digg

Join DiggAbout

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.

Mitt Romney Ignores man in Wheel Chair watch!

youtube.com — When asked by about his use of medicinal marijuana mitt romney ignores the man in the wheel chair and moves on.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • unloud, on 12/24/2007, -62/+166WOW.

    What the hell else do I say? ***** Romney; make this video ***** viral.
    • mikesbaker, on 12/24/2007, -5/+12its from OCT 6 it already is
      • EditorResponse, on 12/24/2007, -9/+4What a bunch of HORSE *****! He replied and he is not in favor of it. A lot of us are not in favor of it and we have proof that the medical system dispensing medical marijuana does NOT work. Last year there was a program on either 60 Minutes of 20-20 and they were all laughing in the doctors waiting room about getting their prescription for medical marijuana. Most of the patients in the waiting room were laughing their asses off. Personally I've seen this same ***** ask every candidate the same question. It is a setup...and he can go F*K himself.
    • richlizard24, on 12/24/2007, -12/+6In the words of Conan O'Brien, ASS.
    • ruddy, on 12/24/2007, -9/+3would that be different than regular viral?
      /xkcd
    • epicstruggle, on 12/24/2007, -10/+34Its not like he has a schedule to keep right? I know Ill get dugg down for this, but what that video shows is more gotcha politics. Im not in favor of it when it happens with republicans or democrats.
      • Tilon, on 12/24/2007, -7/+14These sonofabitches NEVER go in an Open Public forum with We the People. EVER.

        So, if it's not 'ambush journalism' or 'gotcha Politics', when will The People EVER GET TO ASK A QUESTION that is NOT FILTERED BY CORPORATE MEDIA?

        Please answer this simple ***** question, Thanks. These are people running for our ELECTED POSITIONS.
        • chaosium, on 12/24/2007, -2/+6"These sonofabitches NEVER go in an Open Public forum with We the People. EVER."

          I'm all for decriminalization, but these ambushes are the most pathetic and least sympathetic way to "FORCE" the politicians to respond. All it does is make supporters of removing these consensual crimes look like assholes.
          • Tilon, on 12/24/2007, -3/+2You didn't answer my question. If those in power never present themselves, then how is it that we are supposed to be heard WITHOUT looking like an *****, you idiot?

            THEY hold the strings and the power, therefore THEY also have the power to look 'proper' even while doing such immoral things as ignoring the will of the people.

            WE DON'T HAVE THE SCREEN FILTER THEY DO.
        • card51short, on 12/24/2007, -2/+4"All it does is make supporters of removing these consensual crimes look like assholes."

          Well your doing nothing about it is pretty pathetic in my eyes. At least they are doing something.
    • JettaMan, on 12/24/2007, -13/+7Uh wasn't this already posted on Digg before? It was lame then and it's lame now.
    • unreg, on 12/24/2007, -7/+13Question;

      How do you think Hillary would have responded? Obama? Ron Paul?

      They would probably given him the listen, the nod and smile and continued on their merry pre-planned photo op sound bitin way.

      • ElAssoWipo, on 12/24/2007, -8/+21Ron Paul is in favor of legalizing the medical use of marijuana and even voted in favor of legalizing industrial hemp again. He's also against the DEA itself and against the war on drugs.

        But you are right about Obamillary.
        • chaosium, on 12/24/2007, -8/+7"Ron Paul is in favor of legalizing the medical use of marijuana "

          No he isn't. He's for states rights, which is not one bit the same.
        • ElAssoWipo, on 12/24/2007, -5/+91. Name: Ron Paul, M.D.
          2. Title: Member of Congress (R), 14th District of Texas
          3. Medical Marijuana
          Position: Pro to the question "Should marijuana be a medical option?"
          4. Reasoning:

          "After deferring to the DEA, your release reads that, 'FDA is the sole federal agency that approves drug products as safe and effective for intended indications.' Why then has the FDA failed to respond to the 1999 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report which concluded that marijuana's active components are potentially effective in treating pain, nausea, the anorexia of AIDS wasting, and other symptoms, and should be tested rigorously in clinical trials?

          It perplexes us that even though the FDA is responsible for protecting public health, the agency has failed to respond adequately to the IOM's findings seven years after the study's publication date. Additionally, this release failed to make note of the FDA's Investigational New Drug (IND) Compassionate Access Program, which allowed patients with certain medical conditions to apply with the FDA to receive federal marijuana. Currently, seven people still enlisted in this program continue to receive marijuana through the federal government.

          The existence of this program is an example of how the FDA could allow for the legal use of a drug, such as medical marijuana, without going through the 'well-controlled' series of steps that other drugs have to go through if there is a compassionate need."
          April 27, 2005, Letter to U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), signed by Rep. Paul and 23 other Member of the U.S. House of Representatives

          http://www.medicalmarijuanaprocon.org/BiosInd/Paul ...
        • blaket, on 12/24/2007, -8/+2Given that this is RP we're talking about what is his stand today on the subject? As per the rest of his stances they seem to change depending on day, audience, time.
        • shmatt, on 12/24/2007, -4/+3Dunno if I'm voting for RP, but ^that comment^ was total BS.
      • shayne8181, on 12/24/2007, -1/+11ron paul was asked the same question by this man
        http://youtube.com/watch?v=JHS_y94H1Dk
      • m0neybags, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1www.granitestaters.com is Wheelchair Guy's website. The democrats either say they will allow states to decide, end federal raids altogether, or specifically in the states where i is legal medicinally. Buden is the only person who does not answer and recommends alternative painkilling methods be found.
    • Cydonia21, on 12/24/2007, -3/+3IF you really think this video is evidence of ANYTHING other than how twisted the world of politics is your crazy. Also, I HATE ron paul so don't try and bark up that tree.
    • blob4000, on 12/24/2007, -1/+2Videos like this shouldn't just be dugg up, they should be forwarded to people (ie. parents, professors, relatives) who would probably never log into Digg or other social networks.
  • JlmAWP, on 12/24/2007, -40/+160Didn't Ghouliani do the same thing to the same guy? We're going to have enough of these for a montage soon. What a jerk.

