How can the united states be a bastion of freedom and a mixing pot of culture when we have leaders who selectively decide which cultures thrive and which do not. How can we be the land of the free when we are not even free to explore our innermost sanctums?

We aren’t. And they don’t want us to be free. It has nothing to do with science or harm reduction. It is purely about suppression and profiting off of said suppression.

I don’t think that the political will exists in the USA for the execution of all drug users to be possible, actually.

I don’t think that countries which aggressively prosecute drug wars primarily do so because the order comes down from the state, either…southeast Asia prosecutes it’s “drug war” in the way it does of it’s culture vis-a-vis drugs and it’s history, for example China’s involvment with the British and opium. I think the actions of the state reflect that.

The belief of anyone in government that the state can effectively just liquidate drugs/drug traffickers from “on high” is ridiculous and delusional. Calderon’s government isn’t failing to end the cartels because they haven’t put enough Mexican marines on the streets, or they haven’t shot enough people, it’s failing because Mexico’s political system has been mired in corruption for many decades, and drugs are just what that systemic corruption is being channeled into at the moment. Although I agree with the point that the war on drugs really isn’t about ending the drug trade.

I was struck by how a guy could talk (write actually) out of one side of his mouth on American’s personal liberty and freedom in one chapter. Then in the next chapter justify killing and imprisoning people along with destroying their and their family’s lives over their voluntary choice to imbibe whatever into their own bodies.

Hypocrisy knows no bounds from our rulers.

One, I think drug laws would be wrong even if they worked, just like, say, laws mandating the ritual sacrifice of the first born in time of war or natural disaster would be wrong, even if people actually followed them.

Two, I think drug laws work perfectly well at their intended function, even though they fail at their stated function. And they could easily be made to work at their stated function, given enough political will. Executing people for possession or use of drugs will nearly end drug use in a country, by killing the users if not by means of terror. Given that this is probably politically possible in America, it’s likely that the actual end being pursued is not really drug prohibition itself.

But in the case of a drug warrior who once used drugs hypocrisy is an even lamer thing to attack, because there’s nothing wrong per se with drug use. It’s the talk they’re talking that’s objectionable. Would that their spirit were as weak as their flesh.

That’s why I say that the possibly fake/apocryphal quote is actually the least damning thing about Gingrich in Radley’s post, and would be even if the quote were Gingrich’s exact words.

Look, it’s simple. The Republican establishment wants Romney because a) he’s an amoral scion of undeserved wealth just like them and b) it’s his turn. But the Republican base doesn’t trust him because of his self-evident lack of any sort of moral compass; they want one whose needle is pinned at “batshit insane” and Romney just isn’t convincing enough.

So they’re rotating through each not-Romney. But since it’s not about policy as such, but personality and willingness to mouth the proper tribal slogans, each not-Romney is highly vulnerable to media ridicule, where in this case “ridicule” is defined as “accurate reporting of the candidate’s past statements.”

Romney’s going to be the last man standing, if for no other reason than he has practically limitless personal funds to keep his campaign going. The Republican base will be vociferous in their hatred until approximately 0.0007 milliseconds after he wins the nominating vote at the convention. From then on it’ll be all Kenyan Muslimofascistcommienazi, all the time, straight through to November.

Remind me: we won World War Two by shooting enemy soldiers, not our own citizens, right?