Pat Robertson Calls For Relaxed Marijuana Possession Laws

[OriginalGeek]

Source: Huffington post

...

Television evangelist Pat Robertson took to the airwaves of "The 700 Club" last week to condemn arrests for marijuana possession, as reported earlier on the blog for the organization Law Enforcement Against Prohibition.

...

"I just think it's shocking how many of these young people wind up in prison and they get turned into hardcore criminals because they had a possession of a very small amount of controlled substance. The whole thing is crazy. We've said, 'we're conservative, we're tough on crime.' That's baloney. It's costing us billions and billions of dollars."

Robertson blamed left-wing lawmakers for the harsh sanctions.

"What is it we're doing that is different?" he said. "What we're doing is turning a bunch of liberals loose writing laws -- there's this punitive spirit, the always want to punish people. It's time for change! More and more prisons, more and more crime. It's just shocking, especially this business about drug offenses. It's time we stop locking up people for possession of marijuana. We just can't do it anymore...You don't lock 'em up for booze unless they kill somebody on the highway."

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/06/pat-robertson-marijuana-pot-_n_1324828.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009

---

Hey if he wants to blame me for previously harsh possession laws, I'll take that hit. AS long as it leads to the eventual decriminalization. Way too many lives are being ruined by marijuana laws.

[FiveGoodMen]

1. Yes, of course, it's liberals who want to put everyone in jail for victimless crimes...

Sheesh!

[OriginalGeek]

3. I know right?

I think he must have been high...

[bluedigger]

2. This isn't the Onion?

I gotta put down the pipe...

[OriginalGeek]

4. I SWEAR I thought the exact same thing

when I saw the headline...I had to look 3 times at the URL to make sure I wasn't being tricked...

[think]

5. other than blaming the left I am stunningly in amazement...

[montanto]

6. When did he start smoking weed I wonder?

[OriginalGeek]

9. He's pretty old

and I have heard that if you live long enough, some kind of cancer is the most likely thing to get you. I admit I wondered if that was the reason for his position here - I am not aware of him having any drug friendly views in the past.

It boggled my mind to see him say liberals are the punitive ones but I guess any chance he can take to tear at us is good enough for him. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see a hypocritical thought come from the likes of Pat Robertson but I also don;t wanna rock that boat lol...if he can get his zombies to agree that's one step closer to legalization. I expect he'll take a stand against full legalization but decriminalization is a step in the right direction (unless it get's stuck there and hnever gets moved past decrim...)


On second thought, I am pretty sure I have heard him rant about liberals letting criminals go too early and too often...so yeah, his hypocrisy is confirmed in my mind...

[Joe Bacon]

42. Well, how else can he get in the mood to do that "Speaking in Tongues" shtick?

[kestrel91316]

10. BINGO

[Enrique]

14. i knew it all along

[patricia92243]

45. Looks like GW Bush. n/t

[AlbertCat]

16. When did he start smoking weed I wonder?

He's probably started exploiting some South American tribe to grow and produce it so he can sell it. That's the only reason I can think this selfish fuck would have anything to say about the law against it.

[TBF]

22. Either that or he has found himself with some health ailments

Funny how someone can change their mind completely once they are the ones who need help.

[NAO]

33. He opposes criminalization b/c he knows how much it costs

and he does not want tax dollars used for it. He would rather collect money in "offerings" and convert the potheads to Christ.

And, yes, he probably has some land in South America where he has "invested the Lord's money" in a marijuana plantation.

Glory je to Besus!

[tridim]

7. Huh wha-whaaaat?

:

[saras]

8. If you contrast liberal/conservative he's wrong. If you contrast liberal/progressive he's right

The right-wingers are largely responsible for the worst anti-drug fanaticism, whether crazy hater or big pharma and prisons, but there's a bunch of people who think of themselves as "liberal", vote Democrat a lot, and are extremely anti-drug, especially when they have school-age children (presumably forgetting or harshly judging their own, and their parents' and THEIR parents', youthful experiences). Even if they don't disapprove of pot, they're willing to sacrifice pot users to get crack or meth or ecstasy or Four Loko or whatever they're afraid of this time around.

But with Pat it's not so much a clock that's right twice a day as it is a clock that, when kicked up into the air like a football, is for a moment an accurate sextant.

[OriginalGeek]

12. outstanding!

"But with Pat it's not so much a clock that's right twice a day as it is a clock that, when kicked up into the air like a football, is for a moment an accurate sextant. "

I love that so much! I literally did lol - my office mate wants to know what's up.

