Tea Party Destroyer

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:55 pm

I have done the impossible before. I intend to do it again.

I haven't had so much fun since I was promoting Polywell. And you know how that worked out.

TDPerk · Post by **TDPerk** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:11 pm

Which side am I on now? Not yours in this regard at this time. Different priorities.

"It is not nice to be abusing abused children."

Which is beside the point, isn't it?

The Tea Party needs first and foremost to stop the bulk of the hideous increase in "discretionary" spending of borrowed funds. However unconstitutional, the war on drugs is "baseline" spending and not a part of that.

It's a distraction from the main chance.

And really, given how you're operating outside your area of expertise--and the from the way I've seen you spamming varied and sundry unrelated threads across the internet--I don't think you'll be making friends and influencing people.

But you'll be influencing people, no doubt.

TDPerk · Post by **TDPerk** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:12 pm

"I have done the impossible before."

By the by, obviously, you never have done the impossible.

I can't even say you've done the unlikely.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:19 pm

When I was working for a large aerospace company my bosses thought I was doing the impossible. But no matter.

If the Democrats make this an issue and I think they will

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... ttern.html

only the libertarian wing of the Party (the smallest fraction) will have an answer. The social conservatives will play right into Democrat hands. I look forward to watching it unfold.

I actually think they could cause some serious hurt by branding the Republicans as racists. BTW I have been writing about this Republican vulnerability for years. And Drug War Racism.

Fogg covered D.C. for the DEA during the late 80s and 90s. In a statement from Law Enforcement Again Prohibition, Fogg says, "I personally witnessed racially biased enforcement procedures when I ran a joint DEA task force...When I requested equal enforcement of upscale suburban areas, I met internal resistance." So Fogg never busted down doors in Chevy Chase, McLean, or Bethesda? Shocking.

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... -drug.html

The Ds might not win on this (OTOH they might). But they will seriously cut into the R margin of victory and they will have an issue for the next campaign. Unless the Rs get out front. Which if you are any evidence they won't. I look forward to endless amusement esp as more Black officers come out on this. Most of the Rs won't know what hit them. "But we had the economic thing sewn up....." Heh.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:26 pm

I personally witnessed racially biased enforcement - Fogg

Now why would that be? Aren't we supposed to be equal under the law?

BTW the stats back him up. So we have anecdote and supporting statistics. What do social conservatives have?

I have said for years that the war will be over when the police come down as hard on whites as they do on minorities. Whites would not stand for that level of policing.

More SWAT raids in white neighborhoods. Yea!!!!

And why am I so sure the Ds will run on this? They have nothing else.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:38 pm

MSimon wrote:
I actually think they could cause some serious hurt by branding the Republicans as racists.

I don't know where you get this. My recollection is that they haven't ever stopped calling Republicans Racist. The accusation has never before rang more hollow than since Obama's election. It has become such a non-threat that people nowadays are just making fun of the "racist" accusation. For Example,

Ace of Spades does regular commentary making fun of the "anyone criticizing Obama is a RACIST! " meme. From all the people *I* know in the Conservative movement and Republican politics in general, they have never ever cared less about being called racists. The accusation simply has no further political benefit to be wrung out of it.

Axil · Post by **Axil** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:55 pm

The majority of substance abusers are mentally ill and use these mind altering substances to self medicate. They do so because they can't afford professional psychiatric care.

These poor people eventually hit bottom and end up in jail rather than a more appropriate mental hospital setting where the rich will usually end up( The Betty Ford Center )

The libertarian can not deal with reaching out to support the mentally ill who are in need and can't assume any responsibility for themselves. This is one weakness of the independently oriented libertarian way of thinking.

This is consistent with libertarian resistance to universal health care.

I am interested in debating the efficacy of a country taking responsibility for their mentally ill.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:57 pm

D,

But this time they have evidence to make it stick and socons will be their willing assistants.

It will be so delicious watching this unfold.