    And to the guy in the wheelchair, please keep it up. You're doing what is right.
    • mattrmcg, on 12/24/2007, -4/+16Next up: Huckabee

      Might say marijuana is the plant of the devil and that all who smoke it will go to Hell.
      • myklee, on 12/24/2007, -7/+4"Excuse me, i have to take this... Yes? Oh hey Jesus, tee time at 7am? Sounds great!"
      • yfguitarist, on 12/24/2007, -1/+2I go to a school of thousands of Christians and I don't know a single person that believes that smoking pot will send anyone to hell.
    • Quakee, on 12/24/2007, -4/+18Even though Romney was a dick, giuliani was a lot worse. He was of course prepped for what was about to be asked of him because of the romney video.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyq7IzONnsk
      • verevi, on 12/24/2007, -2/+4Hillary actually handled the question pretty well for a person running for office in the US.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gP-GgIVRyV8&NR=1
        • snowpatrol, on 12/25/2007, -0/+2That's just a ***** answer.
          • Yodacola, on 12/27/2007, -0/+1Indeed. I think Bush has taught everyone that the executive branch isn't too great at research.
      • mm911, on 12/24/2007, -2/+3It's funny how there's no outcry about Hillary's total copout answer. "We have to do more research" = "There's no way it's going to happen, but I'm smart enough not to say that and look like a bitch on camera."
    • ufia, on 12/24/2007, -2/+10I got the feeling that people in wheelchair are cyborgs. We should be wary of them.
      • geneikillua, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2They technically are cyborgs. So are people who wear glasses.
    • Vincent21212, on 12/24/2007, -0/+5I hate these guys as much as the next digger, but what are the Democrats views on legalizing medical marijuana? If its the same as the Republicans, is Clayton going after them too?
      • card51short, on 12/24/2007, -3/+2you realize that democrats don't hold some collective beliefs about everything, right?
        When will you people stop playing the 2 team game?
        Look at the person not the party.
        • Vincent21212, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2I was hoping I didn't have to spell it out, but okay: What are Hilary Clinton, Barrack Obama, Dennis Kucinich, John Edwards, Ron Paul, Mike Gravel, Tom Tancredo, John McCain, Chriss Dodd's, etc... views on legalizing medical marijuana? You know what I'm getting at. I have a hard time seeing this guy asking Obama "HEY! are you going to jail me for smoking the only medicine that works for me?" But maybe Obama is all for it, I don't know.
      • DarkSamus, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1Clayton Bigsby? he's the man
    • faithfreedom, on 12/30/2007, -0/+1HUCK TO THE RESCUE ... NOT!
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mN_Bnw3sfvY&feature ...
  • Bull985, on 12/24/2007, -40/+113I think this is a little ridiculous. Romney was ignoring the guy because his question conflicted with his political stance, not because he's in a wheelchair. I've seen a video like this involving Guiliani also.

    For the record I'm not a Mitt Romney Fan.
    • trigatch4, on 12/24/2007, -15/+10couldn't have said it better myself
    • shaun1018, on 12/24/2007, -13/+40Personally I think Romney is a tool and even I think this set-up question is more than a little dubious.
    • Dreww40, on 12/24/2007, -11/+18seriously... buried as inaccurate
      • t3rmv3locity, on 12/25/2007, -2/+2youre buried as inaccurate
      • HippyInASuit, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1Oohhh. So this video is doctored? Thanks for informing me with your expert skillz.
    • MSP1, on 12/24/2007, -8/+21A "political stance" that ignores reality is pointless and needs a serious rethink. It is also no excuse for blatant rudeness. You did know that didn't you???
      • shagywashere, on 12/24/2007, -5/+9yea his political stance doesnt justify it. he basically wants to arrest old elderly people for trying to help themselves. that guy isn't elderly but i mean he just said all his doctors say marijuana is the best treatment for him. and romney pretty much said "i dont care if you're about to die, im personally against so you're not allowed to use it". sounds like a dictator to me.
        • jggr, on 12/24/2007, -1/+11I do not think that weed will cure this young man, just ease his suffering. Which, imho, is enough to justify it, however it is not a cure.
        • Dundasbro, on 12/24/2007, -4/+4And for the sake of being a jerk, saying that everyone should be able to do whatever they want sounds rather anarchistic to me. Also, learn to capitalise. Happy holidays!
        • Vincent21212, on 12/24/2007, -2/+5his doctors told him medical marijuana is the best treatment for him? I know the guy's in a ***** up situation, and he should be thrown a bone, but as soon as ONE doctor tells me "You should try medical marijuana to treat your symptoms" I'm going to tote that as THE only option. Don't let your sympathy blind you. Medical marijuana works, but for the vast majority of the cases it isn't the only option. It isn't a ***** miracle drug. People would just rather get high to ease their pain. I believe the rest of us only support these medical marijuana people in hopes that some of that cheeba will someday fall into our hands. I didn't see an outcry for VIOXX when they took that off the market. I know it had it's deadly side effects in some cases, but so does marijuana (lung cancer, maybe?)
        • Schneckehaus, on 12/24/2007, -2/+2Vincent, countless tests have yet to show that Marijuana has ever caused cancer. The cancer causing tars inside of Marijuana are offest by other chemicals that fight cancer. You can easily google search it and find lots of lab studies on the subject (reputable ones, too). Tests have found that people who smoke very very often are at little to no increased risk of cancer of any type, and infact it reduces other tumors. (This isn't a biased argument either, I don't even like weed).
          • sonnybobiche, on 12/24/2007, -0/+4Shenanigans. A search on pubmed proves otherwise.

            Several publications have recently suggested a relationship between cannabis use and certain types of cancer. We gathered information on the latest findings on the subject. A manual and computerized bibliographic search on cannabis and cancer was conducted. In users under 40 years of age, cannabis is suspected to increase the risk of squamous-cell carcinoma of the upper aerodigestive tract, particularly of the tongue and larynx, and possibly of lung. Other tumours being suspected are non-lymphoblastic acute leukaemia and astrocytoma. In head and neck cancer, carcinogenicity was observed for regular (i.e. more than once a day for years) cannabis smokers. Moreover, cannabis increases the risk of head and neck cancer in a dose-response manner for frequency and duration of use. Interaction was observed with cigarette smoking and alcohol use. Delta9-THC seems to have a specific carcinogenic effect different from that of the pyrolysis products. Epidemiological studies are needed as soon as possible to provide data on the European and French situation. Information on the possible risks of a regular use of cannabis should be a priority.
          • Schneckehaus, on 12/25/2007, -0/+1from the same site you used-
            BACKGROUND: Despite several lines of evidence suggesting the biological plausibility of marijuana being carcinogenic, epidemiologic findings are inconsistent. We conducted a population-based case-control study of the association between marijuana use and the risk of lung and upper aerodigestive tract cancers in Los Angeles. METHODS: Our study included 1,212 incident cancer cases and 1,040 cancer-free controls matched to cases on age, gender, and neighborhood. Subjects were interviewed with a standardized questionnaire. The cumulative use of marijuana was expressed in joint-years, where 1 joint-year is equivalent to smoking one joint per day for 1 year. RESULTS: Although using marijuana for > or =30 joint-years was positively associated in the crude analyses with each cancer type (except pharyngeal cancer), no positive associations were observed when adjusting for several confounders including cigarette smoking. The adjusted odds ratio estimate (and 95% confidence limits) for > or =60 versus 0 joint-years was 1.1 (0.56, 2.1) for oral cancer, 0.84 (0.28, 2.5) for laryngeal cancer, and 0.62 (0.32, 1.2) for lung cancer; the adjusted odds ratio estimate for > or =30 versus 0 joint-years was 0.57 (0.20, 1.6) for pharyngeal cancer, and 0.53 (0.22, 1.3) for esophageal cancer. No association was consistently monotonic across exposure categories, and restriction to subjects who never smoked cigarettes yielded similar findings. CONCLUSIONS: Our results may have been affected by selection bias or error in measuring lifetime exposure and confounder histories; but they suggest that the association of these cancers with marijuana, even long-term or heavy use, is not strong and may be below practically detectable limits.

