War on Marijuana Failed- (2008) Survey shows

[Quietus]

Oh, for Heavens sake. That's right, defend your Political party. As to why I feel it necessary to inject politics into my posts, please see the explanation (Post) in the Political Forum.

I'm not defending anything, just pointing out some things you conveniently missed in your assessment.  Just keeping you honest, medical man.

Now now medical man, don't you believe that Newt and the new republican congress having to shut down the government forcing President Clinton to sign a balanced budget he didn't want is an important part of the equation?  Yet somehow you didn't feel it was worth mentioning.  Very interesting indeed.

You rightfully rail against spending during the Bush years, but are curiously silent when Obama's deficit spending makes what the republican congress did look like an ATM withdraw at a 7-11.  Very interesting indeed.

As far as your other post, I'll let it wither and die on the vine like it deserves.  Just like the five or six other 'REPUBLICAN R EVIL D00DS OMGZOR' posts you made in the past couple weeks.

I could easily write a lengthy treatise on "THE WAR JOE BIDEN AND THE DEMOCRATS HAVE WAGED ON AMERICANS WHO WANT TO SMOKE POT", write a lengthy post on "BILL CLINTON GOES AFTER DOCTOS WHO PRESCRIBE MEDICAL MARIJUANA!", or a nice long article on, "BILL CLINTON FOR THE FIRST TIME USES GOVERNMENT FUNDS IN A PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN.  HIS DRUG CZAR IS A LIAR AND SO THAT MEANS THAT ALL DEMOCRATS R EVIL D00DS."

But you know medical man not only would I only be telling half of the story it wouldn't be very useful in terms of getting marijuana law reform.  Once again, this is a NORML website and not dailykos, politico or briebart.com.  Marijuana prohibition was a fully bipartisan effort, it'll take a fully bipartisan effort to repeal it.

[Doctor]

Quietus, at least I have the common decency to use your user name when responding to your post, not the name I prefer,as you do, which would be innappropriate . I refuse to converse with you any longer until you can find it in yourself to extend the same courtesy.  As for keeping me honest, do you feel that other users of this forum are too unintelligent to make their own judgement and web search assesments; or that they require a fact checker? I didn't cut and paste anything. I simply cited the source and cut a brief, relevant portion of same. That's not cutting and pasting. That's cutting and posting.
Since I doubt you have the ability to be civil and use my user name, rather than the condescending name you choose, Good bye and good luck.

[Quietus]

Quietus, at least I have the common decency to use your user name when responding to your post, not the name I prefer,as you do, which would be innappropriate . I refuse to converse with you any longer until you can find it in yourself to extend the same courtesy. 

Professor Q, The Narc, Quietus-US, CONman, come again there medical man?   

As for keeping me honest, do you feel that other users of this forum are too unintelligent to make their own judgement and web search assesments; or that they require a fact checker? I didn't cut and paste anything. I simply cited the source and cut a brief, relevant portion of same. That's not cutting and pasting. That's cutting and posting.
Since I doubt you have the ability to be civil and use my user name, rather than the condescending name you choose, Good bye and good luck.

I think the other users of this forum are quite intelligent, we had some very nice conversations and reasoned debate when you got banned for creating fake accounts.  As far as fact checking goes, for a self proclaimed intelligent and college educated individual you seem to have a problem with both citation and constructing a logically sound argument.  One would think such a bright and educated individual such as yourself would be easily able to separate opinion from fact and approach a topic objectively.

So when you come in this thread and claim that Clinton was president in 1988, or that Bush is behind a private ad in that aired back 1987, or assign multiple and totally conflicting monetary values to a particular propaganda program that Bush somehow started in 1998 when he wasn't even president, don't you think that you should be asked to account for such obvious flaws in your reasoning?  Especially, since your intent has nothing to do with marijuana law reform, but to just vomit up irrational team politics as if you're on dailykos.com.

[Doctor]

I never created fake accounts. That's a lie. I deleted my account and then could not respond to your trash, so I created another.  My spouse also created an account after reading your posts in reply to mine, So I was "banned" for a dishonest reason. I also had donated to NORML (national) and was accused of not. Please ask dOc to check on this for you. For someone who claims "wanted me back", you certainly don't live up to that statement.
As for that last paragraph about Clinton and these 1980's dates?  I never made any such statements. And I couldn't be more involved in Norml than I am. I'm Testifying before the Committee, Donated to norml and phillynorml and I'm a volunteer. I was in the Phillipines in 1987 and met Pres. Reagan at Parris Island in '86. I'm not confused about who was President and never made the claims you alledge. More often than not I addressed you by your username. What would you have me do when you post fabricated "quotes" with my username, imply I'm gay because I served in the Marines, call me Insane and self medicated, complete with demeaning photo's? And never using my username, just medical man???I guess I have to respond when you outright LIE!
Frankly after what you've posted regarding me, I'm not sure why you haven't been banned!!!!!!! You've violated the user agreement multiple times.

[Quietus]

Furthermore, your "Facts" don't add up. Previously you said it was an Ad from 1987, but the money wasn't appropriated until '88 and you acknowledge that, so which is it Con Man?  And Wow, Clinton spent a whopping $2 Billion that Congress appropriated in 1988 for anti-drug ad's.The money wasn't available in '87! Bush spent at least $8 Billion

I quoted you in the 9th post of this thread saying exactly that.  Of course now that you so conveniently deleted all your posts you're claiming it's a fabrication?  Go figure...

What percentage of the threads you start contain either the words "republicans" or "Bush?"  If you want I can do due diligence and calculate the actual percentage.  I'd wager it's over 90%.  Considering that republicans haven't been in control of congress for three years now, the percentage seems a bit high, don't you think?  So you can claim you're here for marijuana law reform and maybe that's true, but your post history suggests to me something different.  Hell, you even made a thread attempting to justify the fact that all your other posts are hyper-partisan bullcrap.  What was your justification?  More hyper-partisan bullcrap!  Go figure.

If you were really concerned as you say, you would be using your energy by thinking of ways to convince conservatives that marijuana prohibition is unconstitutional and converse to the spirit of the declaration of independence.  But no, from you medical man we instead are subjected to a never ending stream of "Dick Cheney invested in a mutual fund, arrest him!"  

I re-assert my position that this is not the dailykos and such idiocy is not germane, let alone rational.  So as I've told you before many times, if you don't want me taking that fact-stick and poking at your irrational and substance-adverse diatribe, then try and remember why this website and organization is here.  It is not the DNC, ACORN or Code Pink, it is NORML.