Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwit1979 | Hacker News Reader

throwit1979

This is news.ycombinator.com, right? Can someone please explain to me how this comment is not [dead], as it ought to be, within 10 seconds of its posting?

I'd also have to question how it's even possible that any thinking human being, aware of even the barest modicum of facts, can continue to maintain that the police state is exclusively the domain of the GOP.

Jesus Christ, what has HN become?

Edit: Disregard this, I just checked the parent's karma score. Popularity goes a very long way in relegating petty things like posting guidelines and reason into the dustbin of irrelevance.

View on HN

You may not like the reference, but: Nixon (a Republican) started the "drug war". Nancy Reagan with her "just say no" campaign was totally anti-drug. But in general: most of the Republicans are opposed to MJ legalization; but you will find a non-trivial number of Democrats who support it. So the sentiment is correct, to a certain degree.

Nixon was the first to whom which the phrase "War on Drugs" was used, but it had been going on for many decades previously and had ... heated up quite a bit, certainly in terms of consumption and press about that, in the period of the cultural '60s prior to his assuming office in 1969. You might say "LSD Madness" was a major meme back then, and heroin was the big evil hard drug that caused the most fear.

This is largely from direct observation back then, e.g. in 3rd grade a bit before "War on Drugs" was coined I had to write a thorough workbook detailing all the major drugs being abused then, why they were bad for you, etc.

And, errr, here you posit "total - non-trivial number < most" (if I'm not too tired to express that); on its face it's just an impression you have. Very possibly a correct one, but then again you admit there are anti-War on Drugs Republicans. And in theory one of them could do a Nixon in China ... but we all know how a lot of Democrats would reply, no matter what their personal preferences were.

> And, errr, here you posit "total - non-trivial number < most"

I would posit that you have a significantly higher percentage of pro-legalization Democrats than Republicans. Most opposition to legalization comes from Republicans.

Consider H.R. 499, the bill to legalize marijuana. It had 16 co-sponsors; 15 of them Democrats and only 1 Republican. http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th/house-bill/499/cosponsor...

Not to disagree with the general sentiment, but if Obama declared that cannabis should be legal the GOP would have a field day with that. Big time.

Several commentators have argued persuasively that the democrats and the GOP act as a ratchet mechanism.

The republicans push the envelope with new programs considered extreme. The democrats solidify and systematize these programs.

Not literally true in every instance, but it happens often enough that it appears to be a quality of the system.

That is to say, Obama WON'T push to legalize cannabis, and it's far more than the cult of Reagan in the GOP that keeps the DEA alive and radical.

Here's a blog from which I got the idea:

http://whoisioz.blogspot.ca/2010/05/ratchet-effect-part-infi...

Note: This looks like some obscure blogspot blog. Not so. Who Is Ioz was actively read by all major political bloggers circa 2006-2011. Glenn Greenwald (of recent Edward Snowden fame) commented there a few times.

The blog was not much discussed, as it was considered too radical (or too lucid), but Ioz correctly predicted that Obama would entrench Bush's policies, rather than reverse them.

I have no idea who Ioz is, or what he's doing now.

Writing this dredged up some memories. I found the posts where Greenwald commented at Ioz's. They were shortly before the election.

Five years on, they're an interesting read. Obama's current policies were very predictable, even then.

http://whoisioz.blogspot.ca/2008/06/bottom-line.html http://whoisioz.blogspot.ca/2008/07/from-i-would-use-ring-fr...

The Hegelian Dialectic in full affect.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_sutton.html

Reply on news.ycombinator.com