View Full Version : Prohibition repeal as a good model for the party of freedom?
An assessment of how the GOP lost the very winnable race for Colorado Governor:
Prohibition Repeal Is A Good Model For Marijuana Legalization (http://dailycaller.com/2014/12/05/prohibition-repeal-is-a-good-model-for-marijuana-legalization/)
"Here in Colorado, the Republican challenger for governor was ahead by 10 points in a September poll. Then, showing the Republican skill for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, he stated he would like to recriminalize marijuana. His lead evaporated almost overnight. He lost by 58,000 votes and singlehandedly damaged the Republican brand for a generation of young Colorado voters. There are over 10,000 people directly employed in this Colorado industry and hundreds of thousands of consumers. That’s a lot of voters to antagonize; many of them motivated single issue folks.
What if the GOP could create a new supporter every 48 seconds rather than trying to throw them in jail?
Freedom and liberty win. Prohibition and attempting to control people’s lives loses. Republicans, if you believe what you say, end the federal prohibition on marijuana. A permanent majority awaits. It is yours for the taking."
This thread won't be popular here because it requires the GOP changing their platform.
Then imagine how far they could get if they would stop caring about what goes on in the bedroom of 2 or more consenting adults..
Great-Kazoo
12-06-2014, 11:54
Then imagine how far they could get if they would stop caring about what goes on in the bedroom of 2 or more consenting adults..
^^This thread need go no future. It captures the main issue with the GOP on the head.^^
I don't understand why you guys care what consenting adults do on their platform? [/sarcasm]
I really did not keep up with this issue besides what was said in the debates, where both of them said it was not what they wanted but it was voted in to law so they approved it. Beauprez just said the law as written needed to be followed. I could have missed it but did he really say we needed to "recriminalize marijuana" at any point?
I really did not keep up with this issue besides what was said in the debates, where both of them said it was not what they wanted but it was voted in to law so they approved it. Beauprez just said the law as written needed to be followed. I could have missed it but did he really say we needed to "recriminalize marijuana" at any point?
From his website:
"Marijuana Legalization
Bob believes the priority of Colorado's governor should be to make sure the state can pay its bills and you can pay yours. Recognizing that legalized marijuana is now part of our state's Constitution, even though he personally opposed Amendment 64 in 2012, Bob's focus will be on enforcing the law, creating effective and robust regulations, and providing extensive education for young people, especially around the issue of edible products."
However... during a debate with Hickenlooper when asked about marijuana Beaupez said this:
"Beauprez says Colorado voters should be asked to consider a repeal, citing the possible negative effects on developing brains."
Sounds like Bob was trying to play both sides as well as appease the personhood people.
Bailey Guns
12-07-2014, 09:00
This thread won't be popular here because it requires the GOP changing their platform.
It's not legal marijuana that's the problem. It's people that can't seem to grasp that conservative values are different from liberals. You want the GOP to move more to the left. Might as well just become democrats, huh?
I don't get some of you guys. You bitch and moan about someone like Romney not being conservative enough and then when a real conservative comes along you bitch and moan that they're too conservative. You bitch and moan about the party that shares many things you value like less government and less gun control then bitch and moan when conservatives talk about other traditional values.
This guy is totally off base in a few regards, especially the part about losing an entire generation of voters. OK...Beauprez lost. He never said he wanted to "recriminalize" marijuana and he knows (as should all of you) that he can't just arbitrarily change the state constitution. That's just a leftist scare tactic. And if this generation of young voters is so single-issue then why did republicans boot a sitting democrat US senator, retake the state senate, miss retaking the state house by one seat and win every other high-level state seat there is?
Conlin was right about one thing. Conservatives should be proud of their traditional values but state it in a way that makes clear that it's personal opinion only and they trust the American people (or in this case the people of Colorado) to make good decisions on issues. Only problem is, when a conservative says something like they're personally against an issue like gay marriage, for example, but that they recognize the people may feel different and it won't change the way they govern, the leftist media immediately goes on the offensive to charge them with hating gay people. And those of you who can't or won't or don't pay attention buy into the propaganda.
The GOP doesn't need to change it's platform. So-called conservatives need to pull their heads out of their asses.
