Marijuana and the definition of conservative

[woodwork201]

Carter put those troops in Lebanon.


Credit patriotic American Jew Caspar weinberger for not joining with Israel's false flag hate hoax designed to bait us into war with hezbollah.

Had W, LBJ, or Biden been president, we would have hit Hezbollah.....

You come into this thread pretending to be, at a minimum, libertarian but really talk more liberal/leftist. So why should it surprise me that you're an anti-Semite racist? Most leftists are both. You blow your own credibility out of the water; you're just another racist idiot on the left.

 

[kaz]

Social conservatism refers to morality laws

Social conservatism refers to more government, bigger government at the expense of individual liberty:

Seeking to violate a woman’s right to privacy.

Seeking to violate the equal protection rights of gay and transgender Americans.

Social conservatism is authoritarian, seeking to compel conformity and punish dissent.

And yet again: the right’s hostility to decriminalizing marijuana is one of many examples of that authoritarianism.

You worrying about losing individual liberty is absurd, Clayton the blowhard.

And a woman's right to privacy? I can't believe you just said that. You anoint yourself over women in terms of their salary (minimum wage), their benefits (particularly medical coverage), whether they can rent out their body or not (prostitution) and you rob them to redistribute their money. Suddenly you're for their privacy? Fuck the shit out of you, liar. You're the biggest threat to a woman's privacy

 

[Harry Dresden]

Social conservatism refers to morality laws

Social conservatism refers to more government, bigger government at the expense of individual liberty:

Seeking to violate a woman’s right to privacy.

Seeking to violate the equal protection rights of gay and transgender Americans.

Social conservatism is authoritarian, seeking to compel conformity and punish dissent.

And yet again: the right’s hostility to decriminalizing marijuana is one of many examples of that authoritarianism.

You worrying about losing individual liberty is absurd, Clayton the blowhard.

And a woman's right to privacy? I can't believe you just said that. You anoint yourself over women in terms of their salary (minimum wage), their benefits (particularly medical coverage), whether they can rent out their body or not (prostitution) and you rob them to redistribute their money. Suddenly you're for their privacy? Fuck the shit out of you, liar. You're the biggest threat to a woman's privacy

jones thinks he knows everything......but yet just cant seem to defend the shit he throws up.....i wonder why?....

 

[kaz]

Fiscal conservatism is finanical restraint

Actually not – it’s rightwing hypocrisy.

Conservatives exhibit no ‘fiscal restraint’ when it comes to unnecessary, wasteful military spending, corporate/agri-welfare, and reckless, irresponsible tax cuts that explode the deficit.

You're intentionally conflating Republican with conservative and you don't know what you are talking about. They aren't the same thing. Republicans haven't run a conservative for president since Reagan. Conservative isn't just a word, it means something.

Just like Democrats haven't run a liberal since Kennedy. You are all leftists

Just stating the truth and facts – conservatives show no ‘restraint’ when it comes to wasteful, unnecessary military spending.

Conservatives show no ‘restraint’ when it comes to reckless, irresponsible tax cuts.

The first part I agree with. We spend way too much on the military. Our defense should be way smaller and defense focused. But you're lying that Democrats think that, you are as militant as the Republicans. You just want to be behind the steering wheel.

On the second part, that is how Democrats double screw us. You spend us into the ground then shrink the economy instead of growing it. You're turning us into Greece. Republicans came in every so often and slowed you down. Now that you're fascists and just stealing elections and no one can stop you we're really fucked.

You know NOTHING about economics, and you repeatedly prove

 

[kaz]

Fiscal conservatism is finanical restraint

Social conservatism refers to morality laws

You're confusing them. You can be both or one and not the other

That's bull crap.

And social conservatism isn't about morality laws, it's about personal responsibility and accountability.

If you don't care about the government spending trillions they don't have as long as they're forcing people to live their lives the way you think they should live them then you are not a conservative; you're a socialist-style authoritarian.

If you believe that the government should spend money responsibly and wisely, conservatively, but bail should be eliminated and the borders should be open and let's give everyone a minimum cash allowance, then you are not conservative.

Specialized conservatism is to conservatism as "some of my best friends are _ _ _ _" is to racism. If you have to do either then you really aren't what you say you are.

Government does so well enforcing "responsibility and accountability" at the point of a gun, huh?

