Political Rants

-Please excuse my last remark, for none of the information now avaliable was avlable then.

-I'm going to start this off by saying it is idiotic saying that this had to have taken years to plan, It wouldnt be hard at all unless you were mentaly retarded, with a drunken monkey super glued to your back. You get some friends who don't like the U.S. and say "hey, lets get on some planes and crash them into the World Trade Center and some other important buildings" It wouldnt be that hard.

-Secondly, where do we get off automaticly asuming it has somthing to do with the middle east, I know they know some people from the middle east were on the plane, but there is no way to asume they had anything to do with this. I am partialy from middle eastern decent, and I would have to say that that is very racist.

-Lastly, didnt anyone else see this coming? I know I did, I'd been expecting some major terroristic act for about 2 years here, it doesn't take much any more to kill a whole lot of people, so if you wanted to, it'd be fairly easy. I'm realy suprised this didn't happen earlier.

The evils of Walmart are so many it's hard to list them all on one page. The redeeming qualities listed by Jesse earlier seem to be the only ones. I was almost glad to hear that a Walmart store had gone out of business (this was about a week or two ago). For starters, have you ever tried to walk through the aisles there? The management crams so much crap into said aisles that I find it impossible to pass someone when they decide to peer upon the crap stacked in the aisles themselves. Also, need I say it again, music censorship is evil!! I feel sickened when an upstanding store such as Target (which is a great store (for the most part) in my opinion) censors the music they sell. It sickens me to the core. Well thats about it for now. If I think of more evils of the modern-day world, I will be sure to make my opinions known.

-I used to like shoping at Walmart, their anti union which I like since it keeps prices down, and they have a good selection of nintendo oddities such as my game saver for my super nintendo(very cool.) But the other day I was watching tv and discovered that A. Walmart is the largest CD seller in the world, and B. They refuse to cary any thing with a Parental Warning on it. I find this to be an insane feat by them. I find censorship to be one of the greatest evils to ever lerk the earth. I believe censorship is like lieing, and should not be tolerated. If we censor things that are "too harsh" we all become ignorant fools, and ignorance is one of the other great evils, im running out of ideas for this article, so die

-First off, I believe the only form of legalized marajuana that should be legal to use would be the form that is not smoked, but injested instead, although this form has been proven not to be as affective as its counterpart, people can not get high off of it, and therefore there would not be any cases of people not needing it using it. Also, I believe that any liberal Republican does not deserve to call him self republican, for he goes against everything that the republican party stands for. Also this is not ment to be a battle ground, but for people who think diferently than most to express their opinions. I can understand your want to correct an error in somone elses judgement, but other than that this is free speech. Happy Hunting

Now to defend myself: In my article, my point (however clearly I put it) was that I would rather have drug trafficking done by no-one, much less by the government which is supposedly here to help us with our problems rather than magnify them. I think we all agree that if marjuana was legalized, it would be more accessable to the average person (Little Jimmy could rob a pharmacy, forge a prescription (it's easier than you'd think) or commit some other sort of crime to obtain it, rather than just buy it direct from the dealers and crime lords). Why not recruit more police officers to go undercover and stop the drug trafficking that occurs now, rather than destroying more innocent lives for a 'good cause'?

Follow Up To: Legalized Marijuana: WHY?
Posted: [6/29/2001 5:58:38 AM | Chris Franson]


I would like to start my follow up to Franson?s article by declaring that I am a supporter of the Republican Party. I am not a conservative republican; instead I am a fairly liberal republican. But yes, I am a republican.

As Franson stated: ?Little jimmy is interested in getting high, and he doesn't want to kill himself using inhalants, or pay a whole bucketful of greenbacks to get hooked on cocaine or heroin.? This is the scenario that Franson created for his argument; I will use the same. In the current situation Little Jimmy would walk down to a park, a street corner, a back alley, or any other place that has some dealers near by. Little Jimmy gets some marijuana laced with LCD and Little Jimmy ends the next day dead with an overdose. That probably won?t occur but it could . . . and probably does. If marijuana was legalized this situation would never occur.

Little Jimmy goes to the local drug store to get his marijuana, and he gives the pharmacist his forged prescription, and walks out with his marijuana -- this would hardly ever happen because the chances that little Jimmy can actually forge a prescription and get away with it are so small. I am sure when congress instates the bill that they will take some precautions, so that it would be very difficult to forge a prescription for marijuana. For the sake of discussion though, what if Little Jimmy gets away with it. He is going to have safer marijuana ? some that isn?t laced with LCD. Jimmy doesn?t end up dead with an overdose the next day, but instead just gets a little high.