Bailey Guns
12-07-2014, 09:20
The typical republican isn't worried about 2 dudes sleeping together or some doper smoking weed. That's part of the problem...too many people buy into that lie. Just because a person doesn't believe in something doesn't mean they're worried about it.
I don't like what a bunch of black people did in Ferguson. Doesn't mean I don't like black people. I just don't approve of the actions of some of them...just like I don't approve of some of the actions of white or other people. You can be against something without being on a vendetta to ruin a person's life over it.
Bailey Guns
12-07-2014, 09:51
Republicans have been the ONLY party that's tried to reign in some spending. Not a single republican voted for O-care. The republican budget submitted in March (I think it was March) made several reductions in the amount of federal spending. Of course, democrats ALWAYS decry these reductions as "cuts" to important programs and, as usual, lie about what the reductions actually are.
Republicans are for less spending and smaller government...probably just not to the extent you and I would like to see. But to be fair, that's really not gonna happen with the entitlement society that we've allowed over the past 3 or 4 decades.
Aloha_Shooter
12-07-2014, 11:40
The GOP doesn't need to change it's platform. So-called conservatives need to pull their heads out of their asses.
+1
[Beer]
ridge isnt complaining about the republicans, because he is a democrat.
Libertarian, actually. Suppressors and abortions for all!
It's not legal marijuana that's the problem. It's people that can't seem to grasp that conservative values are different from liberals. You want the GOP to move more to the left. Might as well just become democrats, huh?
No. I want the Republican party to go back to the fiscally conservative fundamentals it originally stood for BEFORE the Christian right came in and took over.
People seem to forget that Conservative != Religious Right.
Your argument (just become Democrats) is fundamentally flawed: There is fundamentally no difference between the Religious Right and the Democrats. Both want to tell you how to live your lives, and both say that you are wrong if you disagree with them about MORALITY choices. They just disagree on which morals they want to beat you over the head with.
Bailey Guns
12-07-2014, 12:46
The "Chrstian right"... Another liberal lie many believe because they're too lazy to look for the truth. Conservatism isn't only about fiscal policy.
The "Chrstian right"... Another liberal lie many believe because they're too lazy to look for the truth. Conservatism isn't only about fiscal policy.
No true Scotsman, eh?
Bailey Guns
12-07-2014, 13:14
I don't see the republican party as a party dominated by the "religious right". Frankly, I don't see republicans preaching religion. I see the party platform espousing traditional American values that the left has demonized since the 60s. If you see it differently, so be it. I think there's a tremendous difference between the democrat party and the republican party...and I'm glad for them. Doesn't mean I think the GOP is perfect...but it's a damn sight better than the democrat party.
The country was founded on Christian principles and beliefs. To deny our government has a religious background is to deny history and the historical record. And just to be clear...I'm not a really religious person.
The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life
Faithful to the “self-evident” truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion or fund organizations which perform or advocate it and will not fund or subsidize health care which includes abortion coverage. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life. We oppose the non-consensual withholding or withdrawal of care or treatment, including food and water, from people with disabilities, including newborns, as well as the elderly and infirm, just as we oppose active and passive euthanasia and assisted suicide.
Republican leadership has led the effort to prohibit the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion and permitted States to extend health care coverage to children before birth. We urge Congress to strengthen the Born Alive Infant Protection Act by enacting appropriate civil and criminal penalties on healthcare providers who fail to provide treatment and care to an infant who survives an abortion, including early induction delivery where the death of the infant is intended. We call for legislation to ban sex-selective abortions – gender discrimination in its most lethal form – and to protect from abortion unborn children who are capable of feeling pain; and we applaud U.S. House Republicans for leading the effort to protect the lives of pain-capable unborn children in the District of Columbia. We call for a ban on the use of body parts from aborted fetuses for research. We support and applaud adult stem cell research to develop lifesaving therapies, and we oppose the killing of embryos for their stem cells. We oppose federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.
We also salute the many States that have passed laws for informed consent, mandatory waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health-protective clinic regulation. We seek to protect young girls from exploitation through a parental consent requirement; and we affirm our moral obligation to assist, rather than penalize, women challenged by an unplanned pregnancy. We salute those who provide them with counseling and adoption alternatives and empower them to choose life, and we take comfort in the tremendous increase in adoptions that has followed Republican legislative initiatives.
