Dilbert Creator Scott Addams: Political Drug Arrests Make Obama Unacceptable

R

RockX

Banned
No matter how much you like President Obama, you shouldn't vote for him, Dilbert creator Scott Adams argues in his latest provocative blog post. Why? Well, "suppose you found out he once killed an American citizen … to help his reelection," Adams muses. Would you still vote for him? Because in Adams' mind, Obama has done something nearly as bad in prosecuting people like medical marijuana dispensary owner Aaron Sandusky, presumably for political reasons. Sandusky was recently sentenced to 10 years in prison, even though his business was legal in California. "Personally, I'd prefer death to spending the final decades of my life in prison," Adams writes. Obama is "ruining this fellow's life, and his family's lives, and the lives of countless other minor drug offenders." So while Adams disagrees with Romney on many things, he's endorsing him. "Jailing American citizens for political gain simply has to be a firing offense."


http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/firing_offense/


:whoa:

That will leave a mark with the liberal nerd herd...
 
So a cartoonist informs your political decisions?


That's OK, but there's a tiny problem with his logic.

Romney-pot-leaf.jpg



Asked about legalizing marijuana for medical use, Romney gives the standard prohibitionist response:


I would not legalize marijuana for medicinal purposes, and the reasons are straightforward. As I talk to people in my state and at the federal government level about marijuana and its role in society, they are convinced that the entry way into a drug culture for our young people is marijuana. Marijuana is the starter drug.

The idea of medical marijuana is designed to get marijuana out in the public marketplace and ultimately lead to the legalization of marijuana overall. And in my view, that's the wrong way to go. I know that other people have differing views. If you'd like to get someone who is in favor of marijuana, I know there are some on the Democratic side of the aisle who will be happy to get in your campaign.

But I'm opposed to it, and if you elect me president, you're not going to see legalized marijuana. I'm going to fight it tooth and nail.




http://reason.com/blog/2012/09/07/romney-vows-to-fight-marijuana-legalizat

​
 
RazorX said:
No matter how much you like President Obama, you shouldn't vote for him, Dilbert creator Scott Adams argues in his latest provocative blog post. Why? Well, "suppose you found out he once killed an American citizen … to help his reelection," Adams muses. Would you still vote for him? Because in Adams' mind, Obama has done something nearly as bad in prosecuting people like medical marijuana dispensary owner Aaron Sandusky, presumably for political reasons. Sandusky was recently sentenced to 10 years in prison, even though his business was legal in California. "Personally, I'd prefer death to spending the final decades of my life in prison," Adams writes. Obama is "ruining this fellow's life, and his family's lives, and the lives of countless other minor drug offenders." So while Adams disagrees with Romney on many things, he's endorsing him. "Jailing American citizens for political gain simply has to be a firing offense."


http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/firing_offense/


:whoa:

That will leave a mark with the liberal nerd herd...
Click to expand...

Whilst I find this to be a disgusting decision, I can't really see Romney being for medical marijuana. Mormons don't even drink tea or coffee, so I can't see him giving it any consideration.
 
A pretty lukewarm endorsement, Adams writes...

Romney is likely to continue the same drug policies as the Obama administration. But he's enough of a chameleon and a pragmatist that one can't be sure. And I'm fairly certain he'd want a second term. He might find it "economical" to use federal resources in other ways than attacking California voters. And he is vocal about promoting states' rights, so he's got political cover for ignoring dispensaries in states where medical marijuana is legal.

So while I don't agree with Romney's positions on most topics, I'm endorsing him for president starting today. I think we need to set a minimum standard for presidential behavior, and jailing American citizens for political gain simply has to be a firing offense no matter how awesome you might be in other ways.

...
Also, you should all read the Updates.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
Whilst I find this to be a disgusting decision, I can't really see Romney being for medical marijuana. Mormons don't even drink tea or coffee, so I can't see him giving it any consideration.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and all Americans who do not drink still support the 18th Amendment!!
 
It's very disappointing that people see this as only possibly being motivated by cynicism. There is no reason to believe that Adams' only motivation is getting high. Aaron Sandusky is a real person. He is not just a comic book character.