[RainDog]

27. GREAT

from the article -

"I became sort of a hero of the hippie culture, I guess, when I said I think we ought to decriminalize the possession of marijuana," Robertson said,

He also just said that people shouldn't live anywhere in the country that has tornadoes b/c god is going to make tornadoes and hurricanes to let the earth let off steam.

He spoke to LEAP, so they're trying to reach out to the crazies - if that's how they'll almost sort of get it, so be it.

[Recursion]

40. Prohibitionism is part and parcel with progressivism

The fiasco of alcohol prohibition was the climax of the first progressive movement. It's one of the reason I don't like the broader left's move to the label "progressive" -- Herbert Hoover was a Progressive.

[saras]

47. It's why I don't let other people define my movements - especially long-dead people

Alcohol prohibition wasn't completely a fiasco - the problem it attacked (GIGANTIC amounts of hard liquor used to control the working class) got solved. Some OTHER problems showed up, as the rich were completely unwilling to go along, wanting a separate law for the poor, and youth culture, a new thing to the West at the time, was as susceptible to lifestyle advertising - smoking and drinking - as they are now. We had just invented the teenager, although we hadn't named them yet.

The thing about progressivism (assuming that such a thing exists anywhere but in the minds of the enemies of individual progressives - isms are an intrinsically antiprogressive way of organizing one's thinking) is that it doesn't have an overriding principle or direction except to start where you are and make things better. There's no guarantee that's a linear path, much as there's no guarantee that democratic voters are always educated enough to make good choices. Likewise, being a true Democrat means supporting the democratic choice of stupid, antidemocratic laws, or asserting that you actually have other principles than democracy that you think should overrule in this instance. In a country with no mass media and no advertising, I'd probably be a democrat, unless they had an anti-majoritarian diversity party.

One thing that really baffles me about conservatives is their insistence on hanging on to REALLY old ideas, and the individuals connected with them, as though there is a real cultural phenomenon that living people participate in, called Darwinism, for example. It's a bizarrely unrealistic way of trying to understand others' positions, rather like insisting that Newtonian astrology is all as true as his mechanics, and that you can't use one without the other.

Herbert Hoover had a "progressive" label tacked on him. Wikipedia calls him a leading conservative. As fixed political positions, they are mutually exclusive. But - given his background, Hoover could be considered "progressive" in that he was attempting to be more liberal than his background. He was also a mining engineer, which has always been a horribly antiprogressive, environmentally destructive business. And there's this fabulously progressive quote: If a man has not made a million dollars by the time he is forty, he is not worth much."

But in the real world, who or what Hoover was matters about as much as what Beowulf was.

Yeah, labels are really helpful.

Back at the beginning of the twentieth century, progressives made a couple of gigantic mistakes. One was to believe that corporate culture was malleable enough to be directed towards human progress, and the other was to believe that large institutions could be made as humane as they could be made precise. They were wrong on both counts. Medicine turned to eugenics, psychology turned into industrial behaviorism, industrialists turned to fascism, and by the end of the thirties most progressives had moved far beyond that, into exploring socialism.

The rest of America STILL believes that corporate culture is malleable enough to be directed towards human progress, and that bigger and more "efficient" is better.

And, BTW, I enforce a private "prohibition" around my personal space. I just cannot stomach drunks, in any capacity. When the human goes away (about 1 1/2 to 2 drinks) I just find the hairless monkeys that are left to be really revolting and unattractive, and they intuitively sense my dislike and start throwing poo. So I tend to sympathize with the goals of prohibition. I don't want to FORBID alcohol, I want to live among people who have outgrown (not repressed) the need for it.

[sofa king]

11. Well, I see he's found the Fox News Green Room.

[bluestateguy]

13. I will not allow myself to agree with Pat Robertson on anything

Therefore, I now favor stepping up the war on drugs.

[Enrique]

15. this is a good thing

same with the things Ron Paul says that are true. I don't want anyone to support Ron Paul nor Pat Robertson, but it's good they're saying these things that are true and very important.

[bayareaboy]

17. Folks I know about farms in Berkeley... ...

But stoners in church!

[Deep13]

18. Wait, what? nt

[marble falls]

19. whooooaaaaaaaa, duuuuude ........

AMEN!

[Taverner]

20. Why is it everyone and their mother is calling for this, yet our govt does nothing?

[OriginalGeek]

37. THAT is a great question

what are they still afraid of? I know a shitload of people who smoke pot. They are not all liberal. In fact, at this point in time, I know more conservative pot-smokers than liberal. I know a crap load of liberal ex-pot smokers though. (Including me. lol, we all did what we wanted and quit - they are just getting around to it now?)

