What is Digg?187 Comments
- wishninja, on 07/02/2008, -0/+51Obama also supports plan columbia and plan Meridia is the sad thing. Watch the blood flow in Mexico for the next few decades is what Obama and McCain both want by funding military operations on civilian populations. Why not they are doing it in america. People do not realize just how failed the drug war is. There are impacts everywhere from this failed prohibition policy. Its a failure so colossal and so horrific that no politician dare mention it and no government official dare to study it. And we are spreading it as we speak the drug war is expanding faster than ever before.
- Labyrinth336, on 07/04/2008, -4/+54ummm... Obama supports the war on drugs too...
digg me down for stating a fact.... but he does.. - Cuchanu, on 07/02/2008, -11/+57The un-winnable, already lost "War on Drugs" was here well before Bush. Besides if they legalized drugs there would be chaos: we'd all be driving around without license plates. IS THAT WHAT YOU COMMIE LIBERAL DOPE FIENDS WANT???
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -1/+30I am a conservative non-drinker non druggie and I believe we should legalize drugs. This is based upon the historical perspective of prohibition. That wonderful government decision opened a market for organized crime. This is what happened with the drugs.
We need to legalize them and tax them. Given a choice of buying the drugs legally or on some corner, most would opt to buy it at the local store. We see this with cigarettes and booze. There arent too many moonshiners running around anymore. The criminal element left booze once the profit motive was removed. And drugs profit is contained in the fact that they are illegal. - 3tcp, on 07/04/2008, -1/+27Uh... yeah, that sucks, but Obama hasn't exactly come out in opposition of them, has he? Why is it a big deal that McCain will reinforce the status quo on this issue when Obama will too?
- PhilLesh69, on 07/04/2008, -0/+26Just like we have an alcohol policy that works: End prohibition, regulate and tax it. Don't allow children access to it, and only criminalize drug users for committing crimes, like we do with drunks -- if you drink in your home, no problem, if you drink and get behind the wheel, you go to jail.
How's that for a start, at least? - PhilLesh69, on 07/04/2008, -1/+22why is that ridiculous?
Consider the alternative. The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre was better?
Our alcohol policy actually works quite well. Sure, it isn't perfect, but nothing ever is. However, more people drink responsibly, or even if they drink to excess, they still act responsibly. Yes, there are people who have drinking problems, and lots of teenagers figure out ways to get access to alcohol. But as it stands right now, with cocaine illegal, teenagers still get access to it, and those people who abuse it to the point of needing help are less likely to receive that help because of the social stigma and potential legal consequences.
People can lose their job if they go to their boss and say "I need to go to rehab, I have a coke problem", while most of the time, a boss will be understanding, if maybe a bit perturbed, if an employee comes and says "I need to go to rehab, I think I have a drinking problem."
Our policy on alcohol works as best as you can expect. Yes, it is a dangerous drug, but it is widely used and widely accepted. - MikeFallopian, on 07/04/2008, -2/+23It takes a special kind of partisan cynicism to call this "McCain's drug war" when Obama's stances on drug issues are nearly identical.
- streetpreachr, on 07/03/2008, -1/+21We need a drug policy that works.
- wynja, on 07/03/2008, -3/+22The privatization of the prison system in America will be remembered as a major driving force in the establishment of the new Fascist State.
- NikoKun, on 07/04/2008, -0/+17representDLV, Our current policy regarding alcohol works a LOT better then the prohibition of marijuana.
surveys consistently show that Marijuana is easier for kids to get than Alcohol. See the problem there?
The illegal drug is unregulated, and dealers don't check IDs, so kids can get it easily. - ivan423, on 07/02/2008, -1/+18Yes. I hate license plates.
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -4/+19So what is Obama's stance, oh, the same?
*****....I was really counting on experiencing change, BIG change. - Kanten, on 07/04/2008, -0/+16Legalize pot, shrooms, ex, the ones that AREN'T lethal and pose no plausible "threat to peace".
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -0/+15Do we really have to limit it to the ones that aren't lethal? Hell, drinking Drano will kill you, but I don't see any major push to ban it. If people are stupid enough to ingest substances that'll kill them, I say that's their lookout.
- F9Phoenix, on 07/04/2008, -2/+16That policy is called rehab and education. American politicians are allergic to such crazy ideas.
- Mabx86, on 07/04/2008, -2/+16Both candidates support this and yet again this an unfulfilled article from huffington post. I really hope people don't believe everything that comes from this website.
- PhilLesh69, on 07/04/2008, -0/+12Not to mention that once the more "recreational" drugs are legalized, it will eventually remove the social stigma, and people that develop addictions or other problems from their use will be more likely to seek help.
But the biggest factor for most people should be the fact that the mob grew out of alcohol prohibition, then moved to drugs after the eighteenth amendment was repealed by the twenty-first amendment. Why would anyone support a set of laws that empowers ruthless, violent and greedy criminals? - datagod, on 07/04/2008, -1/+13Wait until it turns into the War on Terrorists on Drugs! Watch out, you dope smoking Iranians!
- devilclown, on 07/04/2008, -0/+12I'm a moderate middle of the road voter, I agree with what you stated. Its difficult to have a war on anything if you dont have the funds for the war.
The war on drugs is a lose-lose-lose situation. Tax payers lose, people that consume drugs lose, the third world loses life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to gangs.
The only ones that benefit from illegal drugs are the private corporations that both run the prisons and lobby for stiffer sentences. - voxtarri, on 07/04/2008, -0/+13I want the war on drugs to fail.
- PhilLesh69, on 07/04/2008, -0/+11Good news. It has, and it will keep failing.
- Kitchenfire, on 07/04/2008, -1/+12Throwing your money away at a 'war' that is impossible to win is just that: Throwing your money away.