            also http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...
            The point is that lots of studies say that the risk is negligible, and a few studies say it may be harmful. In this kind of situation, with hundreds of studies, you marginalizer based on consistency, types of studies, averages, and what-not. The larger amount of studies support the fact that smoking marijuana doesnt cause cancer, while a large number of studies suggest that the tars can cause cancer. But the studies that only use the tars arent factoring in the cannibinoids effects on tumor growth and other such factors. Technically its inconclusive, but considering the amount of studies, a still inconclusive result means that it might as well be considered safe for now. Read more than one study next time.
    • PeppermintPig, on 12/24/2007, -1/+7But these politicians with their political stances are influencing the personal lives of millions. It's more than just politics, it is relevant to this man's wellbeing and life.
    • chrisgnv, on 12/24/2007, -4/+11How did the question conflict with his political stance? Isn't the question asking what his political stance is? And how about he talks to the guy a little more, and answers his question with an EXPLANATION. Brushing the guy off completely like that was pretty dick, and only goes to show how self-centered Romney and the others that act like him are. If Romney gave a ***** about the common American, he would have answered that guy with some well-founded and solid support and wouldn't have shown a complete lack of regard or care for the guy's situation.
      • theblt, on 12/24/2007, -4/+3Romney could have stood there for a half-an-hour (or even longer) debating this topic with the kid, but he didn't and shouldn't have to. He clearly stated his position and moved on. He's not going to cater to every ***** person who is against him and have a debate with, I'm sure he has better things to do.
        • Schneckehaus, on 12/24/2007, -2/+4Yeah, lots and lots of better and more important things to do than have intellectually stimulating debates with voters while being recorded. What kind of crazy politician would talk to the people he wants to represent?
    • NullPolarity, on 12/24/2007, -2/+5Inaccurate story titles on Digg? Didn't you know our mascot is the red herring?
    • ricksite, on 12/24/2007, -3/+7He didn't even ignore the guy. The guy brought up medical marijuana and Romney gave his position on the subject. His next question was probably, "If there was a possibility your car would hit a school bus full of kids and kill them all, would you quit driving?"
    • ahvi, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2What Romney should have said: I'm sorry Mr. Clayton but medical marijuana conflicts with my personal political beliefs. The question as to whether I would arrest you and/or your doctors is a tough one that I would have to think about with my political advisors. Thanks for coming out and take care.

      There was that so hard?
      • Pake, on 12/24/2007, -3/+2Even if he said that, you'd still see this video up on digg accusing him of ignoring a man in a wheel chair. His answer was about as straight forward and simple as it gets. Sure, he's a pure dick and I hope he doesn't make office, but this would of happened either way.
      • zephyr42, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1either way... he'd look like a dick. sorry, *does* look like a dick
  • skaspud, on 12/24/2007, -38/+20dude. that looked really setup especially with the 1 voice just happened to be "ready" to jump on it. And AT LEAST HE STUCK TO WHAT HE THOUGHT WAS RIGHT! HE DIDN'T CHANGE IT BECAUSE OF THE DUDE'S STORY!!

    why does every article on digg have to be an anti-bush or anti-romney?
    • nonstop87, on 12/24/2007, -4/+10Your forgetting pro Ron Paul.
    • unearth, on 12/24/2007, -7/+11It's a video of Romney talking to people on the campaign trail, not an anti-Romney video.

      It's like when Bill-O whines about Olbermann defaming him when all Olbermann does is quote exactly what he says back to him. It's not bias.

      Find me a video of other candidates doing ridiculous ***** like this, and I'll gladly watch and be outraged for those as well. It just so happens that Bush and Bush-like politicians have a monopoly on stupid.
    • trogdoor, on 12/24/2007, -3/+7But he didn't "stick up for what he thought was right" ( I turned caps lock off for you ), he simply ignored the question. If he had been sticking up for what he believes he would have said " Yes, I would have you arrested because you are a criminal and there is no legitimate medical use for marijuana ".
      • shagywashere, on 12/24/2007, -3/+4Mitt "I don't care if you're about to die, I don't like it, you don't use it!" Romney
        • actorboy, on 12/24/2007, -2/+5You've said that twice now. You know, marijuana isn't a cure for death, don't you?
    • Baroja1898, on 12/24/2007, -6/+1Go back to AM radio if you don't like digg. We don't want you here anyway, you ***** republican.
    • chronically420, on 12/25/2007, -0/+1uh gee MAYBE BECAUSE THEY BOTH DEFY THE CONSTITUTION YOU MORON. seriously what the ***** is it with people? can they not see that? did they not go to school and learn about our founding fathers?
  • hayes321, on 12/24/2007, -44/+201For the record:
    He didn't blow past the guy
    He stayed and listened to the guy
    He gave a strait up answer that he doesn't believe in medical marijuana.


    (From a Kucinich fan)
    • jeffiek, on 12/24/2007, -19/+67Yeah, and then refused to say "Yes, I would have you arrested."

      I don't care whether or not someone "believes" in medical marijuana. What I care about is what they will DO about that belief.