Obama entrapped him and many like him. Obama indicated that Sandusky's actions and those of others like him would not be targeted and then they pulled the rug out from under them.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/15/aaron-sandusky-convicted-_n_1967862.html

This is a far bigger crime than any of the bullshit the idiots are complaining about with Benghazi. That is based on nothing but partisanship, irrational hatred of Obama and is clearly political grandstanding as they cannot coherently relate it to any specific policy issue. Those critics of Obama are just whiny little chicken shits cowardly using the death of 4 brave Americans to score political points.
 
\\((|))// said:
So a cartoonist informs your political decisions?


That's OK, but there's a tiny problem with his logic.

Romney-pot-leaf.jpg



Asked about legalizing marijuana for medical use, Romney gives the standard prohibitionist response:


I would not legalize marijuana for medicinal purposes, and the reasons are straightforward. As I talk to people in my state and at the federal government level about marijuana and its role in society, they are convinced that the entry way into a drug culture for our young people is marijuana. Marijuana is the starter drug.

The idea of medical marijuana is designed to get marijuana out in the public marketplace and ultimately lead to the legalization of marijuana overall. And in my view, that's the wrong way to go. I know that other people have differing views. If you'd like to get someone who is in favor of marijuana, I know there are some on the Democratic side of the aisle who will be happy to get in your campaign.

But I'm opposed to it, and if you elect me president, you're not going to see legalized marijuana. I'm going to fight it tooth and nail.




http://reason.com/blog/2012/09/07/romney-vows-to-fight-marijuana-legalizat

​
Click to expand...

Here's the Republican VP candidate speaking on the official stance of the campaign when talking about Medical MJ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/07/paul-ryan-marijuana-legalization_n_1866180.html

He basically says, "Let the states decide."

From the link:

In an interview with Colorado station KRDO-TV, Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan says he believes it's up to the states to decide whether to legalize medical marijuana.

"My personal position on these issues has been let the states decide what they want to do with these things," he explains. "This is something that is not a high priority of ours."

Voters in Colorado will decide whether to legalize marijuana this November with Amendment 64 on the ballot. (Ryan did not elaborate on whether complete decriminalization should be left to the states.)

According to KRDO-TV, Ryan made clear that he "doesn't believe" in the effort, but he nevertheless feels the issue should be reconciled at the state level.

more at link...
 
Damocles said:
Here's the Republican VP candidate speaking on the official stance of the campaign when talking about Medical MJ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/07/paul-ryan-marijuana-legalization_n_1866180.html

He basically says, "Let the states decide."

From the link:

In an interview with Colorado station KRDO-TV, Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan says he believes it's up to the states to decide whether to legalize medical marijuana.

"My personal position on these issues has been let the states decide what they want to do with these things," he explains. "This is something that is not a high priority of ours."

Voters in Colorado will decide whether to legalize marijuana this November with Amendment 64 on the ballot. (Ryan did not elaborate on whether complete decriminalization should be left to the states.)

According to KRDO-TV, Ryan made clear that he "doesn't believe" in the effort, but he nevertheless feels the issue should be reconciled at the state level.

more at link...
Click to expand...

And you read that as the official stance because?!?!?

Romney indicates he sees medical marijuana as just a cover for the legalization movement, i.e., he disregards anybody that is suffering, and on legalization he says...

"I'm going to fight it tooth and nail."

It seems quite clear to me that he is going to do the same thing Obama has done. Adams' point is that he will then move to fire Romney. Adams is drawing a line and arguing that if you go over this he will will do what he can to see that you get fired, no matter what. His position is clear and pretty well supported.

It's not an enthusiastic endorsement of Romney and he does not seem to be so stupid as to expect Romney will behave all that differently. He is willing to give him the opportunity to earn a pink slip and that's about it.

I think he would be wiser to endorse Johnson or Stein even if it does not result in firing Obama. It is not very rational to fire Obama by endorsing the hiring of someone that will most likely do the same thing.

Here is a follow up.

http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/interesting_day/
 
Oh man this dude is genius! Look at what he writes about criticism of his position...

