ColdBlooded declares candidacy for president

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#21
GTS said:
Do you think the Federal Reserve has the right to print money, and toy with interest rates?
I believe the only institution that should be printing legal tender for the United States is the United States government.

Interest rates on government loans should be set by the government and privately held/issued loan rates should be determined by the private entities that issue/hold the loan.


Lamberto Quintero said:
How do you plan on dealing with Venezuela and the rest of the new Latin American Left? Do you view Hugo Chavez as a threat to America?
I would plan on dealing with Venezuela and the rest of Latin America's political leaders the same as any other country. As I've said I believe in a united America from the Arctic to the Straight of Magellan. I believe there are common goals and interests that unite us all. I would encourage hemispheric cooperation and integration on all fronts (trade, defense, health care, education, etc) for the betterment of all countries including the United States, but not solely the United States.

Hugo Chavez could never be a threat to America. In fact he could be one of our closest allies and do a great deal to help the United States and help archive the goals i stated above.



MaddDogg said:
ColdBlooded, when speaking on the Islamic / Arab world and the War on Terror as President you proposed "removing" the problems of the people: economic equality and sustainable economic systems, finding educational outlets and other civic institutions besides the mosque, and oppressive Governments. What steps as President would you take to help resolve these issues? Which governments do you believe would cooperate? Furthermore, what steps would you take to remove these aspects of life in countries which would not cooperate with your agenda?

Also, you mention removing the US from the position of scapegoat. You also say "it would be my policy to stop giving terrorists a target by meddling in other countries own domestic situations." How do you feel you can advance your goals of improving economic sustainability, social networks, and toning down or removing oppresive governments without meddling in other country's own domestic situations and providing more ammunition for people who blame the US as the scapegoat for their problems?


I don't believe it should be our goal in the United States to tone down or remove any government other than our own. Realistically it is quite possible for this to be accomplished. All we need is leadership that is not so extremely arrogant as to believe that we know better than others how their own country should be run. Does this mean we have to agree with everything we see? Obviously not, but if we expect others to respect us, we should be ready to give some respect in return.

Improving economic sustainability, social networks, education, etc around the world should be the goal of every country. We should embrace those countries with similar goals and work together to achieve them. I believe it is counter productive and never possible to archive such goals through overt or covert intervention on military levels. Nor do I believe it is productive to intentionally manipulate other countries economies, political situations, etc as a way to achieve our own goals.

Countries that wish not to align themselves with such goals would find themselves alone on the world stage and increasingly isolated from the rest of the world. I believe there are a number of governments that currently have the same goals and other countries that would quickly jump on board if such an opportunity was presented to ally with the United States on this new agenda.

It is important to remember that such goals are not to be achieved solely for the betterment of others at the expense or on the shoulders of the American people. There is much that can be done in our country to better itself as there is much that can be done around the world that would positively effect the American people at home. There is much our friends around the world can and would do for the American people.

This is will always be my first priority. The American people.
 
Mar 15, 2006
569
0
0
44
#23
ColdBlooded said:
Realistically a bill decriminalizing marijuana would have to pass congress in order to become law, not by some imaginary decree by the president. If congress passed a bill legalizing marijuana for recreational use, despite my personal opposition to it, I would sign the bill into law. Would it be a bill I would push for congress to take up? - No. Would I discourage them from doing so? - No.

Personally I oppose decriminalization of marijuana. I do believe federal sentencing guidelines for marijuana(and all other drugs) need to be re-evaluated and amended and as president it would be one of many policy initiatives. I also believe that cannabis is a potentially valuable crop and would support studies into its viability for America’s farmers to grow. The development of our national agricultural system should not be hindered when non-narcotic growth options are available for production.
Why exactly do you think Marijuana should not be legalized? (Even though you said you wouldn't veto a bill doing so.) Marijuana law as it stands is a war against the American people. You wouldn't fight to end the war on our own people?
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#24
As president my power is limited in such matters, rightfully so. The duties of the president include the day to day management of the state. It is not the roll of the executive to write the laws.

If the law is to be changed it will take the hard work and will of the people. They will need to express themselves through their elected members of congress and encourage their representatives to change the law. Which is why I would sign such a bill, because it would represent the will of the people.

I myself wouldn’t lobby the legislature to take up such measures because I believe there are far more important and pressing issues that need to be addressed by all branches of government in this country than the legalization of marijuana. If your only concern is toking and your only problems are marijuana laws then you are an excessively privileged citizen. There are far more serious problems that concern a far greater number of people in this country. Perhaps once the problems and concerns of the downtrodden and underprivileged in this country have been elevated you will get a sympathetic ear from me on the subject.
 
Mar 15, 2006
569
0
0
44
#25
ColdBlooded said:
As president my power is limited in such matters, rightfully so. The duties of the president include the day to day management of the state. It is not the roll of the executive to write the laws.

If the law is to be changed it will take the hard work and will of the people. They will need to express themselves through their elected members of congress and encourage their representatives to change the law. Which is why I would sign such a bill, because it would represent the will of the people.