That's a job for families, communities and churches, not government. You're as naive as Democrats turning to government for charity

 

[kaz]

The war on drugs was only one of Reagan's mistakes. His middle east policy was another bust. We should have stayed out of Lebanon and if we were there the State department should not have had the power to make the military decisions they made that got all those soldiers killed. Reagan called the 3 for 1 deal with Tip ONeil the biggest mistake of his presidency. It was

Reagan was an absolutely great, conservative, president. The problem is that for much of his presidency he was not functioning as president and the RINO, deep-state intelligence community, Bush 41, along with Reagan's RINO staff, were functionally president because of Reagan's senility. That wasn't Reagan's fault; senility comes, or will come, to most of us. But his staff should have followed his vision but followed their own RINO vision instead.

Reagan was limited for sure by the Marxist Democrats as well as the useless majority of Republicans. He got a lot done considering what he was up against

 

[kaz]

Social conservatism refers to morality laws

Social conservatism refers to more government, bigger government at the expense of individual liberty:

Seeking to violate a woman’s right to privacy.

Seeking to violate the equal protection rights of gay and transgender Americans.

Social conservatism is authoritarian, seeking to compel conformity and punish dissent.

And yet again: the right’s hostility to decriminalizing marijuana is one of many examples of that authoritarianism.

You worrying about losing individual liberty is absurd, Clayton the blowhard.

And a woman's right to privacy? I can't believe you just said that. You anoint yourself over women in terms of their salary (minimum wage), their benefits (particularly medical coverage), whether they can rent out their body or not (prostitution) and you rob them to redistribute their money. Suddenly you're for their privacy? Fuck the shit out of you, liar. You're the biggest threat to a woman's privacy

jones thinks he knows everything......but yet just cant seem to defend the shit he throws up.....i wonder why?....

Yes, Clayton is a total blowhard

 

[woodwork201]

The definition of conservative is to be reactionary and authoritarian, to manifest an unwarranted fear of positive, beneficial change, to oppose diversity and inclusion, and to compel conformity and punish dissent through force of law.

To be conservatives is to seek more government, bigger government at the expense of individual liberty:

To deny women their right to privacy.

To violate the due process rights of immigrants.

To violate the equal protection rights of gay and transgender Americans.

To violate the voting rights of minority Americans.

And although there’s no ‘right’ to possess or use marijuana, the authoritarian right nonetheless seeks to criminalize both to compel conformity and punish dissent through force of law.

You must be referring to all those conservative ANTIFA members reacting in Seattle, Portland, and Minneapolis. And all those conservatives, both the community on Facebook and Twitter along with the conservative owners of Facebook and Twitter forcing conformity and cancelling anyone who did not conform.

And then there are those conservatives in the Biden administration, including Biden herself, who are growing government by adding 87,000 new IRS agents along with exploding all of government:

Get Ready for a Massive Increase in IRS Enforcement Personnel

pjmedia.com

And then there are those conservatives who harm women by giving them purpose in life as sex slaves and indentured servants to Mexican drug cartels. They defend children in the same way. The conservative Biden foster-care program makes sure that every child coming north from Central America has a home in a loving child-pornography production.

Conservatives hate women and want all women crushed so they ensure equality in women's sports by putting biological men into the sports programs so biological women are treated equal to men and have to compete against men.

Conservatives especially want to take away a woman's right to privacy. Their right to privacy is defined as their body, their choice, and that government has no business in their healthcare and healthcare is between patient and doctor.... until, of course, it comes to vaccines. Suddenly right to privacy doesn't exist to conservatives...

Of course none of that is true, just like none of what you said is true. Replace conservative with "leftist, socialist, liberal" in my post and then you'd have the truth.

 

[woodwork201]

And although there’s no ‘right’ to possess or use marijuana, the authoritarian right nonetheless seeks to criminalize both to compel conformity and punish dissent through force of law.

And you show your ignorance even in defending your liberal views. There is absolutely a right to possess and use marijuana. If a right to privacy allows a woman to kill her unborn child, then certainly the same right to privacy would protect a person's personal choices. And whether you believe that or not, the 9th and 10th amendments clearly protect EVERYTHING not explicitly granted to the Federal government. You can't even defend what you're right about, let alone all that which you are lying about.

 

[woodwork201]

I'm not debating your views. I'm debating the notion that conservatives have been for legalization traditionally. Please stop sidetracking, idiot.

