This is Just Plain Common Sense

I know that by writing this I am going to be accused of being a fan bois and told I am being duped by an insane crazy person, but you know what? Rand Paul is right:

In an interview with Fox News Sunday’s Chris Wallace, Paul was asked why he advocates for more lenient marijuana laws.

“I don’t want to promote that but I also don’t want to put people in jail who make a mistake,” Paul explained. “There are a lot of young people who do this and then later on in their twenties they grow up and get married and they quit doing things like this. I don’t want to put them in jail and ruin their lives.”

That led Paul to mention some bigger figures who have been linked to marijuana in the past — Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush.

“Look, the last two presidents could conceivably have been put in jail for their drug use, and I really think, you know, look what would have happened, it would have ruined their lives,” Paul added. “They got lucky, but a lot of poor kids, particularly in the inner city, don’t get lucky. They don’t have good attorneys, and they go to jail for these things and I think it’s a big mistake.”

Yep. I’d love a better spokesman, but at least some people were exposed to this opinion who might not otherwise agree with it.

210 replies
  1. 1
    Evolving Deep Southerner says:

    I won’t say “first,” because I’m made to understand that some here don’t care for that.

  2. 2
    Sparky says:

    The big win would be to slowly walk him away from all the crazytown views and bring all the folks he has hooked with him.

  3. 3
    Princess says:

    But he’d be thrilled to put young women who make a mistake and get pregnant and have an abortion in jail. I don’t disagree with his position on marijuana but it is not like he is the only one saying this and there are better spokespeople for personal liberty out there.

  4. 4
    max says:

    I know that by writing this I am going to be accused of being a fan bois and told I am being duped by an insane crazy person

    If you said, ‘Argentina, Zimbabwe, HITLER! GOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLDDDDDDDDDDDD!’ then you would be a fanbois*.

    I’d love a better spokesman, but at least some people were exposed to this opinion who might not otherwise agree with it.

    Sure. Nice if he would vote against a filibuster or vote for a bill that implemented his suggestions. We’ll see when that day arrives.

    max
    [‘Not going to hold my breath.’]

    * And how very faux French of someone.

  5. 5

    Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. That particular sentiment is correct. I would still avoid Paul like the plague, because if he’s ever right, he’s right by accident. His opinions are formed out of conspiracy theories, IGMFY arrogance, and the Christianist love of imposing whatever he personally thinks is right on others. Any time he’s right, it will be part of a broader platform that’s wrong.

  6. 6
    Corner Stone says:

    Cole, retract this. To agree with Rand Paul on one issue is to sign on to his entire platform.
    Retract your support for the broccoli mandate!

  7. 7
    Arclite says:

    Ron Paul said somethings that made sense too. But most of what he said was completely wrong headed.

    Same with Rand. And even though the precise question about his drone filibuster is not the one I would have asked, I’m glad someone brought drones to the forefront.

    Still, there’s a lot of presidential posturing here. God forbid he should win.

  8. 8
    PeakVT says:

    Paul is uttering the correct position on the subject, but unfortunately he’s only getting attention because he’s being a “maverick”, not because he’s right.

  9. 9
    Litlebritdifrnt says:

    As a paralegal working for a criminal defense attorney I see this every fucking day and it infuriates me. Last week in our Superior court there was a week long trial about whether or not possession of 3ozs of marijuana constitutes “with the intent to sell and deliver”. Jury found the kid guilty. It is insane, is costing this country trillions in law enforcement costs, court costs, prison costs, lost lives and lost prospects. It is simply insane.

  10. 10
    Ultraviolet Thunder says:

    According to Mr. Pierce’s 5 Minute Paul Family Rule, it took him 300 seconds to make this very reasonable case. He then immediately returned to his natural state of irrationality and delusion.

  11. 11
    minutemaid says:

    HAHAhaha. Can always count on wr0ng way Cole to go the wrong way. Add another one to the list of Cole’s buddies who said one thing once that he liked and now Cole thinks they are dreamy.

  12. 12
    raven says:

    @minutemaid: Robert Byrd

  13. 13
    boss bitch says:

    Why is anyone on the left or in the Dem party impressed with anything Rand Paul says? There are Democrats, liberal Democrats, who are against the drug war and against drones.

    Pffft…

  14. 14
    Baud says:

    Paul introduced a marijuana sentencing reform bill with Leahy. But Leahy is a Democrat so fuck him, right?

  15. 15
    Poopyman says:

    Also consider Mr. AquaBuddha is speaking of himself there. Wake me up when he’s speaking on the right side of an issue but it isn’t self-serving of him to do so.

  16. 16
    Obliterati says:

    The sun even shines on a dog’s ass some days.

    I’m guessing we won’t see Senator Rand actually lead from the front on this issue, that doesn’t seem to be his MO. But it’s nice to see a Teabagger talking some sense occasionally.

  17. 17
    4tehlulz says:

    This is more states’ rights bullshit.

    “States should be allowed to make a lot of these decisions,” Paul said. “I want things to be decided more at a local basis, with more compassion. I think it would make us as Republicans different.”

    lol more compassion – for white people

  18. 18
    Maus says:

    Do you find yourself agreeing with stopped clocks too?

  19. 19
    Arclite says:

    @boss bitch:

    Why is anyone on the left or in the Dem party impressed with anything Rand Paul says? There are Democrats, liberal Democrats, who are against the drug war and against drones.
    Pffft…

    You’re right, let me rephrase about the drones. Lots of liberals and other people raise this issue. But it never makes the mainstream press. I’m glad someone was able to get attention, is what I should have said.

  20. 20
    Ronnie P says:

    @minutemaid:

    Minutemaid wins the award for stupid poster of the day.

  21. 21
    Paul Gottlieb says:

    It’s extremely rare for someone to always be wrong about everything. Even Dick Cheney, a conscienceless sociopath and torture buff, is right on the subject of marriage equality–if only for selfish reasons. Rand Paul is a typical right-winger: He can picture himself, or someone just like him having their life ruined by a marijuana conviction, so he feels some sympathy for people exactly like himself. He will never be black, so he’s quite comfortable with racial discrimination; he will never be a woman, so he is indifferent to any suffering he inflicts on women, or any denial of their rights.

  22. 22
    ChristianPinko says:

    Please. This is just another instance where a conservative wants the government to safeguard the privileges of himself and persons like him. Ten-to-one he’s smoked weed himself and thinks, “Well, if I do it it must be ok.” Just like Sen. Portman’s discovery that homosexuality is ok when he found that his son is gay.

  23. 23
    BGinCHI says:

    You know who else was right about something once?

    Hint: 1930s.

  24. 24
    NotMax says:

    New server’s Kool-Aid filter seems to be set to zero.

  25. 25
    Yutsano says:

    @BGinCHI: W.E. Fields?

  26. 26
    JPL says:

    Rand Paul would let businesses decide who to serve. So if a business sold pot, they could refuse to sell to minors, I guess.
    He’s an ass.
    also,too.. he is running for Pres and is trying to get the youth vote.

  27. 27
    Keith G says:

    Extremely few humans are all good or all bad. Paul the Younger does have some worthwhile ideas on a couple of topics. He wants to be President and he just might be realistic enough to understand the truth in the polling data. So, he needs to work his way carefully to the more moderate positions on some libertarian issues.

