Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (648694)	3/23/2012 9:40:14 PM
From: joseffy	1 Recommendation Respond to of 1583391

Newt calls Obama's Trayvon Martin comments 'disgraceful' By MAGGIE HABERMAN 3/23/12 politico.com Per POLITICO's Ginger Gibson, Newt Gingrich accused President Obama of playing race: Newt Gingrich called Obama's remarks about Trayvon Martin "disgraceful" in an interview with Sean Hannity, according to CBS/National Journal. “It’s not a question of who that young man looked like. Any young American of any ethnic background should be safe, period. We should all be horrified no matter what the ethnic background," Gingrich said. "Is the President suggesting that if it had been a white who had been shot that would be ok because it didn’t look like him?" Earlier in the day Gingrich told reporters that he thought the case should be investigated and suggested the shooter was at fault. "That’s just nonsense dividing this country up. It is a tragedy this young man was shot," Gingrich continued on Hannity's show. "It would have been a tragedy if he had been Puerto Rican or Cuban or if he had been white or if he had been Asian-American of if he’d been a Native American. At some point we ought to talk about being Americans. When things go wrong to an American. It is sad for all Americans. Trying to turn it into a racial issue is fundamentally wrong. I really find it appalling.” Obama has gotten some criticism for discussing a pending legal matter.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (648694)	3/23/2012 10:11:08 PM
From: average joe	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583391

"If the store won't sell beer to kids, there's usually a Mexican guy standing around who'll go in and buy it for them. Pot wouldn't be any different." An ethnic Mexican American or illegal immigrant Mexican? I have come to the conclusion after dealing with a pot-head employee that caused one very extraordinary employee to take extended leave that all drugs should be illegal and that includes pot. Doctors that get patients hooked on OxyContin should pay for their detox and rehab and support them while they get back on their feet. The buck has to stop with someone and the insurance fund for doctors has lots of money. No one but a psychiatrist should be able to prescribe antidepressants and only after other treatment options have failed.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (648694)	3/24/2012 3:06:53 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583391

>> If cocaine were legal, why would we need any treatment programs? Especially mandatory ones? I think the Portugal model is pretty close to right. >> Regulated and controlled? Half the convenience stores in Houston are run by Pakistanis and they'll sell anything in the store to anyone who can push dollar bills across the counter. If the store won't sell beer to kids, there's usually a Mexican guy standing around who'll go in and buy it for them. Pot wouldn't be any different. This is surely true in many places but it will still be a huge improvement over the current situation, which puts a pot smoker in touch with everything from pot to crack to Oxycontin. The fundamental point that is so misunderstood by almost everyone is that drug abuse should NOT be a criminal justice matter. It is, de facto, a health care issue and should be treated as such. However, the criminal justice system is so deeply rooted in so-called drug crimes that many (not all) law enforcement and justice system personnel can't see it rationally. It is one of the most corrupt government programs in existence. It should be a clue when one of the biggest lobbies for stiffer drug penalties in California was the penal workers union. The money seized from drug criminals is unaccounted for and creates a slush fund for local law enforcement to buy everything from surplus tanks to grenade launchers with. It is so bad that people have been KILLED because of squabbles over who is going to get the money from the drug bust. It is pathetic. >> I've seen Portugal mentioned as an example before. It sounds like there's still a drug war there, albeit one with different tactics: There is not any debate over whether they are better off now versus before. Here is what is important: "Since decriminalization, lifetime prevalence rates (which measure how many people have consumed a particular drug or drugs over the course of their lifetime) in Portugal have decreased for various age groups. For students in the 7th-9th grades (13-15 years old), the rate decreased from 14.1% in 2001 to 10.6% in 2006. For those in the 10th-12th grades (16-18 years old), the lifetime prevalence rate, which increased from 14.1% in 1995 to 27.6% in 2001, the year of decriminalization, has decreased subsequent to decriminalization to 21.6% in 2006." cato.org It is worth reading.