Please do not equate Republican with conservative. There's absolutely no connection and very, very, little similarity. Conservatives want government out of personal choices. Republicans want government in your personal choices.

 

[woodwork201]

EMH is also claiming that wanting to legalize pot is a conservative value. I guess all us liberals are conservatives after all since we were already here.

You're not a liberal; you're a leftist. Just as there's no connection between conservatism and Republicans, there is no connection between leftists or Democrats when compared to liberals.

 

[OKTexas]

What's the constitutional authority for the Federal Government to ban the use of marijuana?

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3.

And if I grow my own and do not trade it?

This proves you're not a conservative. That the government abuses the Commerce Clause to justify virtually any regulation it wants does not make it constitutional.

But you misunderstand the Commerce Clause and the meaning of Commerce in 1789. Commerce was the act of trading, not the production or manufacturing.

Well child, if you had been around this forum more than a minute, you'd know I disagree with most of the supreme court precedents on the commerce clause. But until the congress and/or the States decide to rein in the court via Article 5, it is what it is.

.

Well, child - I'm 66 years old so don't child me. I don't care that you disagree with the Supreme Court precedence on the Commerce Clause and, apparently, neither do you because you claimed it empowers them to regulate things that are not in commerce just because they say so.

So you're not a conservative, you're an authoritarian. When the Court does or says something you don't like (guns for instance) you cry out about how unconstitutional it is but when they do something you do like, using the very same misreading of the Constitution, you support them because it enforces your will on other people. Like most faux-conservatives, you're a fraud.

The Constitution says and means what it says. It doesn't matter what the Court says or doesn't say. Government may have the physical might to force compliance with unconstitutional tyranny but it doesn't make it right or constitutional. The reason they get away with it is because political cowards like yourself just accept whatever the Court says when it suits your own view of morality.

Conservatives are always conservatives. They're not situationally conservative. Conservatives may hate that people put substances into their own bodies but would die defending their right to do it. You're not a conservative.
[/QUOTE]


When you act like a fucking child, I will call you one. You're obviously not old enough to understand what I just posted. My personal opinion on the use of drugs is irrelevant to the fact is the courts have been the most destructive force to our Constitution and individual liberties. But hey feel free to keep acting like the commies, you seem to get a lot of exercise jumping to conclusions.

.

 

[Rigby5]

Carter put those troops in Lebanon.


Credit patriotic American Jew Caspar weinberger for not joining with Israel's false flag hate hoax designed to bait us into war with hezbollah.

Had W, LBJ, or Biden been president, we would have hit Hezbollah.....

You come into this thread pretending to be, at a minimum, libertarian but really talk more liberal/leftist. So why should it surprise me that you're an anti-Semite racist? Most leftists are both. You blow your own credibility out of the water; you're just another racist idiot on the left.

This is complicated, but several of your assumptions are wrong.
First of all, EMH is very right wing, from other threads.
Second is that the wording "anti-Semitic" when you mean "anti-Jewish" is cultural appropriation.
The word "Semitic" means "of an Arab language group", so does not mean "Jewish".
Third is that Israel is the product of Ashkenazi Zionism. which is totally and completely anti-Jewish.
Real Jews are taught that they are to wait for the coming of the Messiah before looking for Zion on Earth.
Until then they are to remain out of the Mideast and atone for the sins of arrogance and pride.

 

[woodwork201]

Just stating the truth and facts – conservatives show no ‘restraint’ when it comes to wasteful, unnecessary military spending.

Conservatives show no ‘restraint’ when it comes to reckless, irresponsible tax cuts.

Please have your screen reader read more slowly so you can comprehend. Republicans are not conservatives though, since we only have two choices, some conservatives are Republicans.

 

[woodwork201]

Fiscal conservatism is finanical restraint

Social conservatism refers to morality laws

You're confusing them. You can be both or one and not the other

That's bull crap.

And social conservatism isn't about morality laws, it's about personal responsibility and accountability.

If you don't care about the government spending trillions they don't have as long as they're forcing people to live their lives the way you think they should live them then you are not a conservative; you're a socialist-style authoritarian.

If you believe that the government should spend money responsibly and wisely, conservatively, but bail should be eliminated and the borders should be open and let's give everyone a minimum cash allowance, then you are not conservative.

