It will need to be a gradual change, as the American people need to educate themselves on the topic. Most of what the American people know about drugs is based on lies, half truths and omissions of truth.

As I said earlier, I bet less than 1% of Americans can even give me a ball park figure on how many overdose deaths there are from illegal drugs. Maybe 1% have bothered going to NIDA, or other government websites for detailed statistics, but I know that few have ever bothered to actually do any significant reading on this topic.

Yes, it will be a gradual process, but the sooner we begin, the sooner we can finish. It is time to open the debate on drug legalization. For the debate to enter the mass media and to be discussed rationally, logically, without emotional appeals.

Neither will i. But that doesn't mean i'm going to spout it to the masses if i think it is ultimately detrimental at this early stage. Hell i'd lie through my teeth if i thought it would help.

that would be nice. however, humans being naturally emotional beings, america having free speech, and legalization being a mountain climb of an uphill battle, it pays to not overextend yourself to early. Start small and work to make it bigger.
Do them one or two at a time. Otherwise you fall off (turn public support against you instead of for you).

Reality,
The problem with our government and the majority of U.S. citizens is that you get tangled up in the details. And, not important details, which would pose a reason to do so, but mindless, nonsense details that have no merit.
I think you would argue a point that you know you are wrong about ,simply so you would not have to admit you were wrong.
I see this crap everywhere and it is so counter productive.
What is it? Pride? Would it affect your feelings of self worth? What?
It's frustrating trying to make real progress with people like you around because your so busy disecting that which does not need to be disected.
You call yourself "Reality" when in truth, your supporting conclusions based on a foundation of misconceptions. That, my friend, is not reality. That is stupidity.

Keyword phrase there is "the majority of U.S. citizens". those are the people who pass the laws. Those are the people you have to sway. Those are the people you don't piss off or frighten if you want to pass your bill.
It may be stupid but its REALITY. Go ahead and try to get it all passed at once. Its doomed to fail and make the legalization movement lose ground. I don't want to see that happen. Its all well and good to be an armchair general, but all that shit goes out the window when you step out into the street, to paraphrase Descartes. Meaning you can use all the logic and sound reasoning an "this makes sense" talk you like, but if you can't convince the people of it its totally useless.
Thats WHY it has to be SLOW. You may think me as stupid as you like. I guarentee you i feel the same about you hoss.

The majority of U.S. citizens do not pass laws. The money (banking cartel) passes the laws. That is the reality of it. And all your little mindless disections aren't going to do squat. All my rantings of right and wrong arent going to do squat. So really, whats the difference?

really? when exactly did we turn from a representative republic to an oligarchy? Politicians may be rather corrupt as a rule of thumb, but if you vote them out of office theres nothing they can do about it. Sounds like rule by the people to me. You can write your congresscritter and tell them what you want them to do. Send them petitions with signatures of their constituents on it. get enough that it effects their power base and watch how fast they jump to. Sounds like rule by the people to me.

Seperating a goal too large to pass at once into smaller parts that can be passed progressively seems to work. Look at how prohibition started in the first place. Look at gun control. Look at civil rights. You have to start off small and get people used to it. then you can get bigger and bigger until youve got what you originally intended because it 'made sense' but couldn't convince people of when you started. Patience is a virtue.

I understand your thoughts on incremental drug/gun bill diplomacy. But I see it working more against me then for me. I don't think we have had a Federal election that hasn't been manipulated in decades, so your "by the people, for the people" crap is just that, crap. And you call yourself "reality"? The reality is that our elected officials don't call the shots and haven't for some time. The money makes the rules. Thats the way it's been and, unless a miracle occurs, the way it will continue.

How exactly can our views be accurately represented by our leaders when our leaders routinely lie prior to elections? Obama lied about the withdrawal of troops (a hot issue), and Bush lied about WMDs (gave him a boost prior to the election for his second term). Do you consider your business dealings with a cellphone seller to be willing, honest, mutually beneficial and representative of your desires when you send the seller $200.00 and the seller sends you an empty box instead of the phone?

if you don't like it perhaps you could be less trusting for one, and then vote their ass out of office for seconds.

Well, I didn't vote for Obama in the first place, but you bring up an interesting point. Would you say the same to the guy trying to buy the cellphone? For him to be less trusting in the making of contracts? Seems to me like you want people to just give up the idea of a "contractual agreement" because they can be screwed, rather than enforcing contract law.

o? don't think i said that at all. Unless obama made some sort of written agreement on which he swore to get x y and z done in exchange for your vote.
youre comparing apples and oranges, politics and written contracts.

he might have said he'd look into it or try, but the president doesn't have to power to pass things by force of will now does he? which gives the slick bastard an easy out. as it has for ever politician of our government ever.

Politicians lie. You should know that, and from your comments elsewhere, i'd assumed you did.

I think Commerce among the several States of the Union should be well regulated and taxed to defray that expense.

An oral, recorded statement can be just as valid as a contract. You're confusing it with the statute of frauds, which requires some agreements to be in a certain format in order to avoid fraudulent claims that the agreement took place later on. However, it really doesn't apply here since Obama was serious when making the claims and since they were well-document (often with a video camera).I don't think that's what happened, though.He is the commander-in-chief of the military. While he does not control funding or declarations of war, he does control the military.But, if I remember correctly, his promises are within his legal power. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the President (CinC of the military) can decide to withdraw the troops.And people violate contracts. Doesn't mean we shouldn't enforce contracts.

What is wrong with you?

I have listened to people bitch about broken campaign promises my entire life. It has been going since this country was first founded, yet the sheeple still support the two ruling parties. If you vote for, or support either party, in any way, then you are part of the problem.

NAFTA is a great example of broken promises. Almost everything we were told about NAFTA was lie. The Republicans pushed it through Congress and a Democrat president signed it. Both parties are guilty.

But feel free to harp on broken campaign promises if you wish, after all, you will have new material every 4 years.