Firehaus
12-07-2014, 13:20
How many of the founding fathers were religious?
Sent from my iPhone
I don't see the republican party as a party dominated by the "religious right". Frankly, I don't see republicans preaching religion. I see the party platform espousing traditional American values that the left has demonized since the 60s. If you see it differently, so be it. I think there's a tremendous difference between the democrat party and the republican party...and I'm glad for them. Doesn't mean I think the GOP is perfect...but it's a damn sight better than the democrat party.
The Republicans don't have to preach religion, they try/can mandate the tenants of their religion via law -- and that's something I can't abide by, and neither could our founding fathers. They were very specific on the subject. They came to this country (well technically their forefathers) specifically to ESCAPE mandatory state religion.
Your definition of "traditional American values" and mine are a little different. From my perspective your definition seems to be tainted by religious overtones. For example: abortions have been performed in this country since before it was a country. This is not recent thing or phenomena. In fact, for many tens of thousands of years it was acceptable to perform a post birth abortion.
The country was founded on Christian principles and beliefs. To deny our government has a religious background is to deny history and the historical record. And just to be clear...I'm not a really religious person.
The country was founded on the tolerance of all religions and the freedom to practice whatever religion you wanted. Please keep in mind that the people fleeing the religious oppression in their home land were the ones that created this country. They specifically did not want the state to mandate religious beliefs.
XC700116
12-07-2014, 14:14
Here's the point it all comes down to, Conservatives and the Republican Party (many of which I refuse to call conservatives) are traditionally getting their asses kicked because of a few ABSOLUTELY STUPID issues that they have ZERO sanction in the constitution to control/regulate/make laws on/tax. Meanwhile because of these things that they shouldn't be messing with they give the D's and the liberal media all the ammo in the world to clobber them with, and the idiots on the street then vote D. If it wasn't for the overwhelming failure of the Democrats over the last 6 years, they'd have gotten their tails handed to them again this time around. They had run away victories across the country because the D's failed horribly, not because they proved themselves better to the 15% of the population that actually decides the outcome of elections. The bases of each party don't change.
For example:
Marriage
Marijuana and drugs in general
Abortion, up and until the point where some form of constitutional amendment is passed declaring a fetus a person and therefore a human life, until then it's an unsanctioned issue in the constitution.
Until the Republicans quit trying to govern outside the powers granted to them in the constitution, they have no right to call themselves conservatives. And IMHO anybody that doesn't get that, doesn't either.
Outside of a few the overwhelming majority of the Republican Party is no better than the Democrats when it comes to true conservatism and sticking to the constitution. I vote for them because they are the lesser of two evils, but simply put, if they got down to true conservatism and stayed within the boundaries of what they are supposed to govern, they'd go farther.
When asked about their stance on gay marriage, MJ, or Abortion, the correct answer is - "The office I am running for, does not have the power to govern that issue and therefore should be left to individual choices, my personal feelings on the issue are of no consequence as the office doesn't have power to govern it." Then if they really feel the need to interject their personal feelings on the issue, they can go right ahead, but it's not going to help.
Bailey Guns
12-07-2014, 15:17
OK...to be fair I said our country was founded on Christian beliefs. I meant to say religious beliefs like I said "religious background". Most of the founding fathers believed in a Creator. And I never said the government should be run according to any religion...only that it had a large part in the early beginnings of our country.
And, yes, we probably do have a huge difference in what we term traditional American values. I don't know how old you are but that may have some bearing. I think conservative baby boomers probably see things differently in terms of what conservatism means than do later generations.
The country was founded on Christian principles and beliefs.
The country was founded by a bunch of people who wanted to get away from an oppressive religious government in England.
From his website:
However... during a debate with Hickenlooper when asked about marijuana Beaupez said this:
"Beauprez says Colorado voters should be asked to consider a repeal, citing the possible negative effects on developing brains."
Sounds like Bob was trying to play both sides as well as appease the personhood people.
At that time the polls showed 51+% said that law was the wrong choice. So he was a squirrel chasing a nut. Classic politician.
The typical republican isn't worried about 2 dudes sleeping together or some doper smoking weed. That's part of the problem...too many people buy into that lie. Just because a person doesn't believe in something doesn't mean they're worried about it.
