ELECT: FreAkweNtcY Florida House of Representatives
Created on: February 3rd, 2008
My speech: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZO0fd0Pz26k
Sponsorships:
| user | amount | user | amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| mcearlgrey | $17.76 | FreAkweNtcY | $6.17 |
| Doomrock | $4.00 | JoeyJoeJoe | $1.23 |
| Sponsor this site! | Total: $29.16 | Active: $0.00 | |
Vote metrics:
| rating | total votes | favorites | comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| (3.52) | 208 | 4 | 211 |
View metrics:
| today | yesterday | this week | this month | all time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 10,247 |
Inbound links:
| views | url |
|---|---|
| 54 | https://www.bing.com |
| 9 | http://home.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home |
| 7 | http://216.18.188.175:80 |
| 6 | http://www.google.com.hk |
| 1 | http://ytmnsfw.com/sites/sponsored/alltime/3 |
To answer Petitman's question (and cooke's), My platform aims primarily at one thing: personal freedom - NOT an answer to drug misuse, or drug-induced crimes. I don't want people to misinterpret that, as you both clearly have here. And that may be my fault for not stating that more clearly. What I did (when I was practically a child, mind you) was very bad, indeed, and is not at all beneficial to my campaign, though I do feel that actually spending 7 months in jail was overall beneficial to my (continued)..
What I would seriously hope is that no one would base their choice to vote for me solely on my criminal past. I'm not saying this wont happen, but it pains me to think that people would be so unforgiving. Notwithstanding, I understand that it may simply be a comfortability issue. However, to balance the argument, I find it can be potentially in my favor because I have "hands-on" experience in both the drug and criminal fields.
"During the Fall of 2003, just after turning 18 years old, I became extremely depressed and lost touch with reality."----Yeah because being the spoiled rich son of a best selling author mom and a lawyer dad is just too much for some people to bear. You poor kid!!!! Sounds to me like you still haven't regained touch with reality, punk.
My parents divorced when I was about 4, and I lived primarily with my mother on the south side of town. We lived in poverty for quite some time, though the time I got to spend with my dad was a little more lavish, since he was an established lawyer. My mother eventually filed for bankruptcy before establishing herself as an author.
Well I'm certainly not here to prove you wrong in order to get more than a 1 out of you - that's not something I really care about. If I happen to fit into the description of what the "Ron Paultards" are saying, so be it. I seriously doubt they know who I am, though, and I certainly have not affiliated with anyone from Ron Paul's campaign.
If it wasn't illegal for my brethren to vote for your office space, we would. As an organization, we personally take pleasure in throwing people into our machinery and watching the chains grinding their skin down to the bone. It even causes some of my peers to masturbate furiously and uncontrollably.
You know, as an independent candidate, you may want to consider taking extreme measures to gain publicity. I mean you're a YTMND user, not only that but you're young as f*ck. Jesse Ventura was I'm pretty sure the first independent candidate to win the governorship of Minnesota cause he was a balls-to-the-wall f*cking hardass, and everyone knew quite well that he aint got no time to bleed. So how about a superhero costume at your next rally, eh?
It's unfair to make this campaign similar to Ron Paul. First of all, Ron Paul sort of sold out by going Republican. He's an independent in my eyes. Secondly, how many people do you really think are potential voters in my district on the internet? And how many will actually come across my site or my video? Not many at all. I'm not doing this to win - I'm doing this to spread a message.
After hearing enough people whine and cry about the beard (you were just commenting though, thats ok), I have shaved it off - after three years of having it. Just another sacrifice I'll make to show people how important their needs are. I almost wish I could keep it in an alternate universe, to compare how many people would not vote for me because of chin hairs. Anyways, I appreciate the feedback. I'll keep my eyes peeled for any other candidates with beards -- they'll probably support what I have to say.
"My sister and I were active members of the Tallahassee Irish Step Dancers for a few years, and since then have enjoyed entertaining and dancing with the locals at the yearly Downtown Getdown functions. I enjoy video games and all kinds of music."
Well I guess he's got the gamer nerd and Irish Step Dancer vote locked.
Though there has been much stipulation that the Church of Scientology has brought about actual physical harm to people, it's still out of anyone's jurisdiction right now. It would not be my place to dismantle a religion, hence separation of church and state. Perhaps through me, though, and through the new changes I would make, it would have a little less power.
Any chance that I would endorse your candidacy and/or positions died when after reading through these comments and looking at your site, I realized that you removed any reference to anything negative about your past from your site. I don't live in your district, but I know people who do, and they won't be voting for you.
You know, the good twist with the negatives is that the fact that you are overtly a criminal (in the past). This would mean that you would be less likely to be assumed for large scale corruption and embezzlement, because you'd be on watch. So the people would get a sense of security from knowing this, right? In any case, once again, best of luck.
Take a prominent issue today, such as gay marriage. In 1996, Hawai'i legalized it, but it was not recognized by other states. It seems odd that a marriage license from one state is not valid in another. Perhaps on some social issues it is best to take it to a federal level, and some should be reserved for states. You can't just leave all of those as state issues, Mr. Shaw.
A very good point, sir, that's a tough topic to debate on. I think perhaps moving it to a Federal matter should be our last resort. We should keep the power in the State as much as possible, if we want to maintain democracy. I've got some ideas on how to find a solution for some social issues. PM me if you'd like to hear them.