I'm hoping to see full legalization before I die.

[SomeGuyInEagan]

49. Money. It's always money. As with any war, there's lots to be made from running a drug war.

http://www.esquire.com/the-side/richardson-report/drug-war-facts-090109

[RZM]

21. Good n/t

[Katashi_itto]

23. This is real?

[madokie]

24. You started off pretty good there pat but went downhill pretty dang quick after that

f**k you pat with a big rough ass diamond you rat

[Incitatus]

26. First time I've ever heard a conservative accuse

the left of being against marijuana.

[RainDog]

29. the sad truth is that arrests DO increase with Democrats

this issue is a "kick the dog to look tough" for them b/c people like Robertson think this is about events that took place 40 years ago with no context in between.

I think it's safe to say that we're beyond the Reagan era on this issue - far beyond.

[SomethingFishy]

30. Liberals? Really?

It was a liberal who started the DEA? It was a liberal who started the "War On Drugs"? It was a liberal who appointed a "Drug Czar"? It was a liberal who ran the "Just Say No" campaign? It was a liberal who started DARE?

FUCK YOU PAT. You and your freak buddies own this, nice fucking try though.

[Recursion]

43. In that Nixon was a liberal by today's standards, yes

And progressivism in general has a pretty sad history of prohibitionism.

[NAO]

31. Robertson's pot comments in Fox News Story from 2010; I got a flyer 6 mos ago; Newt also agrees

I got a fundraising letter from Drug Policy Alliance about 6 months ago, and it had a very similar quote from Robertson.

I don't keep junk mail, but I'm pretty sure they had had a similar blurb from Newt Gingrich.

When I researched the quote, I found this Fox News story from December 2010 where Robertson makes the same pitch:

Robertson calls for sensible drug policy - Dec 2010
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/24/pat-robertson-stirs-pot-marijuana-laws/

[NAO]

32. Newt Gingrich: "I don't think actually locking up users is a very good thing"

clipped from interview with Newt:

"I don't think actually locking up users is a very good thing," he said, suggesting instead an approach that would create an array of federal incentives for more effective treatment of drug use.

source: Yahoo News Interview
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/newt-gingrich-drug-laws-entitlements-campaigning-yahoo-news-152936251.html

[neverforget]

34. Bearing false witness is a sin you old goat.

[Kalidurga]

35. This is what conservatives are going to hear...

They will completely tune out all the stuff where keeping people in prison for non-violent crimes is bad. But, they will hear all the stuff about liberals having a punish fixation. So, basically they won't hear the truth but they will focus on the lies.

[Marksman_91]

36. Wow, for once, I actually agree with him

on something. Still doesn't change the fact that I don't like him.

[99th_Monkey]

38. Right-fucking-on Pat!!! Congratulations!!!

On joining the Human Race.

I'm loving it.

May this crack become a chasm,
a torrent of "Bible-believing" wakefulness,
to find a way to truly celebrate diversity.

That is certainly what our "Lord" who
Robertson prays so virvently to,
with his every breath,

Actually had in mind,
when he said "Love your neighbor,
as yourself".

or like the Old Testiment where God sez,
"Let justice and rightousness roll down,
like a mighty stream or waterfall."

Thank you Pat R. for pulling your
head out of your ass finally,
after lo these many years.

[Comrade Grumpy]

39. An element of historical truth in Robertson blaming liberals.

The first big drug law, the 1917 Harrison Narcotics Act, was pushed by Progressives.

Marijuana prohibition in 1937 was passed by a New Deal Congress.

Laws increasing penalties in the 1950s were passed by Democrats.

But after that, liberals merely acquiesced in a conservative drug war crusade. Or sometimes actively collaborated, right, Joe Biden?

[Recursion]

44. We opened this door by pretending "liberal", "leftist", and "progressive" mean the same things

That's a result of a largely defunct coalition of convenience from the 1960s.

[Monk06]

41. Hey pat, pass the Kouchie on the left hand side !!!!!!!!

[Iggo]

46. He's still alive?

[Uncle Joe]

48. I will take the hit as well, cough, cough pass it on.

Thanks for the thread, Original Geek.

[Remmah2]

50. Who'd of thunk this?

He's mellowing in his old age (not).

[BadtotheboneBob]

51. Bong hits for Pat!

... at least for the "stop locking up people for possession of marijuana" thing. Otherwise, well... never mind.

[sarcasmo]

52. Puff, puff pass.