    The fly in the ointment is abortion since that is such a deal breaker with the solid right.

  28. 28
    different-church-lady says:

    It’s Rand Paul: look deep for the Trojan Horse and get back to us.

  29. 29
    BGinCHI says:

    @Yutsano: Was that WC Fields’ brother?

  30. 30
    Suffern ACE says:

    @4tehlulz: you know, there is a difference between states and local, and just because the state is deciding, it doesn’t make the decision more just or more reasonable or more love able or more principled.

  31. 31
    Corner Stone says:

    @BGinCHI: Herbert Hoover thinking there was power in that there dam?

  32. 32
    nellcote says:

    Did I miss the bill Rand Paul introduced in the senate that legalizes pot?

  33. 33
    A Humble Lurker says:

    In cases like these, it’s important to note not WHAT dude is saying but WHY. Then the Universe rights itself again, as you see it’s not for a sane reason, but because the government is using drug convictions to throw us all into FEMA camps.

    Even if dude is saying the right thing if he’s saying it for the wrong reasons he’s useless to us. And really anybody.

  34. 34
    David Koch says:

    I may have join progressive icons Glenn Greenwald and Cenk Uygar and vote for Rand Paul if he keeps talking this way and if the Dems nominate the warmongering-DLC relic Hillary Clinton.

    Seriously, I’m tired of endless wars draining our money and blood and atleast Rand wants to get out of the Middle East, including defunding the outlaw nation of Israel, while disturbingly chicken-hawk Hillary keeps recommending intervention in the meat-grinder that is Syria. If you love war so much Hillary get Chelsea and your Goldman Sachs son-in-law to enlist.

  35. 35
    Josie says:

    My late husband was a criminal defense attorney. He told of a dinner that involved local attorneys and judges (can’t remember the official name) that he attended. There was a group of attorneys and district judges outside in the parking lot enjoying a little coke and/or marijuana. These were the same people who were, during the daytime, sentencing his clients to jail for possession, sale, etc. He was not a happy camper about the whole scene. That was many years ago and I doubt that much has changed since then. Lots of hypocrisy out there.

  36. 36
    Roger Moore says:

    Look, the last two presidents could conceivably have been put in jail for their drug use, and I really think, you know, look what would have happened, it would have ruined their lives

    One out of two isn’t bad. Yes, if Barack Obama had been caught with pot as a teen, it probably would have ruined his life. But George W. Bush has been skating on all kinds of crap for his entire life, and there’s no reason to think that getting caught with pot would have been any different. The cops would have backed off once they saw who his daddy was. If the cops didn’t, the DA would have decided to let him go to rehab, or the judge would have let him off with a slap on the wrist. And daddy’s friends wouldn’t have let it get in the way of offering him business opportunities. The 1% really do have life a lot easier than the rest of us.

  37. 37
    Yutsano says:

    @BGinCHI: I had W. E. B. DuBois stuck in my brain for some strange reason, which I knew wasn’t right. I blame Obama.

  38. 38
    Dave says:

    Rand Paul is right about drugs? Wow, what a thing. Liberals believe the same stuff as a matter of course.

  39. 39
    Cacti says:

    Cole humps leg of glibertarian.

    In other news, water is wet.

  40. 40
    Lolis says:

    He should have thrown his name in there, too. You don’t get the name Aqua Buddha for smoking a hookah.

  41. 41
    David Koch says:

    before any True Progressive attacks Rand Paul, ask yourself why haven’t liberal icons in safe seats in deep blue states like Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren come out against the insane drug war and drones.

  42. 42
    Corey says:

    Why do you hate black people John

  43. 43

    I dont care who says this. I will watch with interest how the corrections industry deals with it, though.

    eta: “corrections” industry. the only thing theyre correcting is that other people’s money isn’t in their pocket.

  44. 44
    Corey says:

    Why do you agree with Rand Paul’s stance on abortion rights John, you’re a sexist

  45. 45
    Ted & Hellen says:

    ROCK CHALK JAYHAWK

  46. 46
    Cacti says:

    If only Rand Paul was in a position to propose legislation to decriminalize or reschedule cannabis on the Federal Drug Control schedules.

    Wait, nevermind.

  47. 47
    Nicole says:

    But he’d be thrilled to put young women who make a mistake and get pregnant and have an abortion in jail.

    Not exactly. Most of the pro-lifers say they want the doctors jailed, not the women. Because, of course, that makes total sense. Everyone knows these doctors are hanging out in parks and on corners, just waiting for innocent pregnant women to come by, so they can grab them and force them to get abortions and pay for them so the doctors can get rich, rich, I tell you!

    Either that or they figure maybe by promising they’d only punish the doctors, they can still get some of the wimmin vote. Because the GOP assume that everyone subscribes to the “I got mine (abortion), fuck the rest of y’all” political philosophy.

  48. 48
    Ash Can says:

    Blind squirrel, nut, etc.

  49. 49
    Keith G says:

    @Baud:

    Paul introduced a marijuana sentencing reform bill with Leahy. But Leahy is a Democrat so fuck him, right?

    You are smarter than this, right?

    Of course Leahy’s efforts are important, but that is conforming to type. Getting voices on the Right to consistently say the same thing (and hopefully in larger number each term) means an increase in the chance of success.

    In the foreseeable future, no reforms will get through the Senate without Republican support (thanks in part to the wisdom of Harry Reid). So on some issues, the votes of folks like Sen. Paul maybe critical.

    Boss Bitch…see above.

    edited

  50. 50
    BGinCHI says:

    @Corner Stone: According to Amity Schlaes, Coolidge is the new Hoover.

    ETA: ….but in a good way.

  51. 51
    BGinCHI says:

    @Yutsano: Racial free association strikes again.

  52. 52
    dewzke says:

    I don’t support stopped clocks…they need to right more often.

  53. 53
    Ash Can says:

    @Nicole: Of course they want the doctor punished rather than the women. Women are just livestock, and you don’t expect a poor dumb farm animal to think and make decisions for itself, now, do you?

  54. 54
    raven says:

    The pie filter still works!

  55. 55
    Roger Moore says:

    @Nicole:

    Most of the pro-lifers say they want the doctors jailed, not the women. Because, of course, that makes total sense.

    Of course it makes sense. It only makes sense to throw people in jail if they have agency, and anti-choice bigots are all about denying pregnant women any kind of agency.

  56. 56
    Corner Stone says:

    Cole, why do you agree with curbstomping people who oppose your political election campaign?
    Despicable.

  57. 57
    ChrisNYC says:

    He for real cited his concern about “poor kids in the inner city”? I swear, they really do think they can say any old garbage and it will be believed.

  58. 58
    eemom says:

    @Frankensteinbeck:

    Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

    But this plus his awesome heroic filibuster re droooonez makes twice. What’re we gonna do if he’s right a THIRD time??

  59. 59
    BGinCHI says:

    @raven: I’m going to come out of nowhere in the NCAA bracket competition. Fear me.

  60. 60
    greenergood says:

    I blame this on Zsa-Zsa. Cole needs to separate endorphins due to happy animal-companions from his approval of Paul-inistas weed endorsements. I am in full approval of weed, but coming from Mr Paul, I suspicious am.

  61. 61
    raven says:

    @BGinCHI: I’m in a calcutta, brackets are sooo yesterday.