I myself wouldn’t lobby the legislature to take up such measures because I believe there are far more important and pressing issues that need to be addressed by all branches of government in this country than the legalization of marijuana. If your only concern is toking and your only problems are marijuana laws then you are an excessively privileged citizen. There are far more serious problems that concern a far greater number of people in this country. Perhaps once the problems and concerns of the downtrodden and underprivileged in this country have been elevated you will get a sympathetic ear from me on the subject.
Having 700,000+ Americans jailed yearly for Marijuana offenses isn't a big deal? Toking isn't my only concern, but it's one that should certainly be fought for. Congress certainly isn't fighting for it, it would take a President just like Carter to come out and publicly say it's time to end this misguided war against our own people, over a plant that is native to not only the United States, but to other countries around the world. I wouldn't want a President that has set in his mind what he would do if such a bill would arise, but not do or say anything about it until the papers hit his desk. I know the President doesn't write law, but he sure as hell can sway a lot of people with his opinions.

Not to mention all the tax revenue the government would make off of legit sales that could go toward health care or even housing the homeless.

I'll change my question slightly. Would you fight to legalize Marijuana for medical purposes? Or just wait and see if something happens in another area of the government first? What problems do more than 700,000 U.S. citizens face yearly that needs to be taken care of first? I'm not asking for an answer that involves any other country, such as Iraq. Like you said, we have our own problems.
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#26
If marijuana legalization was any kind of priority to any significant segment of the population they could easily organize and influence the legislature to take action. But we all know about the only motivation smokers have is to go raid the fridge. I would be one of the first to rejoice if the stoners got off the couch and took action in politics.

Legalization for taxable purposes - I’m not particularly interested in generating tax revenue off the vices of the American public.

What do I think is more important - Education, Healthcare, Labor issues, Housing, Energy costs, would all be priority issues for my administration and would certainly take precedence over marijuana legalization. I believe them all to be more serious threats to the safety and lively hood of the American people and the existence of the United States than marijuana laws.

Do I believe current punishment for marijuana possession/use is excessive? Certainly.
As I have said previously federal sentencing for drug offenses should be re-evaluated.

If sentencing laws were re-evaluated I don’t believe there would need to be any push from me as president in encouraging legalization of Marijuana for medical purposes. I don’t believe the average medicinal user would face any significant threat if sentencing laws were amended. If states want to take action to craft such laws so be it. If the federal legislature wants to craft a new law on medicinal marijuana, they should. But it is not a priority item for my administration.
 
Mar 15, 2006
569
0
0
44
#27
ColdBlooded said:
Legalization for taxable purposes - I’m not particularly interested in generating tax revenue off the vices of the American public.

What do I think is more important - Education, Healthcare, Labor issues, Housing, Energy costs, would all be priority issues for my administration and would certainly take precedence over marijuana legalization. I believe them all to be more serious threats to the safety and lively hood of the American people and the existence of the United States than marijuana laws.
Just once more. You're not interested in generating revenue off the vices of the American public. Revenue is currently being generated from alcohol and tobacco, and both cause a couple of the problems listed above (health care, housing, and you could probably argue that education fits into that category). The US Government has wasted HUNDREDS of BILLIONS of dollars in a fight against a plant and given otherwise law abiding citizens a criminal record in states where marijuana doesn't have some level of decriminilization. This criminal record also denies you access to financial aid for college (unless NORML has already fixed that). I can see where marijuana can fit into the picture to help at least reduce some of these problems, some to a large degree such as education. Do you disagree?
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#28
I don’t believe alcohol, gambling, or cigarettes should be legal either. The point is that they are legal and as president I wouldn’t be changing them. As president it would be my job to work within my powers granted by the constitution. Creating or changing the law is not a power that the president should have and I would not pursue such an expansion of power.

I disagree that marijuana as a psychologically & physiologically addictive substance is a problem reducer. Rather it is a problem diverter if not a problem creator. Legalizing and taxing would do nothing to change that.
 
Mar 15, 2006
569
0
0
44
#29
ColdBlooded said:
I don’t believe alcohol, gambling, or cigarettes should be legal either. The point is that they are legal and as president I wouldn’t be changing them. As president it would be my job to work within my powers granted by the constitution. Creating or changing the law is not a power that the president should have and I would not pursue such an expansion of power.

I disagree that marijuana as a psychologically & physiologically addictive substance is a problem reducer. Rather it is a problem diverter if not a problem creator. Legalizing and taxing would do nothing to change that.
When I met you here in Chico at the concert you were all about...whatever Ralph Nader is. I may be wrong, but I think Nader would take action. Are you now leaning more toward Republican views?

Edit: I'm not sure I understand the line "I disagree that marijuana as a psychologically & physiologically addictive substance is a problem reducer." Are you saying marijuana is addictive or saying it's not? If it is the former, norml.org can educate you more on that.
 
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#30
The platform for my presidential bid on the siccness is solely for the purpose of the siccness presidential elections. I don't believe such a platform corresponds to any real or viable individual candidate or political party pursuing the presidency within the U.S. currently or within the last several decades. Or on the siccness for that matter.
 
Apr 1, 2008
141
0
0
35
#32
Will You work to stop the North American Union?
Oh yeah you don't know it even exists.
Well you don't have my vote lol

RON PAUL in 08!
Yeah, If you will do all in your power to stop the NAU form being formed, you got my vote forever. And, you got my body, mind and rifle. And my Corps. The USMC directly serves the president you know.