Three Strikes and You're Out?

[Wild Cobra]

Well... it shouldn't even be three.

Some years back, Barney Frank had a partner involved in Male Prosititution. He was also present at a partners drug bust. Now again, present at another drugh bust.

Why is Frank still in congress? Does he suck off his constituents?

[Marcus Bryant]

Would you move to his district if he did?

[Winehole23]

http://www.funnyden.com/funnypics/223/weed03.gif

[Wild Cobra]

Barney Frank present during marijuana bust (http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/dpgo_barney-frank-present-during-marijuana-bust1257553669640)


Sources tell FOX25 that when Frank was questioned he told police that he did not live in the house and that he only smoked cigars.

Congressman Frank tells FOX25 that he was surprised and disappointed with what police found. He also tells us that he wouldn't recognize a marijuana plant if he saw one because he is, "not a great outdoorsman," and ,"wouldn't recognize most plants."

I'm sorry, but why can't he "man-up" and admit his partner uses it and he doesn't think it's a problem. Anyone believe he doesn't know what it is? I have no problem with majijuana use, and I think most people don't either.

I am sick and tired of the liars in congress. How does one know when they are sincere about something? This is the second time he was at his partners place when it was raided for drugs. He also had a partner involved in prostitution. Anyone believe he didn'e know that? Our lawmakers breaking laws...

Is anyone dumb enough to believe he doesn't know what marijuana looks like:

He's Not High: Inside Barney Frank's Plan to Legalize Marijuana (http://www.esquire.com/the-side/richardson-report/new-marijuana-laws-071309)

[Winehole23]

Is anyone dumb enough to believe he doesn't know what marijuana looks like

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_GEvR3ewyp3Y/SZ2koqTkcMI/AAAAAAAABPo/pTGfkPNi3os/s400/weed-cigarettes.jpg

[FromWayDowntown]

If my wife is a petty criminal and I'm present when she's arrested three times, I shouldn't be able to serve in Congress?

[symple19]

Nobody anywhere in this country should be getting arrested (or fined) for possession.

The War on Drugs is a Crime against People

Frank did nothing wrong here, as much as I dislike his politics, but why is anyone surprised by the actions of these lowlifes in congress/senate?

I wish all those fuckers like Jefferson, Rangel, Stevens, and Frist would be thrown into a big hole and set on fire...Publicly.

[spursncowboys]

I don't think we should start telling people who they cannot elect.

[Winehole23]

I don't think we should start telling people who they cannot elect.Exactly. If the thirteen term congressman wears out Massachusetts voters, they'll pick someone else.

[Nbadan]

and he still does a better job stoned that most GOP politicians..

[Wild Cobra]

and he still does a better job stoned that most GOP politicians..
I could care less if he gets stoned.

I guess you're right. He's a very effective politician. Must be why I hate him.

I hate his politics, and he is effective.

[AussieFanKurt]

mandatory sentencing is a problem in general

[jack sommerset]

They need to legalize the shit and be done with it. You can't "man up" when it comes to weed. If you do, you got to jail. The weed should be legal. Stupid that it is not legal.

[ChumpDumper]

So what was Frank convicted of?

[Nbadan]

fixing parket tickets?


a reprimand for Frank using his congressional office to fix 33 of Gobie's parking tickets

[spursncowboys]

so what was frank convicted of?

dwg?

[word]

mandatory sentencing is a problem in general

You mean, beyond it being immoral and stupid ?

[spursncowboys]

You mean, beyond it being immoral and stupid ?

How is it immoral?

[Winehole23]

The penalty and the crime are supposed to be proportional. They are supposed to fit. Sending someone to prison for life for stealing a pack of gum, smoking a j, or for some technical violation of release, is disproportionate.

[AussieFanKurt]

You mean, beyond it being immoral and stupid ?


How is it immoral?

Its damn stupid yeah. Immoral, I dont know if thats the word

[spursncowboys]

The penalty and the crime are supposed to be proportional. They are supposed to fit. Sending someone to prison for life for stealing a pack of gum, smoking a j, or for some technical violation of release, is disproportionate.
Maybe. However felonies are supposed to be serious crimes. Legal dictionary states its "serious crimes". Now if you commit two serious crimes, and then you get out and commit another serious crime - you probably will be a career criminal for the rest of your life. In TX, we didn't have a three strikes-out law, but ours IMO was better. they had a law that the penalty doubled for every new felony.

Also this strawman has two felonies, had to have done some time and steals a pack of gum. C'mon.

[boutons_deux]

There are 100 teen criminals locked up FOR LIFE for crimes where no one died. All 100 are in USA, 77 are in Florida.

Hard-ass incarceration and mandatory sentencing (no "judging" involved) offer a huge conflict for right-wingers.

Fiscal conservativism would say "reduce govt spending to zero".

While social conservatism of low-hurdle to (long-time) smash-mouth incarceration runs up government spending at $2000+/month per inmate for decades.

But of course inflating/privatizing the Prison Industrial Complex is business-friendly, using .... tax dollars.

How do conservatives resolve this conflict? As always, follow the money.

[baseline bum]

There are 100 teen criminals locked up FOR LIFE for crimes where no one died. All 100 are in USA, 77 are in Florida.

Hard-ass incarceration and mandatory sentencing (no "judging" involved) offer a huge conflict for right-wingers.

Fiscal conservativism would say "reduce govt spending to zero".

While social conservatism of low-hurdle to (long-time) smash-mouth incarceration runs up government spending at $2000+/month per inmate for decades.

But of course inflating/privatizing the Prison Industrial Complex is business-friendly, using .... tax dollars.

How do conservatives resolve this conflict? As always, follow the money.

The same way they justify spending a trillion in Iraq. If it's war spending, then it's good, whether the war is against towel-heads there or American citizens here.