Obama bans solitary confinement for juveniles in federal prisons

Kobie · Feb 1, 2016

ReverendHellh0und said:
4... give me 4 examples prior to 2015.

Note how you attack, and insult me non stop, note you ignore my points, and continue to insult me.

Just who do you think, reading our exchange from a neutral position, would they judge as the so caller "worst debater", brah?

Not Cardinal, that's for sure.

ReverendHellh0und · Feb 1, 2016

Kobie said:
Not Cardinal, that's for sure.

I said "neutral" person. This is not you.

ReverendHellh0und · Feb 1, 2016

ReverendHellh0und said:
Meanwhile 330,000 non violent drug offenders remain imprisoned....

I post the above, then you respond to this:

seems it doesn't matter who we vote for, that number will double....

Take your partisan blinders off my friend.

Cardinal said:
Then vote Sanders.

ReverendHellh0und said:
I missed where sanders said anywhere he would pardon, communicate, expunge any non violent drug offenders record and order them released from prison.

Perhaps you can show me.

When I ask you to show me you post:

Cardinal said:
I, as well as numerous people, have been following Sanders' extensive career for many years. His anti-punitive, anti-drug war opinions and voting record have been known to us forever. This isn't some wild new thing of Sanders. This is who he is.

ReverendHellh0und said:
Right.... because this career politician is really so much different than other career politicians.

He's said NOTHING on this subject as a presidential candidate...

If he were to say he would pardon and release all non violent drug offenders. I would seriously considering voting for him, even though I am opposed, to almost all of his other views.

but he hasn't and should he win, he won't.

besides, all the sanders supporters are making excuses for that criminal clinton the point will probably be moot.

You retort with:

Cardinal said:
He believes in ending the war on drugs, preferring treatment over incarceration. None of this is new and you can view his "on the issues" page if you're interested. And if any of his fiscally conservative opponents have expressed something better then you can vote for them instead. But I know you won't find something better from his opponents because I already looked and they've all taken a rigid anti-drug user stance.

you claim none of this is "new", yet I show you prior to 2015, there was one instance 15 years ago where he voted on an issue regarding medical marijuana. (a bipartisan vote btw, you know safe)

Here you move goal posts.... while accusing me of moving goal posts. this is also where you start insulting me.

Cardinal said:
Name for me an American politician who has given a blanket pardon to all offenders of a crime (actually, I'm genuinely curious if this has been done). However, you knowingly set a bar you knew no one could live up to so you wouldn't have to seriously consider the obviously superior position of Sanders on this topic. It's what you do. If you don't move the goal post you move it in advance so that you can avoid the life-terrifying proposition of being wrong, however little.

I ignore your insult and point out how sanders doesn't have anything on the topic on his website, is a career politician, and show you a politician who has.

then in the next post below, you attribute a position to me I don't have. Also note how you refuse to be an honest person and answer my very simple question, one I was happy to answer myself.

Cardinal said:
I'm happy to see you've abandoned your foolish demand that a candidate's sole means of credibility on this issue is that they grant a blanket pardon to all nonviolent drug offenders.

tldr verson: you should have read your own article.

ReverendHellh0und · Feb 1, 2016

and here you go again, dishonestly attributing a positon to me I haven't posted.

Cardinal said:
First, research Sanders' position. Second, have you officially abandoned your demand for a blanket pardon of nonviolent drug offenders?

I ask again, pointing out I answered you.

ReverendHellh0und said:
Why is this so hard to answer?

It's a simple yes or no answer, one I happily answered for you when you posed the same to me regarding sanders.

what do you do?

start hurling insults....

Cardinal said:
May I suggest gingko biloba? I can't vouch for it myself but some people absolutely swear by the stuff.

Here's what you said just a few posts above:

And before that, on Sanders...

So why are you supporting a candidate who talks like a career politician and hasn't proposed releasing all nonviolent drug offenders, which was, if I may remind you, your standard?

What's funny is you take my position, and falsley claim that that is my position on all candidates. II never suggested what you claimed, but you keep going with it. Avoiding my question.

ReverendHellh0und said:
Nah bro, don't need no hippy dippy new age stuff to see you trying to turn this thing around.

Why does your ego prevent you from answering?

Or is it not your ego and the issue not really as big an issue as you proclaim.

