake"

  6. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Merlin99 View Post
    Why not, civil disobedience has been shown to work time and again.
    Because that's a last resort.

  7. #77
    Registered User PeoplesElbow's Avatar
    Member Since
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Smackdown hotel
    Posts
    4,354
    Quote Originally Posted by This_person View Post
    The states can make that happen. They can do this much easier than "the people", because the people are only given two viable choices, and due to gerrymandering they are only given one viable choice. The parties control the primaries, the primaries determine the outcome of the election due to gerrymandering.
    You realize that those you are referring to as "the state" will be the same ones that did the gerrymandering so the end result would unlikely to be much different?
    If what I say offends you then you really don't want to hear what I keep to myself.

Members who have read this thread: 55

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search:     Advanced Search
Search HELP

| Home | Help | Contact Us | About somd.com | Privacy | Advertising | Sponsors | Newsletter |

| What's New | What's Cool | Top Rated | Add A Link | Mod a Link |

| Announcements | Bookstore | Cafe | Calendar | Classifieds | Community |
| Culture | Dating | Dining | Education | Employment | Entertainment |
| Forums | Free E-Mail | Games | Gear! | Government | Guestbook | Health | Marketplace | Mortgage | News |
| Organizations | Photos | Real Estate | Relocation | Sports | Survey | Travel | Wiki | Weather | Worship |