Are you not getting the same emails i am from our politicians? Many of them talk about protecting the "sanctity of marriage" and all the other social issues that come up.
Your right, even though i know the repubs are mostly out for my interests i just need to split the vote and go 3rd party giving the dems a seat for years to come. That just makes sense....
What you want the repubs to be is what we lost when the GOP blindsided us with Beaupez. Before that it was Tancredo vs Brophy. Brophy seemed to be what most of us wanted because he was a real no shit Conservative. Not a life long politician and that really is a dirty word to many of us.
Bailey Guns
12-08-2014, 06:33
There were many right here on this forum bitching about Brophy's support of illegal alien families.
Singlestack
12-08-2014, 07:43
...and support for in-state tuition for illegal aliens. Brophy made no such apologies for his stance, and explained it quite eloquently. I made my decision to add my support to Mike Kopp after that...
At that time the polls showed 51+% said that law was the wrong choice. So he was a squirrel chasing a nut. Classic politician.
Really? That's interesting. Since the government didn't pass the legalization, the voters themselves did.
There were many right here on this forum bitching about Brophy's support of illegal alien families.
That is true and i was not a fan of it either but in the end the way he approached every issue with an open mind and with an emphasis on constitutionality and liberty won me over. The main part of that post was the emails i get from politicians. It is not uncommon For one of the few bill they showcase to be about a social issue and they are in step with what the liberal media says they are, its not just kool aid, they do care about 2 dudes sleeping in the same bed.
Really? That's interesting. Since the government didn't pass the legalization, the voters themselves did.
Yes really. I do not trust the the numbers from polls but for a politician its a nut to chase.
How many of the founding fathers were religious?
The Republicans don't have to preach religion, they try/can mandate the tenants of their religion via law -- and that's something I can't abide by, and neither could our founding fathers. They were very specific on the subject. They came to this country (well technically their forefathers) specifically to ESCAPE mandatory state religion.
Your definition of "traditional American values" and mine are a little different. From my perspective your definition seems to be tainted by religious overtones. For example: abortions have been performed in this country since before it was a country. This is not recent thing or phenomena. In fact, for many tens of thousands of years it was acceptable to perform a post birth abortion.
The country was founded on the tolerance of all religions and the freedom to practice whatever religion you wanted. Please keep in mind that the people fleeing the religious oppression in their home land were the ones that created this country. They specifically did not want the state to mandate religious beliefs.
The country was founded by a bunch of people who wanted to get away from an oppressive religious government in England.
And now for a bit of documented history:
http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=8755#FN63
wctriumph
12-08-2014, 14:49
And now for a bit of documented history:
http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=8755#FN63
Quite the good read, thanks.
Zundfolge
12-08-2014, 16:44
...the Republican challenger for governor was ahead by 10 points in a September poll. Then, showing the Republican skill for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, he stated he would like to recriminalize marijuana. His lead evaporated almost overnight. He lost by 58,000 votes and singlehandedly damaged the Republican brand for a generation of young Colorado voters...
I don't buy that THIS is what cost Bob the election. Prior to reading this thread I had not heard that Beauprez had even said this ...Also, I suspect if you were to redo the vote on MJ legalization the results would be very different today (with much less support for MJ ... though probably not enough to reverse the legalization).
I also don't buy this idea that the only way Republicans can win is to become moderates (especially on the so-called "social issues"). If this were true, McCain and Romney would both have won.
Republicans win when they stand for something other than being a watered down alternative to the Democrats. Period.
I also don't buy this idea that the only way Republicans can win is to become moderates (especially on the so-called "social issues"). If this were true, McCain and Romney would both have won.
Talking to people who voted, McCain lost because Obama was more suave, and few people like his choice of VP.
Romney lost because he came off as a greasy used car salesman.
Firehaus
12-08-2014, 16:53
Quite the good read, thanks.
Agreed.