  62. 62
    Cacti says:

    @ChrisNYC:

    He for real cited his concern about “poor kids in the inner city”? I swear

    Because if anybody cares about the poor kids in the inner city, it’s the guy who opposes the Civil Rights Act.

  63. 63
    BGinCHI says:

    @raven: Oh, for some reason I thought you were the one organizing it. Sorry.

  64. 64
    Ramalama says:

    @David Koch: Yeah that would be great but it looks as if Bernie Sanders has been busy doing a bunch of other stuff and I’m not sure he wants to use up his powder on the W.O.D. There’s so much else he’s hauling ass on. http://www.ontheissues.org/sen.....anders.htm

    Elizabeth Warren just got elected.

  65. 65
    SiubhanDuinne says:

    @Yutsano:

    I had W. E. B. DuBois stuck in my brain for some strange reason,

    Reason is not strange at all. Reason is

    accused of being a fan bois

  66. 66
    Cacti says:

    @greenergood:

    I blame this on Zsa-Zsa. Cole needs to separate endorphins due to happy animal-companions from his approval of Paul-inistas weed endorsements. I am in full approval of weed, but coming from Mr Paul, I suspicious am.

    Cole still suffers from no small amount of personal shame for his vociferous support of the semi-literate, incompetent scion of the Bush family.

    He needs a respectable Republican to exist somewhere, to prove to himself that he wasn’t a complete cretin in the past.

  67. 67
    raven says:

    @BGinCHI: Is there one here?

    Still an hour until the Illini game IF the Gophers don’t complete this run at the Gators and force some damn overtime!

  68. 68
    Barbara says:

    In the “Is it just me…?” category, I get so plucked off when people like Paul refer to ‘The States’ as ‘laboratories’ when they have no idea that once something is accepted as proven in a legitimate laboratory, it is called a fact. Laboratories, schmaboraties! They don’t mean ANYTHING when they mention State’s Rights except “Bring black the slaves! They worked for us & it’s been downhill ever since you let them go, Federal Gubmint!”

  69. 69
    ChrisNYC says:

    @Cacti: Unless he means he cares about them just sashaying into private businesses all over the great state of Kentucky without a neveryoumind — and demanding service! That there is a destruction of LIBERTY, friends.

  70. 70
    BGinCHI says:

    @raven: I got an invite but I don’t know from whom. I responded and did my bracket. I think it was the same folks from last year.

    Next year Cole should have one with a huge prize at the end.

  71. 71
    Todd says:

    @4tehlulz:

    lol more compassion – for white people

    Exactly. Compassion for the white son of the Congressdork/Air Force doctor with soft duty, tasers, beatings, arrests and life changing misdemeanor convictions for them criminal colored boys (with the occasional felony if the cop splits his fist open on that colored boy’s face).

    You know, white justice.

  72. 72
    slag says:

    Yep. I’d love a better spokesman, but at least some people were exposed to this opinion who might not otherwise agree with it.

    A very appropriate way to put this. And good to get it out of your system.

    Luckily, on this issue, we have many better spokespeople we can highlight.

  73. 73
    sacrablue says:

    I think some enterprising reporter should ask Sen. Yertle Turtle if he agrees with his Kentucky colleague on this issue.

  74. 74
    Cacti says:

    Rand Paul thinks it’s wrong that the Feds could send “inner city youth” to prison for smoking weed.

    But if a local PD wants to club and taser them for trying to get service at a white man’s lunch counter, well that’s different.

  75. 75
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Frankensteinbeck: Basically this.

    @boss bitch: And this.

    ETA: I am not going to accuse Cole of being a fanboi or anything like that, but, since there are better politicians who support some of these specific policies but for some reason don’t get much media attention, might it not make sense to use the soapbox that this blog provides to promote them?

  76. 76
    Ben Franklin says:

    @David Koch:

    You don’t want to ask about that, because getting an agreement through negotiations is very difficult, what, with the make-up of Congress and all.

    Not getting things done is not the fault of Democrats. They’re waiting to see which way the wind blows.

  77. 77
    Todd says:

    @Cacti:

    But if a local PD wants to club and taser them for trying to get service at a white man’s lunch counter, well that’s different.

    Rand is the kind of guy who stands at the back of the group of local Christian conservatives eager to see their lunch counter cleared of colored boys. He’d be in the back of the group (axe handle in hand) preventing any escape for them colored boys, because being in the front might expose him to getting hit back.

  78. 78
    dewzke says:

    I’ll promote it but am not holding….smoke up!

  79. 79
    Roger Moore says:

    @Cacti:

    He needs a respectable Republican to exist somewhere, to prove to himself that he wasn’t a complete cretin in the past.

    Even those of us who were never Republicans can be dismayed at the behavior of the contemporary Republican party and look hopefully at any hint of improvement. I desperately want the Republican party to start behaving like the loyal opposition in a modern democracy rather than a bunch of treasonous cretins. I have a hard time believing anything Rand Paul says will move him out of the latter camp, but I can sympathize with people who are more optimistic than I am.

  80. 80
    The Sheriff's A Ni- says:

    Aqua Buddha’s prepping for 2016, and he’s setting his base firmly with the Fonzies of Freedom.

  81. 81
    West of the Rockies says:

    @Yutsano: Well, that’s better than W.E.B. Griffin, I suppose!

  82. 82
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Frankensteinbeck:

    Any time he’s right, it will be part of a broader platform that’s wrong

    That doesn’t make him wrong on this. It’s better if you label it as schadenfreude..

  83. 83
    Corner Stone says:

    The Gold Standard? Really Cole, that’s what you want to go back to?

  84. 84
    Cacti says:

    When Baby doc Paultard, Jr. actually drafts some legislation for decriminalizing the demon weed, I’ll believe he’s doing something other than demagoguing for the gullible stoner vote.

  85. 85
    greenergood says:

    @Cacti: No. I’d rather be benevolent and blame it on Zsa-Zsa. Guilt’s crap – my life has been dominated by it. Better to be dominated by pets.

  86. 86
    Maude says:

    @The Sheriff’s A Ni-:
    That’s what I though. Free Market, no gubmint control.

  87. 87
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Corner Stone: I am sure currency backed by silver would be okay.

  88. 88
    Baud says:

    I CAN’T BELIEVE YOU CORRUPTED THE NEW SERVER WITH THIS CRAP, COLE!

  89. 89
    FlipYrWhig says:

    So it would still be up Rand Paul’s alley* if a state wanted to impose draconian drug laws, right, because if states do it it’s totally kosher? Because liberty, that’s why?

    -* Ew.

  90. 90
    Mark S. says:

    WHAT’S THE NEXT POST GOING TO BE, ANOTHER LOVE LETTER TO CHRIS CHRISTIE?

    /fainting couch

  91. 91
    Todd says:

    @Cacti:

    When Baby doc Paultard, Jr. actually drafts some legislation for decriminalizing the demon weed, I’ll believe he’s doing something other than demagoguing for the gullible stoner vote.

    It would almost be worth watching Baby Doc set up his Christianist dictatorship, just to see the confusion on the faces of the stoner Paulites.

  92. 92
    Baud says:

    @Keith G:

    Hmmm. So maybe the media was right. Obama should have socialized with Republicans more.

  93. 93
    Ben Franklin says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    Because liberty, that’s why?

    He’s just reading the tea leaves better than some (most?)