      Romney would have people arrested. He should have the decency to say so.
      • ehrihk, on 12/24/2007, -5/+4I agree totally. Who knows how it will make him look but it sure as hell wouldn't be as bad as avoiding it.
      • Dundasbro, on 12/24/2007, -3/+14Oh please. He refused to answer a bait question that would serve as a soundbite for anyone who would want to defame him. Is it morally correct to not answer the guy's question and not tip-toe around it? Yeah probably. Was it the smarter, politically intelligent choice to avoid saying he would send a very sick underweight man to jail for a victimless crime? Hell yes.
        • Juice7, on 12/24/2007, -0/+6How would that be defaming if Romney admitted he'd put him in jail? He is against medicinal marijuana, he therefore feels that anyone associated with its use deserves to be punished, whether or not their condition that requires them to use the drug. This is a terrible policy and anyone who supports it deserves to be strongly criticized and has no business being our President. Anyone who used this against him would not be defaming, they'd be expressing a very justified criticism toward his views.
      • Gudlyf, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2That's funny that you think he should have the "decency" to do so. If he said "yes," this Digg post would've been butchering him even more. If he said "no," this Digg post would be calling him a liar. And when he doesn't answer, they throw the "man in wheelchair" part in, which was UNNECESSARY because he'd have reacted the same way (or probably worse) if it was not a disabled person. The fact they used a guy in a wheelchair to ask the question was sneaky.
    • div2n, on 12/24/2007, -3/+4The question wasn't "Do you believe in medical marijuana" but rather "Would you have me and my doctors arrested for using medical marijuana".
    • cderry, on 12/24/2007, -8/+1Buried for being Kucinich fan.
    • cerealman, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1So, the answer is he doesn't support proven treatments supported by medical industry experts and would rather ignore these experts.
    • koick, on 12/24/2007, -0/+6Just like div2n says, there's a huge difference between "believing" (or not) in medical marijuana, and outlawing it and throwing users and distributers in jail. That wasn't even remotely diplomatically handled. If he can't deal with that, then how as a president can he deal with hostile media or internationally hostile situations (like dictators), just simply say "I don't agree with you..." and walk away? Nah, NEXT!
    • dan222555, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1You don't justify a ridiculous loaded question with an answer. So Romney answered a more relevant and fair question when he said he didn't support medical marijuana. The guy in the wheelchair should be able to deduce the answer to his question from that.
      • diggingaround, on 12/25/2007, -0/+1hmmmm... what answer? I don't believe in Santa Clause?
        What actually means "I don't believe in medical marijuana?"
    • diggingaround, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1Well... IF you have a brain between your ears, to process the information - Translation of Romney's answer should be:
      "***** you sick wheelchair bastard I hop you die in agony! You ***** drug addict!"
      or
      "I don't believe in medical marijuana, therefore I believe only in marijuana as illegal drug. Can someone arrest this bastard in the wheelchair and his drug dealer doctor?"
    • someuser90, on 01/06/2008, -0/+0yea, that jerk off is prolly just too stoned to walk >D
  • PDAIsAOk, on 12/24/2007, -21/+12This is the same reason voters will be ignoring Romney when the big voting day comes around
    • dan222555, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1Because medical marijuana is certainly the #1 issue to everyone who will be voting. Ok moron...
      • PDAIsAOk, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1It has nothing to do with medical marijuana, it has to do with the way he reacted to the situation. He gave it the politican smiling glad hand approach and then when asked a point blank question he basically just walked away. He showed his complete lack of sympathy for a person who was truly in pain and needed that medicine as an alternative. I had a cousin die this summer from diabetes at the age of 18. She was on pain killers from some of the complications and had to goto a special rehab in florida that dealt specially with diabetes patients. If she would have used marijuana it could have been a safer alternative. This man obviously doesn't care and wouldn't even consider debating it. That is the issue, his lack of open-mindedness. How you twisted that is beyond me
      • dan222555, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1That's ridiculous. He made his position on the subject clear and moved on like he would anyone else. Just because he didn't directly answer the guys loaded question doesn't mean *****.

        And did you expect him to pander to the guy just cause he was in a wheelchair and ill? What happened to everyone being treated equally?
        • PDAIsAOk, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1Treating medical marijuana patients as criminals is hardly treating them equally. And Romney's solution is for him to use Marinol which is just synthesized legal THC. It's the same active ingredient in marijuana except it's concentration is so high it just makes patients even more ill. If he can't handle a loaded point blank question how can he be expected to handle the pressures of being President? At the very least, if the drug companies are going to synthesize marijuana's active ingredient for medical use, and it is accepted and legal, they need to at least make an alternative that works just as effectively as the real thing. Or at least not be hypocritical and say it has no medicinal value
          • dan222555, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1"Treating medical marijuana patients as criminals is hardly treating them equally."
            As long as it's illegal they are criminals. You're arguing with his position on the subject. We're discussing how he treated the question. His position is irrelevant.
  • NinjaPig, on 12/24/2007, -21/+5this is going to front page, probably going to show up on news, and probably destroy his campaign

    who blatantly ignores a cripple?
    • Dreww40, on 12/24/2007, -10/+15shut up, it had nothing to do with him being "a cripple" it was a staged inflamatory question that he decided not to answer. I'm sick of all this inaccurate propaganda ***** on Digg.
      • NinjaPig, on 12/24/2007, -2/+6probably staged, but one of the qualities to look for in a president is his ability to face any issue, it would have been nice to see mitt probably do his research and come up with a good answer instead of just spit out his stance
      • epicstruggle, on 12/24/2007, -3/+6Its getting extremely bad around here. This place is being overrun with immature poster who cant stand facts
    • actorboy, on 12/24/2007, -1/+7If you're going to be sensitive to the needs of cripples, you might start by calling them people with disabilities.
    • GhostyBoy, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1It won't show up on the news.
  • generalzod1, on 12/24/2007, -28/+26I'm in a wheelchair also, but Romney wasn't doing anything wrong. The dude needs to pick his spots. Approaching a political candidate about a hot issue in a venue like that is ridiculous. Dammit
    • Hockey13, on 12/24/2007, -13/+18How is it ridiculous? Shouldn't the candidate be prepared to face the people he wishes to throw in jail? Why do you expect so little from these people?
    • StarlessKnight, on 12/24/2007, -7/+8If the candidate can't handle the heat, they should stay out of the spotlight.
    • actorboy, on 12/24/2007, -5/+17How dare you people Digg down a guy in a wheelchair!?