Rand paul has said a lot more, and has done a lot more than sanders in regards to non violent drug offenders. you suggested I should vote for barnie simply because you FELT that he's strong on the subject.

I showed you the guy who REALLY was the head of this issue, and you can't even be honest enough to tell me that the issues not that important to you so you wouldn't vote for rand paul if he got the nomination.

It's as simple as that.

and you go right back to insulting me, while demanding I abandon a position I did not hold.

Cardinal said:
Why's he REALLY the head of this issue? Has he called for the pardon of nonviolent drug offenders like you demanded?

Maybe ginkgo biloba isn't for you. Perhaps sudoku puzzles to strengthen your memory as you can't recall what you say from one post to the next.

I freely admint to bantering back, but it's clear, you have no interest in a cereberal intellectual debate.

Here you go again, arguing a position I don't hld, while claiming I failed to leard about the positions you claim sanders had that you never backed up.

Cardinal said:
So be a dumb political sheep and vote for the other guy who "said ****" because you feel he may do something you like. You've made every possible effort to resist learning that Sanders actually holds a position you agree with so you don't have to have one single reason to vote for him. You were never going to vote for him, and nobody cares.

HEre I show you the clear difference between the two candidates positions.

ReverendHellh0und said:
"you won't assimilate to the bern, you are dumb!!!!!"

There are a few things I agree with the dude on. but very key philosophical differences in how these things should be dealt with preclude me voting for him.

I agree with him on nafta, on breaking up the banks, Veterans issues, on "too big to fail, too big to exist", and a couple other things.

"the other guy" has the issue on his website:

https://www.randpaul.com/issue/criminal-justice-reforms

It's not on barnie's site.

https://berniesanders.com/issues/

As you can see, for one guy it's a big part of his platform, the other guy, not so much.

you dismiss it with a snarky comment but don't actually address it. It's a concession...

I retort

ReverendHellh0und said:
And you'll vote for hillary when the crook gets the nod.

I'll be voting for the libertarian unless that guy sucks too.

ReverendHellh0und · Feb 1, 2016

you reply to thrilla:

Cardinal said:
Every time a vote has come up dealing with the drug war Sanders has specifically voted in every instance in a way that is hostile to it. Now, yes, you could like reverend hellhound choose to move the goalposts until you've finally found something that Sanders has not done, but to address the point that he's done nothing, that's demonstrably untrue and only reveals your lack of interest in researching anything about the candidate.

I laugh at that.

ReverendHellh0und said:
lol... seriously?

Bernie Sanders on the Issues

until 2015, he's been silent on it.

You correctly point out that there was 1 instance in his carreer prior to 2015 where he voted for MM..

And you start insulting me again.

Cardinal said:
From your own link Sanders sponsored a bill to legalize medical marijuana 2001. Now go ahead and move the goal posts as you always do. We all know that being wrong is more terrifying to you than nuclear war, an anthrax attack and a zombie apocalypse combined.

I retort.

ReverendHellh0und said:
No he didn't.

I get it bro, you want to be one of those young hip dependent class liberals, "feeeelin the bern"..... but d00d, come on, we both know it doesn't matter one wit who the democrat party nominee is, that's really "your guy".

FREE STUFF!!!!

you retort

Cardinal said:
From your own link:

Poor reverendhellhound. He probably wakes up screaming in the middle of a night after a nightmare in which he was wrong about something.

Now quit stalling and move your goal posts.

I go back to the issue...

ReverendHellh0und said:
wow.... So you claim:

Every time a vote has come up dealing with the drug war Sanders has specifically voted in every instance in a way that is hostile to it.

I show you that this isn't the case.

You move goal posts to:

From your own link Sanders sponsored a bill to legalize medical marijuana 2001.

I missed the one medical marijuana one.... and you proclaim victory? so oh wow, once.... gee what a warrior for liberty!

Sanders is all but silent on the war on drugs, and made no congressional effort or vote to end the war on drugs "each and every time" as you proclaimed.

And you accuse me of moving goal posts, kid?

laughable.

want to do the gay marriage issue next? or do you think he was a forefront champion of that as well....

BERN!!~!!!!!! B

You ignore it, cry about goal posts...

Cardinal said:
Thank you, I was getting tired of waiting for you to move the goal posts (frankly, you're a one trick pony). You said "until 2015, he's been silent on it."