    Why can’t you give him credit? Uhhh, let me rephrase; Why can’t we all just wait for Obama?

    Better?

  94. 94

    @Princess: This. Legalization wants and deserves better faces and voices.

    I wonder if American politics will see more instances of The Portman Effect.
    See also: blind pigs and acorns.

  95. 95
    efgoldman says:

    @Baud:

    Obama should have socialized with Republicans more.

    Only if he wore a tux, had a towel over his arm, and said “yassuh, Massa'” a lot.

  96. 96
    Baud says:

    @efgoldman:

    Hey, we need those Republican votes. Whatever it takes, right?

  97. 97
    raven says:

    @BGinCHI: What a bummer.

  98. 98
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Ben Franklin: I give him some credit on the issue of weed, but, as with drones, he’s drawing the lines in a weird place. If it’s an injustice, it should be unjust at every level, without any foisting things onto Teh Staitz.

  99. 99
    Corner Stone says:

    @FlipYrWhig: Ah! Another Rand Paul fan!
    I would’ve expected a pragmatic pragmatist like yourself to not sign on to the entire Rand Paul oeuvre like this.
    But, I guess to each his own.

  100. 100
    Cacti says:

    @BruceFromOhio:

    Legalization wants and deserves better faces and voices.

    Randroid isn’t even a voice for legalization.

    His “progressive” move in the drug war was to co-sponsor a bill giving more sentencing discretion to federal judges.

    Where is he saying it ought not to be a crime?

  101. 101
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Ben Franklin:

    Why can’t you give him credit?

    Because I trust him about as far as I can throw him and I pulled a muscle in my throwing shoulder earlier today.

    Uhhh, let me rephrase; Why can’t we all just wait for Obama?

    No one is saying that. People are saying there are better spokespeople for the position than a right-wing faux-libertarian.

  102. 102
    Baud says:

    @Cacti:

    His “progressive” move in the drug war was to co-sponsor a bill giving more sentencing discretion to federal judges.

    Remember when our progressive betters hated incrementalism.

  103. 103
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Corner Stone: I’m starting to diverge on some of this stuff — re: drones, the whole thing was obvious grandstanding because his position was no better than Obama’s even specifically on civil liberties. But I think left-right coalition building on issues that aren’t neatly left vs. right (like drugs, maybe immigration too) is the only chance we have of seeing shit get done legislatively, and shit needs getting done these days.

  104. 104
    Litlebritdifrnt says:

    @efgoldman:

    I was watching one of DHs westerns this morning. There was Angie Dickenson playing the madam of a high end brothel in the wild west who was in love with the Marshall (Glen Ford), her “maid” was an elderly black woman who would leave the room with “yes massum” half a dozen times during the movie. I was quite gobsmacked by it.
    Personally I blame HGTV for the entire RWNJ backlash. HGTV used to be manly men doing manly things like knocking down walls and building shit. Watch HGTV today, it is gay couples looking for a home (Property Brothers this morning) it is bi-racial couples looking for an upgrade, this must drive the RWNJ peeps absolutely and utterly insane! Can you imagine what goes through their mind when a couple of gay guys are being told about “their master bedroom retreat” EWWWWWWWW EEEEEEEK. The world is changing, they are being left behind, it is driving them NUTS.

  105. 105
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @FlipYrWhig: but, again, if his position is that drug laws need to be moved to the state and local levels, that’s really more of a punt than a reform, IMHO.

  106. 106
    Baud says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    the whole thing was obvious grandstanding

    I have to hand it to Rand here. He asked Holder about using drones in the U.S., and Holder responded that maybe during an event like Pearl Harbor or 9-11. So than Rand holds his 13-hour filibuster, and “gets” Holder to “concede” that drones can’t be used against Americans “not engaged in combat.” Holder’s original answer was actually narrower, but HEY Rand really stuck it to the Administration!

  107. 107
    efgoldman says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    But I think left-right coalition building on issues that aren’t neatly left vs. right (like drugs, maybe immigration too) is the only chance we have of seeing shit get done legislatively, and shit needs getting done these days.

    Where have you seen any evidence at all – anything – that the right side of the equation even thinks about coalition building?
    And Aqua Buddah is an empty suit with a microphone where his brain should be. Just like Cruz – he thinks yapping alone will make him Preznit. He has done nothing – nothing at all – to propose or move any legislation, except introducing a personhood amendment. Now there’s a guy with whom you can build a coalition.

  108. 108
    Cacti says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    but, again, if his position is that drug laws need to be moved to the state and local levels, that’s really more of a punt than a reform, IMHO.

    The overwhelming majority of drug prosecutions nationally are already at the state level.

    When someone gets pinched for a dime bag, it’s not the DEA doing it.

  109. 109
    patroclus says:

    If Rand Paul did a filibuster on this issue and refused to let anything pass the Senate until marijuana decriminalization was enacted, maybe I’d have some respect for him, but as of now, it’s just glibertarianistic rhetoric backed by nothing concrete. Supporting Ted Cruz’s McCarthyism seems far more important to Rand than this issue. Protecting high capacity magazines seems far more important to Rand than this. Defunding Medicare and turning it into a voucher system seems far more important to Rand than this.

  110. 110
    Keith G says:

    @Baud: That’s a bit of a non sequitur.

    Back to the topic of the Senate. Weird across-the-aisle alliances are an important way things have gotten done. This is even more the case when the threshold is no longer 51, but 60.

  111. 111
    Ben Franklin says:

    @efgoldman:

    Now there’s a guy with whom you can build a coalition.

    Yet, here we are, talking about him…and don’t blame Cole.

    My message to the masses? Stop enabling the do-nothings (that means Dems)

  112. 112
    Heliopause says:

    Does this mean John Cole is a “brogressive”?

    Paul replaced Jim Bunning. Just about everything that Paul is wrong about (most stuff) Jim Bunning was wrong about as well, but Paul happens to be right about a few things. His presence in the senate would seem to be a net positive in that sense.

  113. 113
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @efgoldman: there’s apparently a left-right civil liberties group on drone stuff that includes one of the Udalls, Paul, Mike Lee, and someone else on the D side who I’m not remembering right now. So it might be happening at some level. Of course the Wyden-Bob Bennett health care plan ended up costing Bob Bennett his job, so, I agree, there’s not much appetite for genuine constructive dialogue.

  114. 114
    Cacti says:

    @patroclus:

    If Rand Paul did a filibuster on this issue and refused to let anything pass the Senate until marijuana decriminalization was enacted, maybe I’d have some respect for him

    If Rand Paul did this, I’d say he has balls of solid granite, and take back every mean thing I ever said about him.

    But we all know that’s just not going to happen.

  115. 115
    El Cid says:

    People have to figure out what to do when someone you don’t like supports something you do like.

    You can’t abandon what you support simply because someone you don’t support supports it; nor can you support someone you don’t support beyond any shared point you do.

  116. 116
    efgoldman says:

    @patroclus:

    …seems far more important to Rand than this.

    You forgot the zygote personhood bill, which I think is the only bill he’s actually filed since he got to DC.

  117. 117
    Commenting at Balloon Juice Since 1937 says:

    Aqua Buddha is totally cool with this, dude.