Think of the racists from the 60s. It took a generation for that stuff to damp down. And despite Democrats being racists from the beginning their PR was better. So they got the credit.

You want to continue Drug Prohibition? Demand equal enforcement against whites. Of course that is no permanent cure because whites will not tolerate SWAT raids in upscale neighborhoods. Or even middle class neighborhoods.

Since you know this topic well from our interactions you ought to warn your compatriots of what is coming. Not that you will change any minds.

Romney and Perry will get hammered on the issue. The best hope for Republicans is if Socon darling Palin comes out against Prohibition. Then the issue is off the table and we can hammer the Ds on the economy.

I'm a Palinista.

Why am I so sure the Ds will do this? It fits their playbook and they have nothing else.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:07 pm

Axil wrote:The majority of substance abusers are mentally ill and use these mind altering substances to self medicate. They do so because they can't afford professional psychiatric care.

These poor people eventually hit bottom and end up in jail rather than a more appropriate mental hospital setting where the rich will usually end up( The Betty Ford Center )

The libertarian can not deal with reaching out to support the mentally ill who are in need and can't assume any responsibility for themselves. This is one weakness of the independently oriented libertarian way of thinking.

This is consistent with libertarian resistance to universal health care.

I am interested in debating the efficacy of a country taking responsibility for their mentally ill.

Uh. Dude. You know nothing about libertarians. They were anti-prohibition before most of the rest of the society even considered it.

BTW "universal care" is a misnomer. But it is good PR. The nomenklatura will get the best treatment and the rest of us will get what ever the government allows. I'd prefer I be allowed to buy what I can afford.

Why does that help? Well the incentive is to make treatment cheaper to expand the market.

What is the incentive for government: minimize, minimize, minimize. Especially if the pols want the money for something else.

The deal is universal care is not universal and the incentives are wrong.

And incentives matter. Otherwise the USSR would have won the cold war.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:21 pm

And let me add that the vast majority of illegal drug users are not mentally ill. They are suffering from PTSD caused by trauma. Mostly child abuse trauma in America.

BTW if you are an example of how Ds will use this issue they will screw it up.

Let me go over the points that will hurt the other side:

1. Unconstitutional
2. Abuse of abused children
3. Racist enforcement

You have to think like us to beat us. Reports I have read say Ds don't get Rs but Rs get Ds. Big handicap for you.

It appears we have two stupid parties. And two evil parties.

Gonna be a fun election.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:47 pm

And for the rest of my friends (that sure is optimistic),

Why am I helping the Ds on this? There is an old phrase that explains it:

Though the heavens may fall, let justice be done.

KitemanSA · Post by **KitemanSA** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 11:42 pm

Axil wrote: The libertarian can not deal with reaching out to support the mentally ill who are in need and can't assume any responsibility for themselves. This is one weakness of the independently oriented libertarian way of thinking.

The libertarians I know are a pretty caring and giving crowd (except for the objectivist fringe.) I suspect the general charity of Americans would fill the need while the waste in the system would largely go away.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 12:04 am

D,

What you don't get is that the Ds are excellent mind warriors. They have lulled you to sleep with false charges of racism and now that they have a real one you dismiss it out of hand, "Just another one."

You would make a lousy general.

All warfare is deception. And the Ds are at war with you. While you are playing "debate" with them.

If it weren't so serious it would be all too funny.

TDPerk · Post by **TDPerk** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 12:57 am

"Though the heavens may fall, let justice be done."

It isn't justice. It's just you picking the wrong time to wail away on your hobby horse.

Fap.

Fap.

Fap.

Justice is hewing to the main chance for the best improvement.

What you want is a job for Palin's 2nd term.

TDPerk · Post by **TDPerk** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 1:02 am

"They have lulled you to sleep with false charges of racism and now that they have a real one you dismiss it out of hand, "Just another one.""

It isn't a real one.

It is possible you are unaware the responsibility for the disparate sentences between powder and crack cocaine exists solely at the insistence of primarily black Democrats That "socons" have nothing to do with it!