      See how that works?
      • DarkSamus, on 12/24/2007, -1/+2generalzod1 is so beautiful, i want to take her
  • Hearron, on 12/24/2007, -12/+60Decriminalize the herb......End of story
    • Krpano, on 12/24/2007, -6/+1Why ?
      • requiemtower, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2You want to know why? Because our jail systems are FILLED with marijuana users and the real criminals are being released on bail. Because of this, a man charged with domestic violence is walking the streets while some guy who was caught with one ounce of marijuana is behind bars. That's why.
    • diggingaround, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1.... you understand that would undermine the whole government money making scheme, right?
    • cotterbo, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1decriminalization of hemp is a must for the human race or else we will keep killing each other for materialistic things.
      realize the propaganda, analyze it, and come to a conclusion that we are living in a false reality.
  • imbob, on 12/24/2007, -13/+18this is like the 100 time this has been submitted!!!! we get it!!!!
    • jeffiek, on 12/24/2007, -1/+4You do. I do. A lot of people here do, but if you look through the comments you will find a lot of people that don't get it. I know, I hate the repetition too, but some people need to see it over and over before the light goes on.
  • murrowman, on 12/24/2007, -11/+6who the ***** does this guy think he is?
  • eatsushi, on 12/24/2007, -18/+5Mormons....
    • enjoiskaterguy, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1I'm mormon man and I can't stand Romney. Its sad though because most Mormons will vote for him simply on the fact that he is of the same faith. Its so sad to see religion get mixed into politics and make people believe that they actually support this unchristain war praiser.

      Ron Paul 2008 for liberty
  • ArTiFeXx, on 12/24/2007, -9/+4What a tool
  • Soave, on 12/24/2007, -19/+93Meh, pretty damn sensationalist. He listened to the guy, clearly didn't ignore him. And the guy who says "you're gonna ignore a guy in a wheelchair"? Pretty pathetic; he shouldn't get any special treatment.
    • Dreww40, on 12/24/2007, -11/+33the camera man is a tool, end of story. It's embarrassing that the camera guy had to stoop to using the disability card... wow
    • mahler, on 12/24/2007, -8/+3"He listened to the guy, clearly didn't ignore him."

      ...Gov. Romney doesn't answer the question and turns his back on Clayton."
      • actorboy, on 12/24/2007, -0/+4"I'm against medical marijuana."

        That's about as direct an answer you're going to get from most politicians. You realize they're taught to talk that way. If you can't figure out his answer based on his statement, I don't know what to tell you.
    • NSResponder, on 12/24/2007, -5/+9He didn't ignore the guy, but he did make it clear that he doesn't care if he lives or dies. That's why Romny's an *****.

      http://youtube.com/watch?v=CO4zd6VEBK0

      -jcr

      • NSResponder, on 12/24/2007, -3/+3Oh, and BTW, here's Ron Paul's answer to the same question from the same person:

        http://youtube.com/watch?v=JHS_y94H1Dk

        ..Just one of the many reasons I'm for Ron Paul.

        -jcr
        • stateofdreams, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2OH.. so you were just waiting to find a canidiate that would say Marijuana is ok. Well.. i guess you found him. But, just so you know, he asked Ron Paul while he's still up on the Stand with time to talk about a subject. Yet he asked Romney after his talk, while he just does the normal shake hands and say hi routine. So.. Romney wasn't even given the fair time to actually talk about the subject like Ron Paul anyways. lame...
          • NSResponder, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1"OH.. so you were just waiting to find a canidiate that would say Marijuana is ok."

            No, a lot of other candidates have said the same thing at various times. Ron Paul has my support because of his voting record.

            -jcr
      • m0neybags, on 12/24/2007, -3/+3That's not really very logical, ronbot. The guy can use other painkillers or use a buy or grow illegally like everyone else... Or move to California where medical marijuana is legal last time I checked. Ron Paul being elected isn't necessarily going to mean weed will be legal in this guy's state.
        Weed doesn't make the difference between life and death. It just kills pain and increases appetite.
        • NSResponder, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1You didn't listen to him either, I see. He tried the other pain meds. As for calling me "ronbot", well, ***** you, too.

          -jcr
        • NSResponder, on 12/24/2007, -1/+3"move to California where medical marijuana is legal last time I checked"

          You REALLY aren't paying attention, are you? The feds don't care that we went to the polls and legalized medical marijuana in California. They come here and destroy crops, harass patients, and arrest everybody in sight at distribution points to "send a message". The message is that they have no respect at all for the voters, they'll enforce their unconstitutional drug war whether we the people want them to or not.

          -jcr

          • m0neybags, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1I lived in Santa Cruz when the feds came and destroyed crops in the mountains. Mayor Krohn handed out weed from inside city hall. Medicinal Marijuana clubs are everywhere and most people are -at most- a couple degrees of separation from someone with a membership. If you are caught in Santa Cruz with less than an oz of Marijuana, nothing happens to you.
            If you aren't resourceful enough to find weed in Cali, then you're probably not going to benefit much from Ron Paul's reaganomical utopia. And if this guy assumes that his state is going to enable marijuana usage after the DEA is dismantled, he's wrong. Banning abortion would likely be a higher priority.
            The language "would you arrest me?" and "you're going to ignore a guy in a wheelchair?" are sensationalist. Mit's responses are really unremarkable, this video wouldn't exist without the contrived "don't tase me bro" victimization by these two. The exception does not make the rule; marijuana is used and/or abused recreationally for the most part with a standard deviation of extremely rare muscular dystrophy patients who spend more time grinding an ax for Ron Paul than getting high and eating pizzas like every other pothead out there.
            Wheelchair guy's not cut out for libertarianism if he can't find some bud on his own. As if 1bn hits on youtube isn't going to score this guy a sympathy donation stash of epic proportions.
            The people in "We the People" represent a federalist nation. The US is not a confederacy; making it one will do more damage to future interpretations of the consitutions than the drug war.
    • GhostyBoy, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1My only problem is that he didn't answer the question. I think there are enough politicians in the White House who don't feel the need to give a clear and concise answer to a question.
    • diggingaround, on 12/24/2007, -1/+2Yep... he did answer the guy - with a big grin on his face... just look at the video!
      Translation should be:" I don't care if you die in agony. I would denied you the only thing that helps you ease your pain. "
  • mostlysane, on 12/24/2007, -12/+6romney is a republican, right ?
    in other news, the sun will be rising in the east tomorrow
  • Confusinator, on 12/24/2007, -12/+7I'll make this short... Mitt Romney makes me mad.
  • drizzlelicious, on 12/24/2007, -7/+24It wasn't so much a question, was more of an attack at Mitt Romney. There are better reasons to dislike Romney than this.
    • lazlonger, on 12/24/2007, -2/+6asking difficult questions politely and allowing for a response is NEVER an attack. grow a spine.
    • koick, on 12/24/2007, -0/+3"Attack" "Ambush" What the hell? It was a simple question about a decision he's going to have to make if he becomes president. And he totally evaded it. Smooth move exlax.
  • BronxBartoni, on 12/24/2007, -7/+40I smell a set up.
    • Krpano, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1do you think ?.....looks authentic...lol
    • lazlonger, on 12/24/2007, -2/+1of course it was a setup. mitt was setup to answer a difficult question he would prefer no one ask and never be brought up.if he spoke to the issue on his own, a "setup" would not be necessary.
    • TrentDeux, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2Next time they will use a baby to ask the question... And the baby will be held by a guy in a wheelchair... No actually by a navajo indian female in a wheelchair... who needs pot to survive in this crazy world of ours
      • yfguitarist, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1Don't forget that the baby has down syndrome.
    • dan222555, on 12/24/2007, -2/+1Of course it was a setup. Get a guy in a wheelchair to ask a loaded question....but Romney was having none of it. He wasn't going to justify such an obviously setup question with an answer.
  • qXdc, on 12/24/2007, -36/+56Ron Paul 08
  • Qtip42, on 12/24/2007, -11/+3Its funny to see romney squirm I'll admit. It's funny that he takes his run at the presidency seriously when he has absolutely no supporters cept for the state of utah.
    • freetothink, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1Yes all the mormons live in Utah, Qdic42 what a ***** idiot.
  • meteors, on 12/24/2007, -4/+2other thread:

    http://digg.com/political_opinion/Anyone_But_Romne ...
  • BryanFeelsGood, on 12/24/2007, -3/+13I can't say that I wouldn't have handled that any differently?
    • koick, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2How about just answering the question?!? If you are against ALL uses of mj, then just say it, because that's what you're going to do if you become president. Or at least say, "well, that's a tough question and I haven't really thought about actions or consequences for people in your position"? But to just walk away makes you look like an ass.
    • dan222555, on 12/24/2007, -2/+1No politician wants to answer a loaded question when put on the spot like that. Any other candidate when asked a similar question (relevant to their particular views) would have done the exact same thing.
  • Malig, on 12/24/2007, -12/+3Man, I didn't like Romney before this but now, he can rot is his own spit for all i care.
  • benroy, on 12/24/2007, -9/+8I grew up next-door to a family of ten Mormons. Although I disagree strongly with their beliefs and their politics, Mormons are good, honest, well-meaning people. Mitt Romney is NOT one of these people. I saw this the first time it was on digg a month or so ago, but he's just as much of a douche bag as the first time saw it.
    Mitt /`mit/ noun: a thing you throw balls at.
    • StarlessKnight, on 12/24/2007, -0/+4Mormons can be good, honest, well-meaning people; being one does not mean that you are, however. People will be people, despite what they believe or profess to believe.
    • Salgat, on 12/24/2007, -0/+4I wish people would stop categorizing people by their religion. You can't say Mormons are good people, you have to see every person for who they are individually, then judge them.
      • yfguitarist, on 12/24/2007, -0/+3This is the same site where Christians are attacked on a regular basis.
    • FutureCowboys, on 12/24/2007, -0/+0I agree with benroy - Romney doesn't represent them. Just like any other group of people not all think and behave alike.
  • redescape, on 12/24/2007, -9/+3lost my vote,...i never thought that someone could just not care.....its really *****.
    • benroy, on 12/24/2007, -1/+3so you had originally intended to vote for Romney before you saw this? what about all the other ***** things he's done?
    • dasdef, on 12/24/2007, -4/+5vote ron paul
    • sp0rk, on 12/24/2007, -1/+2Damn, so Mitt Romney just lost your vote? I suppose he wasn't holding on to it very strongly, considering all of the Ron Paul stories you've Dugg.

      Seriously, you are not doing Dr. Paul any favors by looking like a jackass on the internet. You're making him look like every other candidate.
  • Vachon, on 12/24/2007, -2/+9Yeah its staged, if you look at the related links you will see this guy asking many other candidates their opinion on this. Some handle it gracefully while others not so much, the most gracefully handled answer I will have to say was Clinton's (if you exclude the fact she was talking to him as though he was a child her answer would have been very diplomatic). Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gP-GgIVRyV8&feature ...
  • arthurdent3, on 12/24/2007, -3/+23What does the fact that the guy is in a wheelchair have to do with it. Does that make him special or something. If people in wheelchairs want to be treated equally then stop making a big deal about it.
    As for Mitt Romney, He answered the question by saying he wasn't for medical marijuana. I don''t know why anybody would be surprised anyway since I am sure most people here wouldn't be voting for him anyway and the people that would vote for him are most likely not to support medical marijuana anyway.
    I don't think Romney will be the candidate anyway.

    • xgambetx, on 12/24/2007, -4/+2yea it kinda does the guy is ill he needs the wheel chair what did it say on the video? he weighs less than 80 pounds?.
    • jeffiek, on 12/24/2007, -3/+1"What does the fact that the guy is in a wheelchair have to do with it."

      DUH He's in the wheelchair because he's SICK. He also needs pain relief and the only thing that works is marijuana. I don't care what Romney "believes", I care what he will DO. He will leave this guy stuck with a choice of pain or jail.

      How'ld you like to be in that boat?
      • sonnybobiche, on 12/24/2007, -2/+3I find it terribly unlikely that absolutely no other analgesic has been effective. If smoking marijuana is the only thing that works to ease your pain, the pain is probably in your head.
        • sp0rk, on 12/24/2007, -2/+1I find it terribly unlikely that you know about this guy's medical history, yet you still make your diagnosis with a high level of certainty.
          • sonnybobiche, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1I'm just saying, there are thousands of analgesics out there. This guy happens not to tolerate any of them, but marijuana works a treat? Extremely suspect.
          • dan222555, on 12/24/2007, -1/+2Everyone else is doing the exact same thing when they claim smoking marijuana is the only thing will help the guy.
      • actorboy, on 12/24/2007, -0/+4Jeffie, did you expect him to change his opinion because the guy was in a wheelchair? Anyone could have asked him that question and gotten the same answer. But because the person who asked was in a wheelchair, all the sudden it's "Mitt Romney Ignores Man In Wheelchair."

        Don't get me wrong. I don't support Romney by any means, and I do support medical marijuana, but this was a set up to make Romney look like an ass. In short, it's propaganda.
        • jeffiek, on 12/24/2007, -1/+2Of course I don't expect Romney to change because the guy is in a wheel chair. I don't expect him to change period. He is what he is.