  118. 118
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Cacti: hmm, good point. But it doesn’t seem entirely consistent, then, with Paul-ism if he thinks that he as a federal office holder should be telling state and local authorities what to do about enforcing the law.

  119. 119
    El Cid says:

    Also, I don’t agree with Rand Paul on this point; rather, Rand Paul agrees with me. Let’s get that straight.

  120. 120
    efgoldman says:

    @Ben Franklin:

    Stop enabling the do-nothings (that means Dems)

    Which means what? That they’re all the same so we might as well let the TeaHadis have after it? Have you looked at the red states lately?

  121. 121
    Baud says:

    @Keith G:

    Weird across-the-aisle alliances are an important way things have gotten done.

    I don’t care if the Senate Dems like Leahy form an alliance with Rand on drug policy. What I can’t stand is the need for liberal blogs to put Rand front and center instead of supporting Democrats who may be in all likelihood even stronger on the issue, especially where Rand hasn’t actually done all that much legislatively.

  122. 122
    Ben Franklin says:

    @El Cid:

    That was a mouthful. The strange part is, I think I understand.

    I don’t think the outliers are supporting Paul. But they lament the silence from those they are supposed to support.

  123. 123
    efgoldman says:

    @Baud:

    … especially where Rand hasn’t actually done all that much a single fucking thing legislatively.

    Fixed

  124. 124
    Ben Franklin says:

    @efgoldman:

    You do know what enabling is, right? That’s making excuses for those we love, against our, and their best interests.

  125. 125
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Ben Franklin: Jared Polis and Earl Blumenauer both introduced legislation on pot last month.

    @Baud: Exactly.

  126. 126
    Baud says:

    @efgoldman:

    Well, he filed that sentencing reform bill with Leahy recently. I’ll give him credit for going that far.

  127. 127
    chopper says:

    see, maybe I don’t agree with sen. Paul that smoking grass is a ‘mistake’. it ain’t a mistake, it’s just a choice of which chemical you want to use to get high with.

  128. 128
    Cacti says:

    @El Cid:

    Also, I don’t agree with Rand Paul on this point; rather, Rand Paul agrees with me.

    Rand Paul doesn’t agree with me. I favor outright decriminalization of MJ, at the federal, state, and local level.

  129. 129
    sb says:

    Late to this party.

    Let’s say Rand Paul becomes prez–perish that fucking thought beyond this post, one and all–how long will it be before he goes back on this position?

    Not long. Hell, he’ll do it campainging in Iowa.

  130. 130
    Baud says:

    Here is Rand’s (and Leahy’s) grand stand on drugs(supported by Grover apparently):

    The Justice Safety Valve Act of 2013 authorizes federal courts to depart below a statutory mandatory minimum sentence only after finding, among other things, that providing a particular defendant a shorter sentence – say, seven or eight years in prison for a drug offense rather than the 10-year mandatory minimum – will not jeopardize public safety. The bill does not require judges to impose shorter sentences, and for many crimes, the minimum established by Congress will be appropriate. But in cases where the mandatory minimum does not account for the offender’s limited role in a crime or other relevant factors, the judge would be allowed to consider those factors and craft a more appropriate sentence.

  131. 131
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Baud: Here is some info on the Polis and Blumenauer bills.

  132. 132
    Keith G says:

    @Cacti:

    When someone gets pinched for a dime bag, it’s not the DEA doing it.

    Yet a large amount of federal money finds its way down to local cops and prosecutors to help fund extra personnel and efforts to “fight drugs”. Remove that money, overtime dries up plus the locals no longer feel compelled to book more drug busts to earn more money.

  133. 133
    Mark S. says:

    @sb:

    Hell, he’ll do it campainging in Iowa.

    I doubt it, but I don’t see him doing any better than his father in the Repub primaries. He’ll win a few states but not enough to be a player, so there’s no point in fucking over a large part of his base of support (i.e. libertarians).

  134. 134
    Baud says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Let’s compare, shall we?

    Today, Representatives Jared Polis and Earl Blumenauer introduced two legislative measures that would end the federal prohibition on marijuana and permit for the regulated production and retail sales of cannabis to adults in states that have legalized its consumption.

    Given that the bill they proposed goes much further, I wonder when Polis and Blumenauer will become blog-hold names like Rand Paul is?

  135. 135
    Mnemosyne says:

    @El Cid:

    Also, I don’t agree with Rand Paul on this point; rather, Rand Paul agrees with me. Let’s get that straight.

    Good point. Paul is not leading on this issue any more than Portman was leading on the issue of gay rights. He’s trying to figure out a way to co-opt this issue and make it a Republican one so he can use it as a club against Democrats.

  136. 136
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Baud: Or when people like Ben Franklin will recognize that they exist.

  137. 137
    Todd says:

    @Ben Franklin:

    My message to the masses? Stop enabling the do-nothings (that means Dems)

    That’s been tried and found wanting. Of course, you knew that already, didn’t you, Teatard?

  138. 138
    Hoodie says:

    I’d love a better spokesman, but at least some people were exposed to this opinion who might not otherwise agree with it.

    As big a horse’s ass as Paul is, the rise of glibertarianism in Republicans to glibertarianism may take some heat off democrats to be “hard on crime.” It doesn’t really undermine the Dem’s comparative advantage on economic issues. Guys like Paul like to think they can trade legalized dope for eliminating Social Security. I don’t think that’ll work.

  139. 139
    SatanicPanic says:

    Hey, give the youth weed and a flat tax to LBGT people and maybe they won’t notice how stupid Rand Paul is.

  140. 140
    El Cid says:

    @Cacti: OK, you don’t agree with me, I favor the complete democratization of the economy, so I find you inferior, so fuck you, reactionary. There. Now I am superior. Ha!

  141. 141
    Baud says:

    @SatanicPanic:

    Oh, that lede deserves to be excerpted:

    Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) on Sunday suggested that implementing a flat tax could assuage gay and lesbian Americans who want equal marriage rights because straight marriages would not get a tax break.

    What’s next? Bring back DADT so gay people won’t have to fight in the same wars as straight people. That’s assuage them.

  142. 142
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    I’m still applauding; not like you would notice.

  143. 143
    raven says:

    Go Illini!

  144. 144
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Ben Franklin:

    My message to the masses? Stop enabling the do-nothings (that means Dems)

    That’s been the strategy of the left since 1968. How’s that been working out for you so far?

  145. 145

    Libertarians are the proverbial stopped clock. They are right about the war on drugs and about not running around searching for the Hitler of the week.

    Everything else? Not so much.

  146. 146
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Todd:

    That’s been tried and found wanting

    Assertion without evidence. Do you understand-the-words-as-you-type?

  147. 147
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Ben Franklin: Hard to see over the ‘net. Want to retract your “do nothing” comment?

  148. 148
    El Cid says:

    @Ben Franklin: It’s not a mouthful. It’s simple.

    If I hold some sort of viewpoint, then my view of an issue exists a priori to any particular political figure adopting something along those lines.

    If I support some policy or policy view about something, then upon the favoring of that by some politician — whether one which I find generally supportable or apprehensible — I do not have to ask myself “do I agree with him / her”.

    That would be silly.

    That would be suggesting that my opinion of some issue is determinant upon the complete biography and voting pattern of any politician who chooses to endorse of view of that issue which may be similar to mine.

