Brazzil

Sounds like First American president to me.


Wrote a Constitution not fo the people butr but for " some people "(read Wite male with land) and took from 1776 to all to way to the 1900"s for women to vote.


Forget about civil rights fo minorites. Blacks still have to seat in the back of the buses until the end of the 60"s. Sad but we talking about 185 years after the constitution for the """ People"""


About chasing the Left


Gee did ever hear about

Joseph R. McCarthy,

possibly the greatest demagogue in the history of America, was also the strongest anti-Communist. In the minds of his friends and foes alike, he was an incredible person whose mere presence could be overpowering. He was a master at playing the press; his name was in the headlines frequently. He also perfected the art of playing on people's fears. His portrayal of Communism as the supreme evil allowed his accusations of "disloyalty" to be incredibly effective.

Of course, there were some things about the flamboyant Senator from Wisconsin that limited his effectiveness. During his storied career, he was never once able to have an accused Red be found guilty.1 He was a heavy drinker and had a soft spot for horse racing and poker games. Despite these shortcomings, he was able to become a national celebrity.

From his expensive election campaign, to his first speech on Communism, to the Army-McCarthy hearings, to his sudden death, and even to today, Senator McCarthy has been the subject of a long-lasting controversy about morality and politics. Some people feel that he was a counter-productive demagogue who aimlessly attacked innocent people. Others felt that he was bringing to the attention of America the eminent threat of Communism. He was a cold-hearted man who was a disgrace to the United States, whose anti-Communist fervor was not based upon ideology but upon his need for a headline-gaining cause.

Here on the streets of Rio, with people getting killed daily in gun shootouts, the latest in copacabana...we need the military to play more of a part. It seems that in the last several years, they have put down all responsibility and only do things to "preserve their honor". Before, was too much military, now there is too much violence and we need military intervention in Rio de Janeiro...

Hell, move out of Rio. Being impossible to eliminate the demand, and dealing with the suppliers is just plain pointless, being both the demand and the markup outrageous, the gap will always be refilled. The military exists to deal with external issues, military siege would only lead to drug sponsored coup d'etat.

In America you have tons of agencies trying to stop drugs.

What happens???

Nothing.


The problem is the supply and demand.


IF people in Rio are stupid to still buying drugs they sure deserve the problems they have.

80% of the crime in Rio has some connection with drugs


Anybody with half brain knows that drugs are not good .Presuming of course that before drugs these people had any brain mass.

you do not need the governmnet to tell you that kind of information.

The jobs is for the parents.

"IF people in Rio are stupid to still buying drugs they sure deserve the problems they have."

Simplistic platitudes, from simplistic minds. Granted the idiots fuelling this market by buying their drug(s) of choice are the source of Rio's problems, however not all Cariocas are drug users. So, why should THEY have to suffer for the stupidty of others?

Either legalize, regulate and control soft drug use, or take the "broken window" stance on law enforcement that Rudolf G. used in New York. Meaning, every user, regardless of the amount they posses, when caught goes straight to the pokey. Make the user's life hell - regardless of "vc se sabe em quem vc esta falando" impunity pleas.

The problem with this approach, of course, is police corruption, Brazilian judicial corruption, a lack of jail space, general Brazilian incompetence, and of course the long ques of champaign socialists "hug-a-thug" bleeding hearts that obfuscate the reals problems and real solutions with their "it takes a village, to raise a village idiot" demands.

em fim, Rio's doomed.

You said

The problem with this approach, of course, is police corruption, Brazilian judicial corruption, a lack of jail space, general Brazilian incompetence, and of course the long ques of champaign socialists "hug-a-thug" bleeding hearts that obfuscate the reals problems and real solutions with their "it takes a village, to raise a village idiot" ""
demands.


Does not take a village to raise a person.

Take the parents obligation to raise their own kid.

Honesty and common sense has nothing to do with been poor.


If all you say was true the USA would be a Free drug zone.


US spend billion of dollars and still having the bigest comsuption of drugs in the world.

Legal and Illegal drugs.


Most of the time the answer to a simple question is the simple answer

Sad but sometimes you pay for the acts of idiot people.

Is the same in America or any other place in the World for that matter.


STOP BLAMING other(police,jail,madre tereza) for a problems in life. Is time for people start taking some responsability.





Is

Not as simple as that! When desperate people have mundane things to worry about like finding the next meal , paying billls etc they don't have time to think or worry about raising their children through ethics, although in principle you are indeed correct.

As for the drug problems - some people do it as a way out of their social situation and others do it because its easy and they want to be greedy.

If the government start addressing some of these social iniqualities and social deprivation. Drug trafficking, drug dealing and taking may in time decline.

Brazil always have poor people

In past you have people in Brazil even more poor that they are today without any kind of public Benefits.