I only needed one example to prove you wrong, and I found it. In your own link which you provided.

Now, this is where you froth at the mouth about socialism and handouts or some other ass-hattery.

The rest is recent enough history I don't need to repeat it. so to finish up...

Then you continue to hurl insults, which I don't care about, but you forget to add any substance. You have to remember to address the topic when hurling insults....

especially when you accuse the one you are insulting as the "worst debater", seriously bro.

Cardinal · Feb 1, 2016

ReverendHellh0und said:
4... give me 4 examples prior to 2015.

I'll address this and ignore the rest of your babbling.

But first, just to refresh people's memories, it (sort of) started with this post by me:

Cardinal said:
Every time a vote has come up dealing with the drug war Sanders has specifically voted in every instance in a way that is hostile to it. Now, yes, you could like reverend hellhound choose to move the goalposts until you've finally found something that Sanders has not done, but to address the point that he's done nothing, that's demonstrably untrue and only reveals your lack of interest in researching anything about the candidate.

And was responded to by reverend hellhound with this absolutist claim:

ReverendHellh0und said:
lol... seriously?
Bernie Sanders on the Issues
until 2015, he's been silent on it.

I cited one example to the contrary, because one example was all I needed to prove such an absolutist claim false. So of course, because apparently there's a lost Eleventh Commandment that says Thou Shalt Not Prove Reverend Hellhound wrong," he changed it to demand four examples, because one example was now unappealing to him.

So now that we're caught up, let's give him four examples that prior to 2015 Bernie Sanders has consistently spoken and voted in ways that are contrary to the Drug War. Oh, and just one other thing: all of these examples are from his own link supporting my position, which can only mean reverend hellhound didn't read his own link which is entirely consistent with his brand of arrogant laziness.

1. Voted NO on military border patrols to battle drugs & terrorism.
Amendment to set up a task force on counter-terrorism and drug interdiction and allow military personnel to help patrol U.S. borders.
Bill HR 2586 ; vote number 2001-356 on Sep 25, 2001

2. Voted NO on subjecting federal employees to random drug tests.
Drug Demand Reduction Act: Vote on an amendment to require that anyone hired by the Federal Government is subject to random, unannounced drug testing.
Reference: Amendment by Taylor, D-MS; bill by Portman, R-OH.; Bill HR 4550 ; vote number 1998-443 on Sep 16, 1998

3.Legalize medical marijuana.
Sanders co-sponsored the States' Rights to Medical Marijuana Act:

Title: To provide for the medical use of marijuana in accordance with the laws of the various States. Summary: Transfers marijuana from schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act to schedule II of such Act. Declares that, in a State in which marijuana may be prescribed or recommended by a physician for medical use under applicable State law, no provision of the Controlled Substances Act shall prohibit or otherwise restrict:

the prescription or recommendation of marijuana by a physician for medical use;

an individual from obtaining and using marijuana from a physician's prescription or recommendation of marijuana for medical use; or

a pharmacy from obtaining and holding marijuana for the prescription or recommendation of marijuana by a physician for medical use under applicable State law.

Prohibits any provision of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act from prohibiting or restricting a State entity from producing or distributing marijuana for the purpose of its distribution for prescription or recommendation by a physician in a State in which marijuana may be prescribed by a physician for medical use.

By the way, rev hellhound said Sanders didn't do this. Again, remember...his link. Ha ha.

4.Exclude industrial hemp from definition of marijuana.
Sanders co-sponsored Industrial Hemp Farming Act

Amends the Controlled Substances Act to exclude industrial hemp from the definition of "marihuana."
Defines "industrial hemp" to mean the plant Cannabis sativa L. and any part of such plant, whether growing or not, with a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of not more than 0.3% on a dry weight basis.
Deems Cannabis sativa L. to meet that concentration limit if a person grows or processes it for purposes of making industrial hemp in accordance with state law.

After this post expect reverend hellhound to demand eight examples, or to attempt to argue the definition of "Drug War," or to use the No True Scotsman Fallacy and say that because Sanders did not personally hold every man and woman in Congress hostage with an automatic rifle demanding an end to the drug war he must not be sincere. Because again, rev is a one trick pony and moving the goal posts is all he's got.

Obama bans solitary confinement for juveniles in federal prisons

Kobie

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.

Cardinal

Respected On All Sides