You really only need to look at the first 35 seconds of this to get the point of this post. Feel free to watch the other three minutes, if you like. Perhaps you’ll realize something, as I did, that I’d never thought about before. How come alcohol prohibition was accomplished through the very arduous process of amending the U.S. Constitution (later repealling it, through the same arduous process)? Ron Paul points out: because they [rightly] understood there was no authority under the Constitution to ban it. Obvious, I suppose, but I’d never considered that. Accordingly, it kind of sheds light on the constitutionality of all current federal drug laws that are sending people to prison.

Anyway, in contrast to how Paul deals with the medical marijuana issue — direct and forthright, without equivocation — see how Hillary and Romney deal with it. "We’ll look at that." What slime; both of them. Can you see it? It’s unmistakable. First, they enthusiastically approach, with their false empathy and compassion. It’s a great opportunity to score points, eh? Then, once they understand that the guy is merely asking to be left alone by the feds, so he can take medicine five doctors have prescribed him, the original phoniness of those two scumbuckets comes out ringing.

Contempt.

Notice also: Paul offered no false, tear-jerking empathetic compassion. He offers real compassion: freedom.