- 15thPD, on 07/04/2008, -0/+9Because defeatism always solves the problem.
- PhilLesh69, on 07/04/2008, -1/+10did they tell you that on Fox News?
- andy314159pi, on 07/04/2008, -3/+12The "war on drugs" and the "war on terror" are both cash cows for people with no skills other than breaking down doors and pointing weapons at people. Their lobbying groups have bamboozled soccer moms into voting in more radical, pro-police state politicians with fear mongering campaigns. It is unreal how much money we waste on unnecessary law enforcement working to stop non-crimes and paying to put people in jail for non-crimes.
- Hangly, on 07/04/2008, -0/+9It does work. Under the WoD the CIA brings the drugs into the country, sells them for a lot of money (all cash,) and that cash is funneled through Wall Street giving the banks a great deal of liquidity.
Oh, did you mean the ***** cover story about "fighting drugs?" Of course that doesn't work, it's not the program's real purpose. - PhilLesh69, on 07/04/2008, -0/+8Actually, it does go back much further than that.
Nixon "officially" started the "war on drugs". However, after prohibition ended, the people who had benefited from prohibition as the "enforcers" with a large and well funded federal agency didn't want to simply dismantle a federal fiefdom and just walk away, so they began to demonize Marijuana, Opium and other drugs being used by darker skinned immigrants.
Demonization of drugs has gone on so long it is now practically a part of our DNA. - Hangly, on 07/04/2008, -0/+8The war on drugs isn't meant to be won, it's meant to be perpetual. Just like the war on terror.
The domestic component of the war keeps the price up and keeps competitors out of the market.
Notice how the anti-drug ads mainly target meth now? Meth production isn't controlled by the CIA, it's made by small private operations. You bet they want to shut that down. - atarijedi, on 07/04/2008, -1/+9Yeah, it'd be more apt to call it Nixon's War on Drugs.
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -0/+8That's kind of an odd request to make after the fact. The war on drugs has failed miserably.
- GorfTron, on 07/04/2008, -7/+15Bush tried to rid the country of cocaine ... one line at a time.
- twiztidsinz, on 07/04/2008, -0/+8@PhilLesh69: Holy *****.
I think that ranks up there in the most logical things said on Digg.
Bravo good sir, bravo. - MikeXpop, on 07/04/2008, -0/+8We need more room for bumper stickers!
- PhilLesh69, on 07/04/2008, -1/+9No, don't just legalize them.
Set an age cutoff. Make it illegal to use certain drugs while doing certain activities. Tax it. Regulate the production, distribution and sale of them.
Why do prohibitionists always think you can only either use the strong fist of government to crush it completely, or otherwise you have to just walk away and let everyone run free with it? - PhilLesh69, on 07/04/2008, -2/+10We'd all be cooking up crystal meth in illegal labs in our trailer homes, too.
oh, wait, that doesn't make any sense.
But I agree, it isn't "Bush's policy", he just kept it going like every president before him since it was started.
If it is "Bush's policy" now, then it was Clinton's policy while he was in office, and so on and so on. - inactive, on 07/04/2008, -1/+8lets dig up nixon and ***** on him
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -3/+10Actually, digg seems to have cooled on Obama lately. But goddamn, McCain sucks regardless.
- PhilLesh69, on 07/04/2008, -0/+6When you've been fighting a war for over 35 years (longer if you go back to the end of prohibition when drugs were a replacement for a large and well funded federal agency that wasn't going to just pack up and go home once alcohol became legal) and you haven't won, you've failed.
If we were still fighting the Germans, at this point in time, we probably wouldn't be calling it anything other than a failure. Maybe a failure we couldn't stop failing at, but still a failure.
You never fight a war to keep fighting it, you fight it to defeat your enemy.
This war isn't about defeat, it is about spending and control of a population. We can't end the war because it serves way too many purposes beyond winning the war. - 0ldmankdude, on 07/04/2008, -7/+13It isn't, but digg is full of obama nuts, so what do you expect?
- Snokage, on 07/04/2008, -1/+7failed plan yes, but its popular.
- Hangly, on 07/04/2008, -1/+7It was Ronald Reagan's War on Drugs policy, and it has been continued by every president since.
If either John McCain or Obama didn't continue it I would be very surprised. - inactive, on 07/04/2008, -0/+6No, it hasn't ended, but it has failed.
- PhilLesh69, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5Especially with all the people who are gainfully employed in the war on drugs.
Prison guards, police officers, defense attorneys, prosecutors, treatment center workers, you name it.
That is one reason why all candidates will never come out and say "Yeah, we should end the war on drugs immediately." They'd lose hundreds of thousands of votes right then and there from people whose jobs he was threatening. - PhilLesh69, on 07/04/2008, -2/+7They all will, until "we the people" stop allowing the establishment to control our politics and our country.
You can't become a presidential nominee if you go against the establishment status quo. - PhilLesh69, on 07/04/2008, -1/+6He almost got there, too. But then he saw jesus, apparently after pissing in a potted plant outside the official white house dining room during his father's presidency.
- PhilLesh69, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5Don't run away from the problem.
Maybe, just maybe, if people didn't flee Germany when things started going the wrong way, just maybe the worst things of Nazi Germany wouldn't have manifested themselves.
The last thing you want to do is abandon your country to the worst of the extremist ideologies. - benjikope, on 07/04/2008, -2/+7Obama supports it too.
- pintomp3, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5exactly. it needs to be treated as a medical problem, not a criminal problem. but there is too much money in keeping people locked up. prison industrial complex and security industry FTL.
- 3tcp, on 07/04/2008, -1/+6It started in the 60's or 70's. They banned pot and acid because they thought doing so would 'fix' hippies.
"Subby has failed history."
lol -
Show 51 - 100 of 187 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is