          A set up? Sure. Call it propaganda if you like. I prefer to call it emphasizing the point.
    • cerealman, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1I just don't understand how a candidate could be against medicine.
  • GangsterCompute, on 12/24/2007, -6/+1Yes, excuse me, I'll have an order of The Sleaze Supreme
  • minox, on 12/24/2007, -5/+30How dare Mitt stand up against wheel chair guy! He should have acquiesced and allowed him to break any law in the land because that is the only fair trade-off for not being able to use your legs!
    • cerealman, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1Laws aren't always correct. America today is proof of that.
    • Instaa, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2I wouldn't call scurrying away with his tail between his legs "standing up against wheel chair guy". His answer was terribly un-presidential.
  • mugwumpz, on 12/24/2007, -2/+24I don't care for Romney at all, but he was CERTAINLY not ignored...and these two were just doing their best to sandbag. When people grow up (there's not enough of that experience represented on Digg most of the time), they realize that their time is better invested in some things than in others. This was a setup...all about scoring political points. It's a no-win situation for Romney...he just decided to go move on and talk to people who didn't already have their minds made up about him. All the answers are too easy for people. Maybe this guy has MS, maybe this guy does get sick with synthetic marijuana. Fine. I'm sorry for his situation. But, when you act like a dick, you deserve whatever treatment you get. And he and his partner-in-crime (holding the camera) need to go find something more constructive to do with their time.
    • blagoaw, on 12/24/2007, -0/+0The interesting thing to me is the difference between seeing it as a "ban" and of realizing how this "ban" is actually implemented. To threaten that guy in the wheelchair with jail time is part of the current solution we have. It's sad.
  • sandman979, on 12/24/2007, -8/+2It's so ***** up how the government even controls what people smokes. Hey Mitt, what you going to do if you ever get cancer, glaucoma or any other ***** painful disease? Smoke a meat pole instead? Dude, please stop the robotic attitude toward things you sincerely don't understand. Is a proved fact that marijuana helps sick people.
    • minox, on 12/24/2007, -0/+6You know his wife has MS, right? I think he might have looked into the issue.
  • sonnybobiche, on 12/24/2007, -3/+12I don't really understand why everyone wants medical marijuana legalized anyway. As an antidepressant, it's not as effective as antidepressant medication. As an analgesic, it's not as effective as pain medication. If smoked, it is more carcinogenic than a cigarette. The argument that it's "all natural" is invalid, because, frankly, there are things in nature far more deadly than synthetic medication. The only REAL justification that I can come up with is that it's potentially very inexpensive. But would people that need medication really settle for something that isn't as effective as an alternative just because it's cheaper? I would hope not. People who argue for legalizing medical marijuana, do not, for the most part, want it for medical purposes. They want it to get high.
    Am I wrong?
    • Derelict267, on 12/24/2007, -1/+6True on the all natural argument. Cyanide is also all natural ;)
      • Ogedei, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2My favorite line is always: All natural? Just cause it's all natural does not make it good for us. Hell Plutonium is all natural, you won't see me eating that!
    • blagoaw, on 12/24/2007, -1/+6We're talking about something that comes from a doctor's prescription on a case by case basis. Why should a blanket ban from the government go over the head of a medical expert's opinion?
      It's misleading to say that one medication is more "effective" than another. Each has pros and cons, and it is the *doctor's job* to help make the decision that is best for the patient.
      Many substances prescribed to patients would be dangerous or highly toxic to those whom it is not appropriate. The doctor is someone who is qualified to make these decisions. Marijuana is not more toxic, so why the fuss? It is political absurdity.
      • sonnybobiche, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1I agree that marijuana may have medical or psychiatric uses and that disallowing its use is probably the wrong move. HOWEVER, I can say the same thing for a number of other clinical agents that the government has banned (clinical agents that did their jobs much better than marijuana does its alleged job as an analgesic or antidepressant or whathaveyou), and you don't see massive support behind their legalization. This leads me to conclude that the vast majority of people that want marijuana legalized don't want it for medical purposes.
        • blagoaw, on 12/24/2007, -0/+0It would then not be the drug you oppose, but its fans. I would say the prudent thing to do would be to swiftly lift the ban on medical marijuana and proceed to ask why these other drugs are banned. I for one don't have any need for any drugs, but don't like having the unsettling feeling that I'm living a farcical existence amongst people who like to harm each other for reasons I cannot understand.
    • blagoaw, on 12/24/2007, -1/+0"People who argue for legalizing medical marijuana, do not, for the most part, want it for medical purposes. They want it to get high.
      Am I wrong?"

      For me personally, it's not a positive argument that makes me want it legalized (yes, medically and in general.. with medical-only being more acceptable in the short term), but a negative one. The best reason I can for it to remain illegal is that because it already is illegal, people are comfortable with it. In seriousness, that is always an important reason. I believe that in time however, that perception will change, and that it is perhaps better to recognize it earlier rather than later.
    • lucidguru, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1Who says that you'd use marijane alone? When I was in a car accident and had whiplash I was given pain medication (vicodin) and muscle relaxants (flexerall). They worked alright... I still had aches and pains in my neck... but then I puffed some janga and I was finally out of pain. Your argument fails because we don't always just use a single medicine to treat illness and disease.
      Using two medications together often creates what is known as a synergism or a synergistic effect. Synergism is when you take two drugs and the effects from the drugs working together in your body is GREATER than what each drug would have done alone. Marijuana is great because when used in this manner it is very effective.
      Could I have just asked for a more powerful pain reliever such as oxycontin? Sure, but the negative side effects from this one medication would have been greater than the side effects from using three medication synergistically.
      Most people arguing against MJ know very little about medicine and will often cite that it is cancerous, and not very effective (so are tons of prescription meds). Simplifications like this retard legitimate discourse and only serve to reinforce the poor argument that MJ should be kept illegal for moral reasons.
  • blueboxed, on 12/24/2007, -6/+1I guess there's no 4:20 on Romney's watch.
  • WickEd101, on 12/24/2007, -0/+7I'm sure there are many valid reasons why Romney is against legalizing medical Marijuana, none of which he felt appropriate to explain to this person. No need for such a startling title for this story.
  • angrybulldog, on 12/24/2007, -7/+2romney's a douchebag. compassionate conservatism ... you just saw it at work
  • blagoaw, on 12/24/2007, -4/+2This is an interesting ethical exercise. Judges are involved in enforcing law according to precedent, but when you're driving the legislation and become face to face with the person you're choosing to jail.. it puts a face on what it means to 'put a ban' on something. As an attack on Romney, I find this cheap, but I do like what they've done here.
    • TrentDeux, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1"As an attack on Romney, I find this cheap, but I do like what they've done here."