You're Endorsing Romney to Cut Your Rich Guy Taxes, Bastard!

Some folks suspect that I'm a weasel-bastard who is using the California dispensary issue as a smokescreen for bobbing to the right so I can save on taxes under a Romney administration. There's no defense against an accusation that I have secret motives, but let me describe the economics as I see them.

Over my career, my net worth has moved in lockstep with the overall economy. So whatever plan is good for the entire country is probably the one that helps me most, no matter what my tax rate is. And realistically, given a choice between taxing the rich, including myself, versus taxing people with no money, I don't see a choice. Even Romney knows we can't grow our way out of the problem. He's not an idiot; he's just a guy who needs idiots to vote for him.

So no, I don't see a scenario in which someday I am flying my diamond-encrusted helicopter over the rioting masses of starvation-crazed ex-middle-classers and thinking to myself that things worked out well for me. I don't see the option of living the good life at the expense of the 99%. That's not even a thing. I stopped working to satisfy my personal cravings years ago. Everything I produce and everything I earn these days is for the benefit of others. So I don't mind higher taxes on the rich if it makes sense for the country. With the exception of M.C. Hammer, the rich get richer no matter what the tax rates are. I'm afraid that won't change regardless of who gets elected.


...

IOW, he does not believe Romney is as stupid as his supporters. I would have to agree with him on that. Romney is only playing to idiots like Dixie, bravo and the rest to gain votes. This is part of the reason he has hope that Romney will be more amenable to political pressure as he writes....

Now consider Mitt Romney, the most famous chameleon of all time. I submit that a hypothetical Romney presidency would be nearly impossible to predict with any accuracy. In each of his past leadership roles he has morphed into whatever the job required. During the primaries, his job required him to be far right. In the general election we see him drift toward the center, or as his advisor famously said, "Shake the Etch-a-Sketch." It would be naïve to assume Romney wouldn't shake it again once elected, given that even non-chameleon presidents do so.

...

However, I think Romney has been fairly consistent in his opposition to marijuana and he seems sincere in his faith, if nothing else. But maybe, he will judge it as a lesser issue.

This is why I think Colorado is so important. California is a flyover state. They would probably vote for Obama even if he reopened Angel Island's internment camps. A large number of them are fing stupid, like the people that fall so easily for Romney's lies.

Colorado shows no sign of being anymore intelligent BUT, the electorate there is a little more purple and so they cannot be ignored as easily.
 
Last edited:
TheRocketSurgeon said:
And you read that as the official stance because?!?!?

Romney indicates he sees medical marijuana as just a cover for the legalization movement, i.e., he disregards anybody that is suffering, and on legalization he says...

"I'm going to fight it tooth and nail."

It seems quite clear to me that he is going to do the same thing Obama has done. Adams' point is that he will then move to fire Romney. Adams is drawing a line and arguing that if you go over this he will will do what he can to see that you get fired, no matter what. His position is clear and pretty well supported.

It's not an enthusiastic endorsement of Romney and he does not seem to be so stupid as to expect Romney will behave all that differently. He is willing to give him the opportunity to earn a pink slip and that's about it.

I think he would be wiser to endorse Johnson or Stein even if it does not result in firing Obama. It is not very rational to fire Obama by endorsing the hiring of someone that will most likely do the same thing.

Here is a follow up.

http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/interesting_day/
Click to expand...

Endorsing Johnson would be silly. He's included in the current polling along with all the "other" candidates, it is very clear one of two people are going to win this, and if you want to fire one you vote for the other.
 
TheRocketSurgeon said:
And you read that as the official stance because?!?!?

Romney indicates he sees medical marijuana as just a cover for the legalization movement, i.e., he disregards anybody that is suffering, and on legalization he says...

"I'm going to fight it tooth and nail."

It seems quite clear to me that he is going to do the same thing Obama has done. Adams' point is that he will then move to fire Romney. Adams is drawing a line and arguing that if you go over this he will will do what he can to see that you get fired, no matter what. His position is clear and pretty well supported.

It's not an enthusiastic endorsement of Romney and he does not seem to be so stupid as to expect Romney will behave all that differently. He is willing to give him the opportunity to earn a pink slip and that's about it.