Specialized conservatism is to conservatism as "some of my best friends are _ _ _ _" is to racism. If you have to do either then you really aren't what you say you are.

Government does so well enforcing "responsibility and accountability" at the point of a gun, huh?

That's a job for families, communities and churches, not government. You're as naive as Democrats turning to government for charity

Did I say otherwise? You're just walking around with a chip on your shoulder.

 

[woodwork201]

When you act like a fucking child, I will call you one. You're obviously not old enough to understand what I just posted. My personal opinion on the use of drugs is irrelevant to the fact is the courts have been the most destructive force to our Constitution and individual liberties. But hey feel free to keep acting like the commies, you seem to get a lot of exercise jumping to conclusions.

.

Well, idiot (when you act like one I'll call you one), my question was from where does the government get the right to regulate marijuana and you said the Commerce Clause. So don't now claim you object to the government's abuse of the Commerce Clause. You're absolutely lying. You only object to their abuse of the Commerce Clause when they use it to restrict something you like but you're clearly all for it when they use it to restrict something you don't like. You're a fucking hypocrite and that's why the left is winning the war and why conservatives are not - because hypocrites who pretend to be conservative are not at all conservative; they're simply, you're simply, authoritarian.

You say that the Courts are the most destructive force to our liberties but when asked where the government gets the authority to regulate marijuana use you go along with the Courts. You're a hypocite.

 

[woodwork201]

Carter put those troops in Lebanon.


Credit patriotic American Jew Caspar weinberger for not joining with Israel's false flag hate hoax designed to bait us into war with hezbollah.

Had W, LBJ, or Biden been president, we would have hit Hezbollah.....

You come into this thread pretending to be, at a minimum, libertarian but really talk more liberal/leftist. So why should it surprise me that you're an anti-Semite racist? Most leftists are both. You blow your own credibility out of the water; you're just another racist idiot on the left.

This is complicated, but several of your assumptions are wrong.
First of all, EMH is very right wing, from other threads.
Second is that the wording "anti-Semitic" when you mean "anti-Jewish" is cultural appropriation.
The word "Semitic" means "of an Arab language group", so does not mean "Jewish".
Third is that Israel is the product of Ashkenazi Zionism. which is totally and completely anti-Jewish.
Real Jews are taught that they are to wait for the coming of the Messiah before looking for Zion on Earth.
Until then they are to remain out of the Mideast and atone for the sins of arrogance and pride.

Great. Another anti-Semite.

 

[OKTexas]

When you act like a fucking child, I will call you one. You're obviously not old enough to understand what I just posted. My personal opinion on the use of drugs is irrelevant to the fact is the courts have been the most destructive force to our Constitution and individual liberties. But hey feel free to keep acting like the commies, you seem to get a lot of exercise jumping to conclusions.

.

Well, idiot (when you act like one I'll call you one), my question was from where does the government get the right to regulate marijuana and you said the Commerce Clause. So don't now claim you object to the government's abuse of the Commerce Clause. You're absolutely lying. You only object to their abuse of the Commerce Clause when they use it to restrict something you like but you're clearly all for it when they use it to restrict something you don't like. You're a fucking hypocrite and that's why the left is winning the war and why conservatives are not - because hypocrites who pretend to be conservative are not at all conservative; they're simply, you're simply, authoritarian.

You say that the Courts are the most destructive force to our liberties but when asked where the government gets the authority to regulate marijuana use you go along with the Courts. You're a hypocite.

You're a fucking liar, as I said the only ones with the power to rein in the courts are congress and/or the States. You can sit around crying like a little bitch or you can contact your reps and make them aware of what you see a the problem as I have been doing for decades. In the mean time I think you need one of these.

.

 

[HappyJoy]

The Democratic Party endorsed prop. 64. Where was the California Republican party?

In Florida, medical marijuana came about only after a referendum to amend the state’s constitution – a measure aggressively opposed by the Florida Republican Party.

Pretty sad as their elderly populations could benefit the most.

 

[HappyJoy]

I'm not debating your views. I'm debating the notion that conservatives have been for legalization traditionally. Please stop sidetracking, idiot.

Please do not equate Republican with conservative. There's absolutely no connection and very, very, little similarity. Conservatives want government out of personal choices. Republicans want government in your personal choices.

Same difference. The GOP is the only political party most conservatives could ever hope to join to win an election.