      Doesn't compute. Like saying to a hooker: I find you cheap but I like you.
  • lagrange, on 12/24/2007, -5/+3Him and Gooliana can play toss the cripple with this waste of flesh.
    • requiemtower, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1Apparently you don't know what it feels like to have chronic pain for the rest of your life and not have relief.
  • DokGonzo, on 12/24/2007, -3/+19Incidentally, here's what Ron Paul has to say on the same issue (to the same guy):

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHS_y94H1Dk
  • and303, on 12/24/2007, -4/+10I'm all for decriminalization, but I buried for wanky tactics of sabotaging a politician. It just makes medical marijuana users look like frantic hippies. They don't allow him a gray area at all.
    "WILL YOU ARREST ME OR WILL YOU COMPLETELY CHANGE YOUR POLICY RIGHT NOW? WHAT?! ALRIGHT, YOU'RE AN ***** GOVERNOR, TO THE INTERNET WE GO WITH THIS FOOTAGE!!"
    • LaughingMan11, on 12/24/2007, -1/+3Dude... you are blaming the guy with muscular dystrophy for not giving him a gray area on the issue? Romney is the one saying he'll do a blanket ban on the thing. If Romney wanted a gray area, he would have stuck around and elaborate on how the issue is not black and white... but he doesn't want that. He wants this to be a black and white issue.
      The guy in the wheelchair's position was firmly in the gray area : no legalization for the general population, but case by case, patient by patient, allow it, just like the thousands of prescription drugs out there.
      Romney is the one trying to look tough by making it a black and white issue.
      • and303, on 12/24/2007, -0/+0Romney also represents a group of people who don't understand that marijuana can be useful to treat illness. If anything, the dude with MS should cut his hair, shave his face, and start trying to educate the republican voters about his issues...not sabotaging and threatening politicians.
  • Lykil, on 12/24/2007, -2/+13Not being offensive or anything, but is ignoring a man in a wheelchair worse than ignoring someone else?
    • LaughingMan11, on 12/24/2007, -4/+2For someone who claims to be a compassionate conservative, yes. The problem isn't that he ignored a guy in a wheelchair... the problem is he's ignoring the guy based on his politics, and even the possibility of a terrible photo op of him turning his back on a guy in the wheelchair didn't make him think twice.
      Bottom line is, if he won't engage with people that he doesn't 100% agree with politically, then he is a partisan tool.
  • BuzzFriendly, on 12/24/2007, -4/+4I am a Ron Paul supporter 100% but Romney clearly said he is not in favor of medical marijuana. Romney did not answer the question if he would arrest him for using medical marijuana. Lets stick with the facts. Vote for Ron Paul and the guy in the wheelchair can at least put that worry behind him.
  • omgwthlol, on 12/24/2007, -4/+1This is what happens when you let the ***** rulvert the good people and thiroth the loy
    • omgwthlol, on 12/25/2007, -0/+1lol on google search for rulvert and then thiroth the loy. HAHAH. bury this comment i would if i could
  • DarthShaun, on 12/24/2007, -5/+2It seems that most people in politics nowadays are just dishonest jerks. Am I just stating the obvious?
  • futureisours, on 12/24/2007, -2/+11What was he supposed to do? Answer "YES you should be arrested," and then have this shown in moveon.org commercials and quoted in lib talking points. It was a setup and a no-win situation. He did the right thing by walking away.
    • orxor, on 12/24/2007, -4/+2Maybe he should have done the right thing and said "NO, there's nothing wrong with using medical marijuana"
      • dan222555, on 12/24/2007, -3/+1Because what you believe is automatically the "right thing" right? The arrogance....
    • garg, on 12/24/2007, -4/+1If he believes that they should be arrested then I want a leader to stand up to his beliefs and say it out loud and clear. He showed poor leadership and for a guy running for president that's pretty pathetic.

      By walking away, he acting like a loser, proved that he would indeed throw people like him in jail, and got the bad press anyway.
    • dan222555, on 12/24/2007, -3/+1Romney wasn't going to be had....so he had no interest in answering such a loaded question. His views on medical marijuana have been made public and the guy in the wheelchair should be able to deduce the answer to his question from those. Romney's views aren't going to change just because he's confronted by a sick guy in a wheelchair.
  • Deviant_Tech, on 12/24/2007, -3/+3So he pulled a Hillary. Big deal.
  • orxor, on 12/24/2007, -8/+17Here's Ron Paul answering the same question from the same guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHS_y94H1Dk
    • rmmcclay, on 12/24/2007, -2/+4Awesome. Straightfoward to the point in one sentence, his first in the reply, Ron answers the question succinctly. That's the kind of thinking we need in government.
    • Zap2, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1Thats not the right answer though...Paul said he wouldn't let the Feds arrest him...the right answer is that no one can arrest him for using it.
      • orxor, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1But the president/federal government doesn't have that authority. To decide for the states what is right and what isn't at least under strict interpretation of the constitution. If he forced the states to legalize marijuana he would be doing the same thing that the current federal government is doing, meddling with the states rights.

        In any case at least with Ron Pauls plan if people need medical marijuana they would be able to get it in certain states without fear of being arrested.
  • NamesTwister, on 12/24/2007, -13/+8buried! for using a handicap person to make him look bad, that guy with the camera should be ashamed, and so should everyone that dugg this
    • Krpano, on 12/24/2007, -4/+1Exactly....i dont know whats worse, the fact that the gov. didnt care if he dies or the stupid setup to make him look like a bad guy....shame on them.
    • SzaszMan, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1I don't get what you guys are saying... is there actually some way to voice support for arresting medical marijuana patients and their caregivers that doesn't look bad? If so, please tell us.
      • apache4, on 12/24/2007, -0/+0what looks bad about receiving medical marijuana because you have muscular dystrophy?
    • Instaa, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1Well considering the use of medical MJ is mainly for people like that dude in the wheelchair, his whole policy is about putting him in jail. So then, why is it a bad thing to bring that up with him and show what the consequences of his policy is?
  • rmmcclay, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2The man in the wheelchair had one question: would you arrest me and my doctors.

    No answer.
  • dmarquard, on 12/24/2007, -1/+3The title is a bit misleading. He never blew off the guy just because he was in a wheelchair.
    • TrentDeux, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2No way... a misleading title on Digg in attempt to attack those without the proper political alignment???
  • Krpano, on 12/24/2007, -4/+3Im for this option, legalize the medicinal use of marijuana BUT give the death punishment for those using it for fun.
    Lets see what the punks have to say about it.
    • solid12345, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1That would be hilarious actually. So many of these phonies on here just support medical marijuana because they think it is their easy ticket to get it for recreational purposes.
    • SzaszMan, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1I think you guys make a point I've always made - supporting medical marijuana is just a losers game for those truly interested in advancing freedom. You two are cases in point.

      Myself, I've always supported the rights of consenting adults to ingest whatever substance they like, period, for whatever reason (medical or otherwise) given they are held strictly accountable for their actions - which is what I'd expect in a free society.
    • apache4, on 12/24/2007, -0/+0death punishment? how about for all of you who get drunk we give the death punishment as well.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 111 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.