Even with that situation people were educated by their parents that most of time had no Academic Education.


In the 20"s you had people coming from Italy living in "Corticos" a house were sometimes up to 20 families live using a single Bathroom with a hole in the ground.

Honest has nothing to do with been poor or not.

Or you are honest or you are not.

Aout find the next meal

If that was true, people in Brasil would be taking food to eat e not selling drugs

If you have not time to educated your kids than you should not have kids- To have sex is option and not a obligation. Is not the job of the state to pay for you sex choiices.

You can go in Any Helth center in Brazil and they will give to you a bag of birth control pills for free

"If all you say was true the USA would be a Free drug zone. "

It's far from a drug free zone, but you don't see drug dealers running large cities now do you? hmmm?

Personal responsibility? I agree. However, responsibility has never been a Brazilian strong-point now has it?

Wel,l the fact the drugs lord are not in the open field does not mean that are not making the same damage in the US.


Well you are making a generalization of people in Brazil.

If you go around you will find million of hard working and well do people with very good life.


If some(not all) Brazilian do not have sense of responsabilty is in PART because tons of people in the news midia make then believe that the government need to take of then in everything in life.


Since a say in PART for the midia doctrination , i would put 90% of the blame in the person sense of responsabilty.

I think the Rio police forces are quite able to deal with the drug problems on the shanty-tows etc., if only they were given the proper support of the people to do the job in the first place. For me, that means in force and without 'pinko' bleeding-hearts feeling more for the criminal elements than the victims of crime. The need for direct military action seems to me to be dangerous, in that a country would be using its army against its own population. I wouldn't condone this no matter how worthless and dangerous the social groups targeted were. It's a police matter first and foremost.
As for drug trafficking, some of the richest countries in the world have some of the worst problems-- take the US and Europe for example (I'm from Britain). The way forward is to give the police/courts more liberal powers to arrest and imprison dealers and their helpers, and to sieze and conviscate ALL property of those involved in drugs: basically they and their family are left destitute. Of course, the simple solution is just to shoot drug dealers, and those associated with them, on sight; but 'hug-a-thug' types find that a bit too rich for their blood. It's time to clean the house, gentlemen; time to chuck out the rubbish.

Nip it in the bud. Who do you think is controlling the drug trade? NOT THE POOR! The poor aren't even the biggest consumers of drugs. It is and has always been the rich drug lords who control the trade and throw a few profits to the poor.

It definitely is not the poor who is using the proceeds (mostly laundered) of the drug trade to fly in imported marble tiles for their villas and mansions and buy expensive yachts to entertain their coke-sniffing friends and politicians. Of course the poor always takes the blame for the "downfall of society" and serves as a convenient scapegoat for all of the ills of that society.

Poor people do whatever it takes to survive but that's all they're doing with their drug proceeds is surviving. Not furnishing 100 room mansions on the beachfront.

Legalize marijuana, tax the rich a little more and pay the cops an actual wage, leave the coke situation alone and see what happens to it over time (sending in thugs in uniform to kill black children don't solve nothing), and, god forbid, maybe we can also try to give some of those children an education in the slums beyond (maybe) being able to write their name. But yeah, the current mandate given to the cops to spray bullets is clearly working.

Legalize ALL drugs, let´s trade cocaine futures, let´s subsidise cultivating and consumption, let´s make it available to all humans with price fluctuation dependent on local candy, and let´s do with all with Victorian stoicism. Government shouldn´t be allowed to regulate vice or instill virtue nor maximize productivity or prevent natural selection. If our society isn´t one able to cope with unregulated amounts of drugs and suicide as something other than imoral, then it is just a fragile defunct enterprise doomed to total failure. Should drug use disposition be a genetic factor, it is our obligation to insure a better gene pool for the future, not to mention the much needed regulation and reduction of over population. Let´s make the passing over from this unholy coil a thundering blaze of powdered face (in cocaine) glory.

I agree with that 100%. I recently returned from a trip to Bolivia. Very few times in my life have I seen people in such need. The situation for many Bolivians and Peruvians is desperate.

I wholeheartedly support cocaine production in those countries and if my fellow Americans want to sniff, smoke and shoot cocaina until their tender little hearts explode, I couldn't care less. It also wouldn't hurt my feelings to see the European, Australian, Brazilian and Argentinian population decline by a few million. Let them drop dead from massive heart failure and toss their bodies in the Rivers and the oceans. The amount of good it could do in certain desperate countries in South and Latin America outweighs the loss of human refuse we would be sacrificing from OD's in Europe, Cananda, Australia and America and not to mention Brazil and Argentina. Let's let them ride the while horse if they want to.

So, are they not consumed the same way as drugs?

The American authorities do not stop drug consumption in American territory because they do not really care.

P.S. So, why are tehy not ...