Sent from my iPhone
An assessment of how the GOP lost the very winnable race for Colorado Governor:
Prohibition Repeal Is A Good Model For Marijuana Legalization (http://dailycaller.com/2014/12/05/prohibition-repeal-is-a-good-model-for-marijuana-legalization/)
"Here in Colorado, the Republican challenger for governor was ahead by 10 points in a September poll. Then, showing the Republican skill for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, he stated he would like to recriminalize marijuana. His lead evaporated almost overnight. He lost by 58,000 votes and singlehandedly damaged the Republican brand for a generation of young Colorado voters. There are over 10,000 people directly employed in this Colorado industry and hundreds of thousands of consumers. That’s a lot of voters to antagonize; many of them motivated single issue folks.
What if the GOP could create a new supporter every 48 seconds rather than trying to throw them in jail?
Freedom and liberty win. Prohibition and attempting to control people’s lives loses. Republicans, if you believe what you say, end the federal prohibition on marijuana. A permanent majority awaits. It is yours for the taking."
I wasn't sure if I wanted to post to this or not; but what the hell. The "young" people were lost long before this governor's race. The "young" people have fucked over this country left, right, and sideways from my sisters hippie baby boomers, to my gen x'ers, to today's millennials and they will continue to do so exponentially. Both candidates for governor thought it was a mistake. My problem with it is strictly financial because in today's shitopia of entitlements, I will spend my hard money on these people.
But really, with all the issues facing the people in this country, the last one on somebody's list should be the constitutional right to smoke weed; no wonder our country is going down the shitter.
Yesterday's young person (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/12/08/college-prof-makes-students-recite-anti-american-pledge-allegiance/); forged today's Obama and the army of young idiots that follow him. Oh, I just can't wait to see what tomorrow will bring [pileoshit]
But really, with all the issues facing the people in this country, the last one on somebody's list should be the legal right to smoke weed; no wonder our country is going down the shitter.
What issues would you rather they spend their energy pursuing?
What issues would you rather they spend their energy pursuing?
Seriously?[facepalm]
Seriously?[facepalm]
Yes. You say they're wasting their time going after what is important to them. What do you think they should be going after instead?
jerrymrc
12-08-2014, 21:57
Seriously?[facepalm]
Actually a good point since by my math the more stoned one might be the less likely one might make it to the polls or be able to correctly check the box for the "Willy Wonka" candidate.[Flower] Just a thought.
Actually a good point since by my math the more stoned one might be the less likely one might make it to the polls or be able to correctly check the box for the "Willy Wonka" candidate.[Flower] Just a thought.
Probably some truth to that.
Yes. You say they're wasting their time going after what is important to them. What do you think they should be going after instead?
OK, I asked my teenage son, who is in high school, about his top five issues facing the country.
They are as follows:
1. Addressing the stupidity and arrogance in Congress and the White House.
2. Addressing the issues with the economy and the national debt.
3. Addressing the issues with our foreign policy and mishandling of the military.
4. Defending my right to bear arms.
5. Addressing my issues with the education system and the standards being adopted.
So, where do you rank the legalizing of pot? Answer: "at the bottom of my list"
I have a different list, but he gets it. There are bigger issues then playing video games and smoking weed with his classmates at lunch. It really doesn't matter to me in the grand scheme of things; there are pros and cons to legalization. However, it is about priorities. We live in a divergent society with divergent opinions. I guarantee that my list is different then what is important to others on this board. However, I think I have a reasonable expectation that the right to keep and bear arms would be at the foremost of everybody's mind on a board such as this...hence the face palm. However, I do believe that today's young people will get the privilege of living through hard times in the near future. I believe my father, who grew up in the great depression, that we have no clue about hard times.
bobbyfairbanks
12-09-2014, 09:49
If your party wants to infringe or prohibit anything rethink your stance. I'm free and I own my body. No government should tell me me what I can or cannot put in my body. From drugs to dick just get used to it. That is where we are heading.
The he best part about it is if you don't like it don't do it. Just leave everyone else alone.
If your party wants to infringe or prohibit anything rethink your stance. I'm free and I own my body. No government should tell me me what I can or cannot put in my body. From drugs to dick just get used to it. That is where we are heading.
The he best part about it is if you don't like it don't do it. Just leave everyone else alone.
Lets see here:
Dumbass does drugs, dumbass becomes addicted to drugs, dumbass has infant addicted to drugs, dumbass commits crimes to pay for the drugs, dumbass ends up in the corrections system and/or state supported rehab, infants and children end up in the social services system and will probably end up addicted to drugs.