Because Massachusetts likes the guy! C'mon, you and I both know that he's the icon of the democratic party, I mean the only senator that's been there longer than him is senator Robert Byrd, who will have his golden jubilee come January. It's thanks to this man that most democratic legislation is actually passed. Furthermore, Time magazine actually called him one of the best ten senators of all time. Think before you pick on Senator Ted Kennedy. Chappaquiddick... That's a cheap shot.
Best advice after watching the YouTube video, is to use less "uh" and "and..." in your public speaking. Im not being a prick or anything, just saying that that is something people really notice when someone's in the spotlight. It makes you appear unsure of yourself and what you're saying. Which in turn makes other unsure of you. Best of luck.
Were you convicted on the charges of hand gun theft, and if so, where are the stolen firearms? Also, about how much do you expect your reforms on drug law enforcement to save the state government? If this is not enough to eliminate the budget defecit, what other measures do you propose to eliminate the defecit? Are there any other government programs in Florida that need to be reformed? If these reforms result in a budget surplus, will you expand government services, cut taxes, or call in bonds?
I was never convicted of any crimes. The guns were all returned to their proper owners -- all accounted for. As for an actual figure on how much it would save the State government, please allow me to return an answer to you when I can have a better approximation. I am not going on an "if" policy -- this will work. And if there are people that disagree, or have doubts, and would not like to support this stance, by all means that is their right.
This is indeed a dangerous route that I'm going with, but for this to work I have to be as fearless as possible. To answer your question as best I can, though, if this is not enough to eliminate the budget deficit, I have no other measures to propose to eliminate the deficit. I will most likely not expand government services, as I am a proponent of limited government.
To answer your very last question - was it an actual question or was it rhetorical? You may believe that reforming drug law is nowhere near enough to have a real platform on economics, but I do, and it's as simple as that. I feel that my platform sure beats the pants off the 5 other candidates for this seat who are all simply promising "Tax cuts, better education, better healthcare, etc.." I am very frustrated with how similar all the other candidates' platforms are. Nothing ever seems to get better.
If you are going to run for public office, then you can't refuse to answer questions because you don't like the way they are asked. I mean, you don't have a chance in hell of winning, but you have to have a thicker skin and be ready for tough questions if you want anyone to consider you seriously. I have my suspicions that you are just a joke candidate, but I'll assume you are for real. If so, then you have to dump the juvenile, "I won't answer because you're mean!" tactics. Time to grow up, junior.
Again, the most juvenile of responses. You walk in here and post your candidacy, then duck questions. If this is such a pitiful political venue, then why are you here promoting your candidacy? If you can't handle YTMND, then a real political forum will eat you alive. I would suggest you adopt a more professional attitude if you expect anyone to take your run seriously.
I'm sorry - what questions are you referring to that I have "ducked" ? What else would you like me to do? I had already asked for a pardon for the question in the beginning of this board, and I answered it best I could. You must be out of your MIND if you're comparing YTMND to a political forum. This is not a "professional" board. I suppose I should have separated politics from personal enjoyment, seeing as how people like you can't discern the difference. Hence, "The internet is serious business."
This is from your website. "John Shaw is in favor of the decriminalization of
any and all illicit and illegal substances in the State of Florida."
I don't mind legalization of marijuana, but when someone wants to legalize harmful substances like meth thats just crossing the line. The fumes created from meth when making it harm everyone around you like if you live in an apartment, and have you ever heard about meth labs exploding in houses and killing their neighbors? continued
Legalizing meth is a bad bad BAD idea. Legalize it and crime rate will rise even more, murder, child abuse and overdoses will be more and more frequent. Marijuana on the other hand is not known for destroying whole sections of society. Legalize that and let them be. The rest of us can keep the country afloat.
"Have you even taken more than 2 hours to figure out the consequences of legalizing all these drugs? There is no doubt that you are unprepared to run for office." -- Prepared as I can be, bud. As I said in the video, prior to June of 2007 I had no political interest. That means that over the last 8 months I have been cramming as much information into my head as possible. The only reason why I didn't delay and wait to run is because the seat I'm running for is term-limited out.
I'm in favor of safety. If the growing of Methamphetamine proves too dangerous for home users to do, I would suggest it be created in controlled environments. Please believe me when I say that meth is reallllly hindering this platform. Remember, this is not about how dangerous a substance is, this is about personal freedom. If that personal freedom inflicts harm upon another human, such as growing meth would, then we would disallow the growing of meth, simple as that.
"Legalize it and crime rate will rise even more, murder, child abuse and overdoses will be more and more frequent." It is unfair of you to give such absolutes; no one really knows exactly what will happen, and this includes you. We can all take our guesses. My guess is that crime rate would DEcrease, murder, child abuse, and overdoses will be LESS frequent. So which theory is right?
I speak from experience of myself and others who have used it. I have been in 2 relationships where meth was used quite frequently. I do speak from a point of view, but it is one that is experienced with the subject. You may be right though. I cannot predict what would happen on a large scale with drug legalization. When I was using drugs, I would have taken a position closer to your own I am sure.
I do certainly wish meth simply never existed, but it does, and it might exist for some sort of purpose, albeit probably not a very good one. Regardless of my dislike for any of the drugs, I must look at it from an ethical point of view, and a logical one at that. Thanks for your feedback, and if you wish to talk some more just drop me a PM.
It doesn't really matter what I say. If you'd like my personal opinion on it, I'll be happy to give it to you. That's a major problem with politics, though. People let personal opinions dictate the way a government should be assigned. I'm not avoiding anything; I'm saying what I feel is appropriate.
Bold
Italic
Underline
Code
User Link
Site Link