  149. 149
    raven says:

    @El Cid: whoop tee fucking doo

  150. 150
    El Cid says:

    @Mnemosyne: Maybe, but no, that’s not my point.

    My point is that you don’t have to inquire about Rand Paul’s strategies and views on an issue to have arrived at an opinion about an issue yourself.

    My views on an issue are independent of Rand Paul’s or any other Senator’s views on an issue.

    That is the point.

  151. 151
    Maus says:

    @JPL: Yep. He’s also pro-segregation, so I’m sure it all equals freedoms in the end.

  152. 152
    Ben Franklin says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Hard to see over the ‘net. Want to retract your “do nothing” comment?

    I’m so desperate I’ll applaud even when it’s tokenism.

  153. 153
    Keith G says:

    @Baud: This seems so full of sound and fury yet focused on such meager real behavior.

    What I can’t stand is the need for liberal blogs to put Rand front and center instead of supporting Democrats who may be in all likelihood even stronger on the issue, especially where Rand hasn’t actually done all that much legislatively.

    Did I miss the parade? Were there fireworks and a potluck I did not see? No one is trying to hand him the Nobel Peace Prize or even claim that he is anything other than a punk who is saying some things that need to be said, especially on his side of the aisle.

    I remember the way Orin Hatch went after Anita Hill (and after Ted Kennedy). It turned my stomach. Later, I could not understand how Kennedy could work with the piece of shit. Yet that piece of shit helped Kennedy pass the Ryan White Act and that law is helping pay for the meds that have kept me alive long after I should have croaked.

    It’s a funny fucking world.

  154. 154
    Ben Franklin says:

    @El Cid:

    You are perfectly clear. I wanted you to expand for the multitudes whose logic proceeds from the aposteriori

  155. 155
    Baud says:

    @Keith G:

    Did I miss the parade? Were there fireworks and a potluck I did not see?

    What I see is distorted coverage of a Republican of the type we often complain about in the mainstream media. I’m open to being convinced that blogs are irrelevant, so it doesn’t matter what they say, but not that the “reporting” (that I’ve seen anyway) on this issue has been fair.

  156. 156
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Keith G: Should someone work with Paul to pass good legislation? Of course. Should one be looking for a way in which Paul is going make the legislation less that good during the process? Definitely. I don’t have a speck of trust for the guy or his motivation. Also, as I noted above there are Democrats who have introduced really good legislation on the issue and yet they don’t get promoted on ostensibly liberal blogs while Paul gets a front page post. Why?

  157. 157
    ChrisNYC says:

    @Baud: This is interesting because it seems to me it goes much farther than what soon-to-be-candidate Paul is talking about in Cole’s post.

    He talks about people like GWB and Obama — presumably first time possession only offenders, who go to jail. That’s a tiny number of people and not really the incarceration problem. It’ll be interesting to see whether he opens it up on the trail to the real drugs/prison issue or whether he’s (cleverly, give him credit for that) found a way to talk nominally about drug sentences (and get all the libertarian kisses) without really talking about them in a way that he’ll take any heat for.

  158. 158
    Baud says:

    @ChrisNYC:

    I don’t see his incentive to go farther. He winks in our direction, and a lot of people on our side turn to goo. Why do more?

  159. 159
    Yutsano says:

    @SatanicPanic: Yeah, becuz a flat tax gives hospital and inheritance rights automatically conferred upon marriage. Oi.

  160. 160
    Baud says:

    @Yutsano:

    Jesus, Yutsano. Be assuaged already!

  161. 161
    Xecky Gilchrist says:

    Yes, Rand can be safely ignored by liberals. There are plenty of sane spokespeople for the same ideas.

  162. 162
    Todd says:

    @Ben Franklin:

    Assertion without evidence. Do you understand-the-words-as-you-type?

    Yes, I do, Teatard. Do you?

  163. 163
    I am not a kook says:

    I am taking up glass flameworking just so I can make an Aqua Buddha Bong.

  164. 164
    Yutsano says:

    @I am not a kook: Please tell me you’ll have an Etsy page too.

  165. 165
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Yutsano: Dude, don’t you realize that taxes trump everything?

  166. 166
    ChrisNYC says:

    @Baud: I’m with you. But, the other rationale could be (I don’t think it is) you talk about something palatable and then do more in legislation. Like with Dems and the relentless “middle class” because they’re scared of talking about poor people. I do think it’s clever, tho, politically. But I still dislike everything about him.

  167. 167
    Keith G says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Why?

    I suspect there is an element of “man bites dog” in this – a more interesting thing to throw out for discussion.

    Funny though, in the past when I mentioned that I was not happy with an idea posted by FPers here, I was told to start my own blog by some of the same wonderful folks who are criticizing Cole (But not you, O.O.)

  168. 168
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Keith G:

    I suspect there is an element of “man bites dog” in this – a more interesting thing to throw out for discussion.

    I can buy that. Still, I think it could be useful, if one cares about issues like this, to promote some of the people who are allies in general when they speak out or act as well.

  169. 169
    jay Noble says:

    I might have missed it scanning though here, but nobody has seemed to mention that Paul is not talking about decriminalizing marijuana, only about lowering the sentences. A felony on your record is going to do wonders for your future prospects no matter how short the sentence.

  170. 170
    Suffern ACE says:

    Ok. My salon email is just nuts. Karl Rove saying the 2016 Candidate could back SSM, Bryan Fischer in favor of ticketing pot like a moving violation…tea party protesting fix news for dropping Benghazi. It really was dump the fundies Sunday. The only thing I can think of is that they figured they’d all be in church and wouldn’t be listening.

  171. 171
    I am not a kook says:

    @Yutsano: You bet!

    The flameworking bit is actually true, just not the reason, or the objects I’m most interested in creating ;-) There is a funny divide in the hobbyist glass community between pipe and non-pipe makers. If you meet a guy in his twenties who talks about glass, you can nod knowingly. I have a place around here that has classes for both.

  172. 172
    patroclus says:

    @Cacti: So would I! Just saying something to Faux News is not really respect-worthy, but a real filibuster on marijuana decriminalization would completely change my mind about Rand Paul. I’m not sure if he would get my vote, but I would certainly take him seriously and not troll him. There used to be Republicans that I could respect although I wouldn’t vote for them – Rand Paul could join that group if he put his money where his mouth is.

  173. 173
    Yutsano says:

    @I am not a kook: You never know. Maybe s/he just wants to become the next Chihuly or something.

  174. 174
    I am not a kook says:

    OK, I’m going to hell. Searched for “bong” on Etsy to, ah, scout out the competition (curse you Yutsano) and this popped up first: http://www.etsy.com/listing/12.....ng-lighter

    Rasta bong cozy. Make in Portland, Oregon. Well, of course. Dunno, just cracks me up.

  175. 175
    Morbo says:

    @jay Noble: How dare you point out Rand Paul’s actual position and not the one that progressives want to project on him.

  176. 176
    eemom says:

    @Keith G:

    I suspect there is an element of “man bites dog” in this – a more interesting thing to throw out for discussion.

    I guess I can agree with that general concept, though I would state it less kindly. Rand Paul is a purely self-serving political pig who, in the service of such ambition, has twice now uttered a series of words that correlate with principles that most of us agree with.

