Does Sarah Palin Smoke Pot?

Formaldehyde

Both Fair And Balanced
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
33,999
Location
USA #1
Or is it inevitable that if you make enough remarks that you will eventually say something that isn't totally stupid?


Link to video.

http://www.newser.com/story/92973/palin-pot-smokins-no-biggie.html

Newser) – Sarah Palin sounded so relaxed in a recent interview about blowing a joint in the privacy of one's own home that it almost sounded like pot could be the conservative Alaskan's cup of tea. She definitely does not support legalizing the drug, but added, "If somebody's gonna smoke a joint in their house and not do anybody else any harm, then perhaps there are other things our cops should be looking at, and try to clean up some of the other problems that we have in society, Palin said on the Fox Business Network. "Relatively speaking," it's a "minimal problem."
 
Well it sort of fits into that whole limited government involvement in our private lives schtick that she's on.

Congrats to her for being consistent on that stand once out of countless times.
 
If she was going to say something that wasn't stupid, she would have said "yes, I want marijuana legalized because its illegal status helps it to subsidize gang crime and makes criminals out of people that are doing no harm to others."
 
If she wanted to say something true she would've said "the only people who really want marijuana legalized are middle class white males living in the suburbs in their mom's basement who are committed to fighting the system while shopping at Hot Topic."
 
Middle class: nope!
White male: yes, but I didn't have control over that...
Suburbs: nope!
Mom's basement: nope!
Fighting the system: what system?
Shopping at Hot Topic: dear God no.
 
If she was going to say something that wasn't stupid, she would have said "yes, I want marijuana legalized because its illegal status helps it to subsidize gang crime and makes criminals out of people that are doing no harm to others."

We're harming them, and we call them criminals

But I remember a "public service" ad from our drug war propagandists a few years back refuting the notion that pot use doesn't hurt anyone (they didn't bother with your distinction, hey, they're propagandists), they showed a pot user getting busted and going to jail and offered that as proof using pot hurts people. Seriously... Our taxes are paying for this nonsense - if the people who support the drug war become babbling fools trying to defend it, "the defense rests"...

The drug war is based on collective punishment, drug users are punished because some drug users did something bad. Thats the same argument racists use to "justify" their ideology - which they conveniently ignore when it comes to their own race and themselves. I dont see many fans of booze demanding alcohol prohibition and caging drinkers because of what some people do under the influence.

I'll bet Sarah's hubby smoked most of the pot in that relationship... But she's right on multiple levels. I'm frankly disgusted that our govt would waste resources on a drug war when we are in an actual war. Thats outrageous! We got nutcases flying planes into buildings and our politicians spend billions on chasing Sarah's husband and his buddies. :crazyeye:
 
The answer to the title question is no, probably not.
 
She's gotta be on something apart from the MILF pills.

EDIT: My guess is she is having an affair with ex-poster Ecofarm.
 
Indeed. Why can't everybody without risk of being deliberately singled out and even sent to prison for doing so?
 
Indeed. Why can't everybody without risk of being deliberately singled out and even sent to prison for doing so?

Mind you, I am just guessing here, but I think its because its against the law.
 
So was alcohol prohibition until the people finally came to their senses and told the reactionaries and the fundamentalists to mind their own business.

It is just taking a bit longer with marijuana because the percentage of users is less and the demographics include a large number of people who have little political power. In fact, that was why the marijuana laws were enacted in the first place; to be able to legally harass minorities.
 
So was alcohol prohibition until the people finally came to their senses and told the reactionaries and the fundamentalists to mind their own business.

Well, the difference there was alcohol was widely used and legal prior to the attempt at prohibition. Marijuana....not so much.

Currently, I do believe nationally, the majority are still against the legalization of Marijuana. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-4877495-503544.html

A majority of Americans oppose legalizing marijuana and lowering the drinking age even if it would mean economic benefits for cash-strapped state and local governments, a new CBS News survey finds.

Fifty-eight percent of Americans say marijuana should be illegal, even after being presented with the idea that the drug could be taxed. Thirty-one percent say it should be legal, while another seven percent say it should be legal if it is taxed and the money goes to projects.
 
A majority were also in favor of prohibition at one stage. It just shows that the US is still largely a theocracy controlled by narrow-minded fundamentalists who think they know what everybody else should or should not be allowed to do.
 
In the UK cocaine and morphine were widely used and legal before they were prohibited. Laudanum was what you got for a tickly cough from the chemists.
 
And the secret ingredient in Coca Cola and most patent medicine was...
 
Back
Top Bottom