Home
RevolutionPlease
rabble-rouser-supreme
Member: 15629
Joined: Oct 15 2007
August 26, 2009 - 11:12pm
#1

NorthReport wrote:

So do you think the "pardon" makes a comment like this acceptable. ;)

To play devil's advocate, what if the tables were turned, and it was said young people, for example, don't have enough life experience to be aware of the big picture. By-the-way I am not suggesting that, and I do enjoy reading your posts. 

 

I would say my post unwise and regretted and lacking in wisdom.  ;)

 

Perhaps, it is an issue that I see as somewhat important to the circle I run in and what I meant was the NDP was just playing to old tropes.  I'd prefer them to be ahead of the pack.

 

Just frustrated, my bad.

 

Trying to get back on topic:

 

Dana Larsen wrote:
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED THAT the NDP advocate for the elimination of all fines and criminal penalties for personal cultivation and possession of cannabis, and the establishment of a taxed and regulated framework for production and distribution of cannabis to adults;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the NDP support a broad federal review of the impacts and harms caused by current drug policies, to select the best model for the government to implement a non-criminal, regulatory approach to psychoactive substance use that is based on reducing risk and harm, emphasizing prevention, public education, health promotion and safety.

 

I think the resolutions Dana quoted earlier are not the least scary and would resonate with a majority of Canadians.  No matter the issues with Dana, were those resolutions not reasonable?


  • Email this comment
Dana's NDP Convention Report By: Dana Larsen (105 replies) August 25, 2009 - 1:54am
  • Coyote wrote: Extreme By: Unionist (Aug 25 2009 - 5:11pm)
  • I think all people should be By: kropotkin1951 (Aug 25 2009 - 5:10pm)
  • Ken Burch wrote: And is that By: Pogo (Aug 25 2009 - 5:09pm)
  • I was talking about the By: Ken Burch (Aug 25 2009 - 5:03pm)
  • Honestly, Coyote, whatever By: Catchfire (Aug 25 2009 - 5:00pm)
  • Extreme hostility? From By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 4:54pm)
  • As an outsider, I'd have to By: Ken Burch (Aug 25 2009 - 4:51pm)
  • Dana, I have no clue how you By: Unionist (Aug 25 2009 - 4:41pm)
  • Dana, thank you for your By: ennir (Aug 25 2009 - 3:36pm)
  • Re: Dana's NDP Convention Report By: Dana Larsen (Aug 25 2009 - 2:14pm)
  • I've watched COPS a couple By: Polunatic2 (Aug 25 2009 - 12:52pm)
  • He states that he was not By: remind (Aug 25 2009 - 12:49pm)
  • You seriously think it is By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 12:39pm)
  • Quote:I know this much: I By: Dana Larsen (Aug 25 2009 - 12:30pm)
  • M. Spector wrote: Some By: Unionist (Aug 25 2009 - 12:25pm)
  • Dana explaining the videos By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 11:56am)
  • Have you looked at his By: remind (Aug 25 2009 - 11:40am)
  • I am singling out for By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 11:13am)
  • You are obviously singling By: M. Spector (Aug 25 2009 - 11:06am)
  • I think it is obvious that By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 10:34am)
  • But you haven't explained By: M. Spector (Aug 25 2009 - 10:12am)
  • I'm saying that I would want By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 10:04am)
  • Are you suggesting that Dana By: M. Spector (Aug 25 2009 - 9:53am)
  • SO not what i meant. I mean By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 9:44am)
  • Coyote wrote: I know this By: M. Spector (Aug 25 2009 - 9:37am)
  • Dana Larsen wrote:The NDP is By: M. Spector (Aug 25 2009 - 9:35am)
  • I know this much: I would By: Coyote (Aug 25 2009 - 9:33am)
  • Brad Lavigne By: M. Spector (Aug 25 2009 - 9:26am)
  • Thanks for the report Dana, By: remind (Aug 25 2009 - 9:16am)
  • thanks Unionist - what I By: janfromthebruce (Aug 25 2009 - 8:55am)
  • The snipets of debate I By: Caissa (Aug 25 2009 - 7:34am)
  • Quote:13. A motion may be By: Unionist (Aug 25 2009 - 7:26am)
  • And to be the "devil's By: janfromthebruce (Aug 25 2009 - 7:05am)
  • Thank you so much for this By: Unionist (Aug 25 2009 - 6:36am)
  • Re: Dana's NDP Convention Report By: Dana Larsen (Aug 25 2009 - 2:16am)