    In this instance, as with the dronez filibuster, certain people regard the mere utterance of those words — regardless of the sincerity behind them, and more importantly, as pointed out above, regardless of the utter lack of any demonstrated intent to actually work for legislation that would effectuate any relevant result — as worthy of praise, just because they are unexpected coming from that source.

    In other words, because they are a “bright shiny object” — that which we so frequently disdain others for their moronic fascination with.

  177. 177
    The Moar You Know says:

    Paul’s legislation to end marijuana prosecutions is doing great, isn’t it?

    And how about that bill he introduced to reduce DoD funding, huh? And the one to end all funding and bring troops home from Afghanistan? God, those are just going like gangbusters, aren’t they? Not to mention the ones he introduced to outlaw drone flights over US cities and to strengthen our rights against illegal searches. Fucking Rand Paul rocks!

    Oh wait, he didn’t do any of those things and you guys are a bunch of dumbass suckers. That’s what this is.

  178. 178
    David Koch says:

    you guys are failing to see the importance of Rand Paul moving Overton’s Window to the left.

  179. 179
    I am not a kook says:

    @Yutsano: Argh, I’ve spent half my day on a tech site railing against broad brush arguments(*) so I just had to let that one out. Sigh, point conceded, but hey, I look at the traffic to a medicinal dispensary all day… Besides, there seems to be real talent in the pipe business, I got nothing against it. Whatever your reason, it’s better to make stuff than watch teevee (my better self is trying to tell me).

    (*) tl;dr: sexist behavior in professional settings: bad. Why do I have to explain this to presumable adults working in corporations today, I wish I knew. Lot of butthurt because women dare to object to “jokes” etc. Political correctness!!!!!

  180. 180
    AxelFoley says:

    Rand Paul can say the sky is blue on a clear, sunny day and I’ll still disagree with him.

    Fuck him and fuck anybody who says “Rand Paul is right”, I don’t give a fuck what the subject is.

  181. 181
    AxelFoley says:

    @ChristianPinko:

    Please. This is just another instance where a conservative wants the government to safeguard the privileges of himself and persons like him. Ten-to-one he’s smoked weed himself and thinks, “Well, if I do it it must be ok.” Just like Sen. Portman’s discovery that homosexuality is ok when he found that his son is gay.

    Bingo.

    How much does anyone wanna bet, that when Paul runs in 2016, we’ll find out this little weaselly muhfucka smoked pot back in the day?

    Again, fuck Rand Paul.

  182. 182
    AxelFoley says:

    @David Koch:

    before any True Progressive attacks Rand Paul, ask yourself why haven’t liberal icons in safe seats in deep blue states like Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren come out against the insane drug war and drones.

    Ask yourself why Paul is coming out against the drug war and drones now.

  183. 183
    Yutsano says:

    @I am not a kook: There are at least ten medical dispensaries within a mile of my residence (Aurora, MikeJ is already snickering) so lots of that stuff floating around where I live. I hypermetabolise THC however, so I eschew.

  184. 184
    lojasmo says:

    This is stupid. Almost nobody has been imprisoned for marijuana posession.

    This is pet-issue bullshit.

  185. 185
    El Cid says:

    @AxelFoley:

    Rand Paul can say the sky is blue on a clear, sunny day and I’ll still disagree with him.

    On that point?

    Is truth determined by any objective reality, or is it determined entirely by the speaker?

    What happens if Rand Paul (perhaps under mind-control) speaks up in favor of the Civil and Voting Rights act?

    You then must oppose it?

    What if Rand Paul argues that circumference of a circle = 2 pi * r?

    Can Rand Paul defeat any initiative you support merely by supporting it too?

  186. 186
    El Cid says:

    @lojasmo: Disregarding the several thousand cases of imprisonment based on marijuana possession, being arrested and jailed on possession is serious enough for lots of average people.

    I’ve known people who lost jobs and thousands of dollars based on casual arrests for marijuana possession. Thankfully it wasn’t the sort of thing used to nail down ‘three strikes’ violations for black folk and such, but still, this isn’t merely a game to them.

  187. 187
    eclecticbrotha says:

    Since when did minor arrests/convictions automatically disqualify you from the office of presidency? If Rand Paul’s so concerned about urban youth having their lives destroyed by the legal system he can start talking to some of the southern states that refuse to allow the formerly incarcerated to vote after they’ve served their time in prison. Also, its pretty fucking insulting to keep hearing whites reference urban youth only when they want to legalize weed. Legal weed is not gonna save the fucking hood. Have a seat with that bullshit already.

  188. 188
    El Cid says:

    If Strom Thurmond had chosen to support rather than filibuster the Civil and/or Voting Rights act, would Martin Luther King Jr. suddenly be forced to oppose it?

  189. 189
    Corner Stone says:

    @electricbrotha: Right on!

  190. 190
    Corner Stone says:

    @lojasmo:

    This is pet-issue bullshit.

    “pet-issue bullshit”. Pure white privilege showing through here. We’ll thank you to check your privilege at the door.

  191. 191
    TCG says:

    @David Koch: Rand Paul isn’t moving jack shit because outside of the internet and the media he’s as inconsequential as his father. Hell he’s even less so.

  192. 192
    I am not a kook says:

    @Yutsano: I pray to Aqua Buddha to cure your terrible hypermetabolism ;-)

  193. 193
    fuckwit says:

    This is the New Repuke Strategy: use the Libertarians in the party to peel off some progressives. Divide and conquer.

    Oh, and what’s Mr. “Libertarian”‘s position on gay marriage? Ah, I thought so. And separation of church and state? Uh-huh. And a woman’s right to control her own body? Hmmm…. interesting “libertarian” you got there.

    We have been through this already. Without doubt, the most likely people to actually vote for and implement marijuana legalization– and other key civil liberties issues– will be, now and for the long likely future, Democrats.

    The War Against Some Drugs does indeed fuck over the poor and minorities in horrible, structural ways. What’s the percentage of African Americans with jail records right now?

    Pay no attention to the shiny objects over there in wingnut-land. Pay more attention to electing pro-legalization Democrats.

  194. 194
    Joey Maloney says:

    Yesh, he’s right about this. So what? Get back to me when he tries to do something about it, like, oh, I don’t know, propose legislation and work to get it passed.

    No doubt someone else has said this already in the thread, but I can’t be arsed to read almost 200 comments before I post.

  195. 195
    Maus says:

    @El Cid:

    What happens if Rand Paul (perhaps under mind-control) speaks up in favor of the Civil and Voting Rights act?

    Pretty much irrelevant considering all he wants is to revoke the CRA.

  196. 196
    NR says:

    @Ben Franklin:

    Not getting things done is not the fault of Democrats. They’re waiting to see which way the wind blows.

    Um, do you realize that your second sentence directly contradicts your first?

  197. 197
    sherparick says:

    1. The Charles Pierce rule with both Pauls. They will make sense for about 5 minutes, but at the 5:00:01 mark they will go off the rails into Cloudcookooland. Evidences: Last week Senator Rand Paul introduced the “Personhood Act,” defining a human being as coming into existence “at the moment of conception.” Besides making several kinds of birth control illegal (IUDs, Plan B, Morning after pills) it will also, by operation of law, will require an inquest and homicide investigation for every miscarriage (and between 10% to 25% of pregnancies miscarry) since every miscarriage will be an “unnatural death.” http://shine.yahoo.com/healthy.....00040.html

    2. And on economic issues, Paul wants to return the U.S. to the Gilded Age. No environmental laws, no social security, no unemployment insurance, no food stamps, no Medicare, no Medicaid. And of course a “Flat Tax” that will amount to a huge tax cut for the upper 1%, but an actual tax increase for the about everyone else. http://www.scribd.com/doc/8451.....ZE-AMERICA

  198. 198
    kay says:

    I don’t even think he’s “right about this”.