I think he would be wiser to endorse Johnson or Stein even if it does not result in firing Obama. It is not very rational to fire Obama by endorsing the hiring of someone that will most likely do the same thing.

Here is a follow up.

http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/interesting_day/
Click to expand...

I notice you skipped this part:

"This is something that is not a high priority of ours."

I think it is likely because it doesn't fit in with your pretext and straw man argument. When a VP Candidate speaks of "ours" he is speaking of the campaign, no longer of his "personal opinion"...

You don't always use pretext and straw man arguments, but when you do it is when you argue against Damocles.

photo.jpg
 
Another interesting point in this thread is RazorX's flub. Still confusing that one, huh? No this comic strip author uses only one "d."

They're creepy and they're cooky
Mysterious and spooky
They're altogether ooky
Your Troll Family

;)
 
Damocles said:
I notice you skipped this part:

"This is something that is not a high priority of ours."

I think it is likely because it doesn't fit in with your pretext and straw man argument. When a VP Candidate speaks of "ours" he is speaking of the campaign, no longer of his "personal opinion"...

You don't always use pretext and straw man arguments, but when you do it is when you argue against Damocles.
Click to expand...

It is hardly an official stance, but actually I stated that there may be hope for that in my summation...

However, I think Romney has been fairly consistent in his opposition to marijuana and he seems sincere in his faith, if nothing else. But maybe, he will judge it as a lesser issue.

... and that it is pretty clearlly for what Adams is hoping. But as I made clear with further comment I don't feel very confident of that because Romney seems to be of a different mindset and has used strong language to indicate "I'm going to fight it tooth and nail." There is no clear "official stance" in any of these comments and anyone that reads one is blitzed on koolade and not very interesting at all.

Now, would you please try to explain how I employed a strawman against you? You really should quit using these charges when you pretty obviously don't know what they mean. I know you guys love to assume that every one else is just a dishonest jerk trapped in some sort of egotistical and cynical death match but if I remember to put a question at the end it IS because I mean to ask a question.
 
Obama lied, flat out lied, to the american people when he said his admin would not persecute MED MJ dispensaries. This has been plainly evident throughout the news media that reports on it but this will not deter liberals in any way, shape, or form. they will simply be 'disappointed' and re-elect a liar because the letter R terrifies them more.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
Whilst I find this to be a disgusting decision, I can't really see Romney being for medical marijuana. Mormons don't even drink tea or coffee, so I can't see him giving it any consideration.
Click to expand...

......Tom, not everyone puts their religious doctrine into legislation. Plenty of reasons not to vote for Romney, but the fact that he happens to be Mormon isn't one.
 
RazorX said:
No matter how much you like President Obama, you shouldn't vote for him, Dilbert creator Scott Adams argues in his latest provocative blog post. Why? Well, "suppose you found out he once killed an American citizen … to help his reelection," Adams muses. Would you still vote for him? Because in Adams' mind, Obama has done something nearly as bad in prosecuting people like medical marijuana dispensary owner Aaron Sandusky, presumably for political reasons. Sandusky was recently sentenced to 10 years in prison, even though his business was legal in California. "Personally, I'd prefer death to spending the final decades of my life in prison," Adams writes. Obama is "ruining this fellow's life, and his family's lives, and the lives of countless other minor drug offenders." So while Adams disagrees with Romney on many things, he's endorsing him. "Jailing American citizens for political gain simply has to be a firing offense."


http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/firing_offense/


:whoa:

That will leave a mark with the liberal nerd herd...
Click to expand...

How can one compare using marijuana, which has no victims unless you have prohibition with crimes that have victims?
 
Arab Spring said:
......Tom, not everyone puts their religious doctrine into legislation. Plenty of reasons not to vote for Romney, but the fact that he happens to be Mormon isn't one.
Click to expand...

It might be the best reason not to vote for him. It's impossible to tell what he believes, but Mormon's understand the need to lie about their true beliefs until the believer is deeply invested in the cult. His faith is about the only thing in which I think he is sincere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top