Taxpayer gets robbed, taxpayer pays for social programs in support of addicts and their families, taxpayer pays for legal system and corrections, medical staff care for infants ravaged by their mother's poor choices, taxpayers foot the bill for even more social programs to pay for more addicts and their families.
...I don't care what dumbass does as long as I am not the one paying for it.
And that is where it goes past just being your body, because it negatively affects others when you commit crimes to satisfy your needs. But that goes for everything, from food to gas to entertainment, too.
bobbyfairbanks
12-09-2014, 11:32
No one said I committed a crime. Lots of people use drugs or have gay sex and it will never affect you. I bet most of you drink. It's the same argument. Look what happens in prohibition and then what happens to crime once it's lifted. YOU do not know what is best for me. If I infringe on you that is different but prohibition never works. Make people accountable for there actions don't sit there and tell people that they can't. Many examples to include religion.m whenever a government prohibits it only makes a larger problem. Leave people alone your good idea is just as bad as Feinstiens.
No one said I committed a crime. Lots of people use drugs or have gay sex and it will never affect you. I bet most of you drink. It's the same argument. Look what happens in prohibition and then what happens to crime once it's lifted. YOU do not know what is best for me. If I infringe on you that is different but prohibition never works. Make people accountable for there actions don't sit there and tell people that they can't. Many examples to include religion.m whenever a government prohibits it only makes a larger problem. Leave people alone your good idea is just as bad as Feinstiens.
I never said I did know what is best for you nor did I even say that I agreed with legalization or not; actually, I really don't give a shit whether is legal or not legal. So what is my idea and how does that compare to Feinsteinn...what? I just simply said that I don't want to pay for other people's decisions. The destruction of substance abuse is well documented; no need to prove that here, and that destruction will continue regardless of legalization. The issue to me isn't whether legalization happens or not; it is about growing a welfare state where I pay for other people's bad decisions. Unfortunately, I get to spend my day at work supporting others and that won't change regardless of the legalization of narcotics thus there are more important issues to consider than whether is legal to smoke weed or not.
And, by the way, prohibition or the repeal of prohibition didn't change the fact that my grandfather beat my grandmother and mother, terrorized them with his firearm, and squandered everything they had because he was a mean filthy POS drunk...this was back in the 20s and 30s during the time of prohibition and it's repeal.
The GOP doesn't need to change it's platform. So-called conservatives need to pull their heads out of their asses.
I just read this. The whole post was great, but the last line pretty much sums it up.
buffalobo
12-09-2014, 12:31
Lets see here:
Dumbass does drugs, dumbass becomes addicted to drugs, dumbass has infant addicted to drugs, dumbass commits crimes to pay for the drugs, dumbass ends up in the corrections system and/or state supported rehab, infants and children end up in the social services system and will probably end up addicted to drugs.
Taxpayer gets robbed, taxpayer pays for social programs in support of addicts and their families, taxpayer pays for legal system and corrections, medical staff care for infants ravaged by their mother's poor choices, taxpayers foot the bill for even more social programs to pay for more addicts and their families.
...I don't care what dumbass does as long as I am not the one paying for it.
You paying for it will not stop until society is willing to vote in candidates who will stop welfare state. Not likely in the near future.
You paying for it will not stop until society is willing to vote in candidates who will stop welfare state. Not likely in the near future.
I know; it pretty much sucks! ...but, I care about the much bigger picture like the movement toward socialism in this country. People really get caught up on some pretty trivial stuff sometimes.
buffalobo
12-09-2014, 12:41
I know; it pretty much sucks! ...but, I care about the much bigger picture like the movement toward socialism in this country. People really get caught up on some pretty trivial stuff sometimes.
While the pot issue is trivial, the movement to socialism and producers paying for non producers go hand in hand and solution is same.
Non producers out number producers these days. We will continue to pay, for several reasons.
We already have the right to bear arms, so why would that be on the list?
We already have the right to bear arms, so why would that be on the list?
Are you referring to my son's list I posted? If so, I imagine that he feels (as well as me), that even though we have the right now, it doesn't mean that we will get to keep it. Or, that we won't be regulated to the point that we effectively loose it. Anyhow, I just asked him and dictated his answers to show that even a freshman in high school can see the big picture.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.