    He says he wants to send it back to the states where local judges can use discretion and show compassion.

    Low level pot possession is already at “the state level” and there’s nothing magically compassionate about “local judges” or, even “discretion”

    Local judges can be petty tyrants, stupid and mean and vindictive, and the flip side of “discretion” is “bias”. Only an idiot thinks “discretion” means more compassion. It could just as likely mean “harsher sentencing for people who aren’t GWB”

    This is a complicated issue. Rand Paul might want to spend less time talking and more time listening because he leapfrogged into the Senate based on who his dad is. Might be a learning curve there.

    These statements he makes are fantasy. They’re based on ideology rather tgan reality.

  199. 199
    Gene Starwind says:

    It is entirely possible to agree with Paul’s position on a specific issue without having support everything he stands for. I sure as hell do not. I DO agree with his stands on UAVs and drugs, but I would forget his name on everything else. The War on Drugs is an epic boondoggle that should have ended decades ago.

  200. 200
    Gene Starwind says:

    @kay: Did you flunk out of civics in grade school? The Senate is a parallel branch of the legislature with a different composition and has duties the House does not, just as the House as duties and powers the Senate does not. You are NOT “promoted” to the Senate from the House. This is NOT the House of Lords.
    This is NOT all that complicated an issue, unless you add all sorts of mindless badinage that the pro-drug war folks like to use.
    Also, several states have legalized possession of small amounts of pot for personal use. Would you have the DEA jackboot through those states rounding up all of the potheads to fill our prisons further beyond capacity than they already are? Are YOU going to pay for it? Don’t ask me to.

  201. 201
    Gene Starwind says:

    @lojasmo: Yours is one of the most ignorant comments I’ve yet read. I know quite a few people who got sent to prison for simple possession of marijuana. The late actor Robert Mitchum did over a year in prison for a single joint, so don’t you EVER tell me that doesn’t happen.
    I used to work in a federal prison, not as guard though. I met quite a few in for just simple possession of pot. Max sentence under federal law is 3 years. Look it up under Title 21 US Code sec 841, et sequitur.

  202. 202
    kay says:

    I love the conceit of libertarians and “poor kids in the inner city”

    I got news for Rand. Poor kids in rural areas get hammered regularly by those simple and pure local judges, sometimes based on the “discretion” that comes from a parent or sibling who has already been in front of that compassionate local judge. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree is a fairly common assumption.

    But lets not talk about that, because rural areas are run by conservatives.

  203. 203
    Cassidy says:

    ANything that might remotely sound like a good idea, coming out a Pual’s mouth, is either self serving or so ignorantly blind to the impact said thing would have on anyone other than southern/ midwestern accented white people that it can be disregarded as plain dumb.

  204. 204
    The Narrator says:

    @Paul Gottlieb: I guess that’s why he is concerned about drone attacks too… and why he repeatedly emphasized in his filibuster that it was especially minorities who are at risk of being targeted by drones.

  205. 205

    […] Rand Paul gets it right on pot laws: I’m with John Cole on this: It would be nice to have a better spokesperson here, but at least Rand Paul is willing to say […]

  206. 206
    craig says:

    @Princess: There is a difference between ingesting something and murdering someone:

    One is a violent act. Can you guess what one it is?

  207. 207
    Kay says:

    @Gene Starwind:

    I didn’t say he was promoted to the Senate. You said that. I.m not talking about the US House. This is from his biography:

    Paul ran for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008 and attracted a small but passionate following which helped him win the U.S. Senate seat for Kentucky in 2010.

    His single public service job prior to his legacy ascension to the US Senate was running an anti-tax non-profit. It is delusional to think that “sending it back to the states” makes one bit of difference in terms of people going to jail, which is what he’s supposedly concerned about.

    I think it’s amusing that he pontificates constantly on sending everything back to the states, yet he began his political career at the federal level.

    He doesn’t know jack shit about “the states” or the supposed “compassion” of local judges. It is libertarian dogma that local and state government are somehow purer and more holy than the federal government because it’s “closer to the people”. In real life “closer to the people” cam mean a harsh sentence based on having the wrong last name in rural jurisdictions. Local and state governments (where Paul wants to send “it” back to) are not inherently less “jackbooted” to use your term. That’s ridiculous. It;’s based on this romantic notion that local and state governments are run by yeoman farmers and common sense shopkeepers. They can also be run by petty, stupid, bigoted tyrants with total control over fiefdoms and “poor kids”. But that contradicts the dogma, so we must pretend that jackboots are worn exclusively by the evil feds. It’s pure bullshit.

  208. 208
    Kay says:

    @Gene Starwind:

    This issue is complicated. Here’s Rand Paul’s compassionate local judges who are close to the people in action:

    Cedrico Green can’t exactly remember how many times he went back and forth to juvenile. When asked to venture a guess he says, “Maybe 30.” He was put on probation by a youth court judge for getting into a fight when he was in eighth grade. Thereafter, any of Green’s school-based infractions, from being a few minutes late for class to breaking the school dress code by wearing the wrong color socks, counted as violations of his probation and led to his immediate suspension and incarceration in the local juvenile detention center.
    But Green wasn’t alone. A bracing Department of Justice lawsuit filed last month against Meridian, Miss., where Green lives and is set to graduate from high school this coming year, argues that the city’s juvenile justice system has operated a school to prison pipeline that shoves students out of school and into the criminal justice system, and violates young people’s due process rights along the way.

    Those jackbooted thugs at the federal level had to sue to stop the “discretion” that was sending poor kids straight from school to jail. How about we ask these “ppor kids who made mistakes” about the Holy Libertarian Writ of states rights? The local crooks would still be doing it if they hadn’t been stopped. Oddly, Rand Paul never mentions the shield part of federal law, when people need protection from those simple shopkeepers and honest workman at the state and local level. Why is that?

    Send it back to the states! is not an answer to this question and it’s not governing. It’s rote libertarian dogma.

  209. 209
    Jonathan says:

    While y’all partisans are busy pledging allegiance to the most aloof WASP wearing the appropriate color shirt for your lifestyle, the people who actually know and understand how things are run are busy putting their efforts behind the officials who get them results.

    Ask yourselves again why you’re not getting policy results. It’s because you don’t want them. What you really want is to compete — the pinnacle of American idiocy and shortsightedness. If you did want policy results, you’d rein these officials and media organs in, vote for whoever does your bidding and turn your back on them when they don’t, just like the people who are actually getting their results.

    Why do rank-and-file Democrats align themselves with an organization whose goal is to perpetuate the problems they purport to solve?

  210. 210

    […] * John Cole, Balloon Juice, "This is Just Plain Common Sense": […]

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] * John Cole, Balloon Juice, "This is Just Plain Common Sense": […]

  2. […] Rand Paul gets it right on pot laws: I’m with John Cole on this: It would be nice to have a better spokesperson here, but at least Rand Paul is willing to say […]

Comments are closed.