?Why may I ask would we want to make drugs even more accessible to young people in this already drug-infested society?? (Franson) More accessible! What is easier going to a street corner or park or wherever to get drugs, or getting the paper that doctors write their prescriptions on, then forging their signature, then walking over to a local pharmacy, then waiting for fifteen to thirty minutes because the pharmacist takes so bloody long. Which is easier?

There is no reason to keep allowing the drug lords to control this profit making, life-destroying drug. Instead I would rather have the Government control the trafficking of this drug. This is a simple choice, who would be better to have control the drugs and the outcome of little Jimmy?s drug experience, the mobs, gangs, and drug lords or the government . . .?

I'm coming out, not in the way your thinking, but in my beliefe that pants are one of the most evil creations ever made by man. They are confining, create social groops, are a cause of aggression, and cots people lots of money for a needless item. They surve no purpose, I see nothing wrong with the naked human body my self. Some may be offended by it, I say "don't look then" Well, that concludes my first article in a while, and dear god, take thoes pants off

I have often thought about making the government better, mainly late at night. One night I came up with the idea of a government system, where there is no government, and yet the peace and civilization continues. How, you may ask, my answer is through Technomonarcommunism. It is a system, where through transmitters in planted in the brain, and a linking mainframe, you get a unified conciseness. This way, there would be no injustice, no hatred, no misunderstandings, and none of the little things that slow our everyday lives. Think of the organization, the preciseness, the shared knowledge. Your brain is just a place for the storage of data for the system, and there would be only one control. This control would have access to any knowledge that anyone hooked to the system at any time had had. This knowledge intern, with other knowledge, could be used for the ultimate good of man kind. People would just be limbs of the system, a creature really. As said by some great philosopher, when many join, it creates something greater than the things them self. This would be the case. But in order to maintain the system, there would have to be at least one person not attached to the system. This person would be able to override anything the system did, and would have the ultimate word. This is where the "monarch" comes in to the name.

-Some may say that this removes individualism, this may be so, but I belive it is for the ultimate good of man kind. The world would stop waiting energy on useless things. Also, when it becomes necessary to leave this world, fore the sun going collapsing or such, it would help majorly in the design and manufacturing of the interstellar space craft capable of getting us to another suitable world. I, my self, am a big fan of individualism, but it becomes necessary, in a turn of events, to give up your rights and wants for the bettering of mankind. Mankind is a virus, just to let you know, but hell, if were going to destroy this world, might as well take it out as one big powerfull creature!!!

Remember the Presidential election from this past year? The Florida controversy? Al Gore complaining on national television for weeks on end? What a mess! The whole thing seems to me to be done in a shoddy, back-asswards manner. But what I consider the most appalling travesty of this whole mess is the manner in which the election was decided. The Supreme Court, the highest, most respected court in the land, was used to decide the election, which it could not legally do!

Under current law, the US Supreme Court is forced to make decisions in a manner completely nonwithstanding of political affiliation. The election, as I see it, could only have been decided correctly on a political basis, since an election is an entirely political event. So why then should the Supreme Court decide this case? Isn't it a matter of what the people of the United States, and of Floida as a whole think, and want to happen in their great nation?

It also baflles me as to how the good ol' liberals even got to this decision in the first place. I mean, this is a case in Florida. Perhaps it is a major part of a Federal case, but it is still a Floridian matter. Why not ude a state court or other such law-interpreting body, rather than a court which would have to go against one of its most central rules to decide the case?

Thirdly, for those of you who claim that this decision wasn't a political one, this ruling basically decided the election. I feel that it is a terrible travesty of the rights of Americans to have a major political decision be decided not by the people, but by nine powerful people in black robes.

In conclusion, I am not lamenting the decision to elect George W. Bush president. I would actually prefer a man who stumbles over his words to an outright liar ("I invented the Internet!") and a major censorship advocate ("Remove raunchy shows like Seinfeld from the air!"). I am simply lamenting the way in which this great country elected their 43rd President. The conservative candidate had obviously won, and the liberal demands that there be a recount of the votes, while hidden caches of liberal votes were brought forth from the depths to be recounted again and again. It just seems like a mess to me.

~ Chris Franson
Coming Soon: Welfare reform.