Posted on 11/14/2012 8:12:19 AM PST by MadIsh32
Much ink has been spilt in describing the precise nature of the soul-searching the GOP is undergoing in the wake of getting totally shellacked last Tuesday. There are a plethora of suggestions — of varying degrees of helpfulness — as to how the Republican party can re-brand and re-orient itself; ranging from capitulating on taxes to deciding that gay marriage isn’t a hill to die on. But there’s one easy ideological maneuver that Republicans could make that would simultaneously burnish their stance as the party of freedom and expand their base while alienating the president from his. It is a move that might also make one swing state a little easier to win in 2016. Congressional Republicans and conservative leaders could get on the weed bandwagon.
Now, the John Boehners and Mitch McConnells of the world may never win the loyalty of the Choom Gang contingent. But Republicans should rejoice with those who rejoiced when voters in Colorado and Washington passed sensible marijuana policy. Last Tuesday, both states passed ballot measures decriminalizing the recreational use of medical marijuana — and giving the GOP an early Christmas present.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
JSNTN: “It’s the only issue I’m aware of where a substantial fraction of FReepers are anti-states’-rights.”
Where do you get that idea? Keep in mind that even if pot was legalized in certain states, the federal government has the constitutional authority to regulate both its importation and use in commerce across state lines. Justice Thomas is the most conservative justice, and I think he speaks for most FReepers on this issue. By using the word, “substantial,” I hope you don’t mean anything approaching a majority of FReepers.
Where do you get that idea?
From posts like the following - admittedly a nonrandom sample, but representing a substantial fraction of FReepers who posted to those threads:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2958387/posts?page=3#3
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2956184/posts?page=10#10
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2956184/posts?page=17#17
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2929280/posts?page=7#7
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2929280/posts?page=47#47
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2915299/posts?page=38#38
By using the word, “substantial,” I hope you don’t mean anything approaching a majority of FReepers.
I think they're in the minority - how far short of 50% I wouldn't venture to say.
there is no taking back the joint. America is over, get used to it. The choices are continue the futile resitance, give up, or separate.
Even if we would have ‘won’ this election, would we really have seen anything substantial rolled back? Even a modest return towards liberty and freedom? No, didn’t happen under Reagan, won’t happen now. All we ever do is slow the descent for a while, we never go back the other way.
It is probably a fantasy, but I fully support secession. It needs to happen before there is nothing left in this country to save. Saving half of it is better than saving none of it.
I believe pot distorts thought processes. It creates false sentiments, mental confusion and social disruption. Yes, it is a malicious drug which, like alchohol, requires years to overcome its impact. Legal or illegal its influcence is destructive.
Why do you believe pot is the devil? Do you believe it should be illegal?
I believe pot distorts thought processes. It creates false sentiments, mental confusion
Agreed.
and social disruption.
I might agree if I knew more specifically what you meant by this.
Yes, it is a malicious drug which, like alchohol, requires years to overcome its impact. Legal or illegal its influcence is destructive.
I agree that pot, like alcohol, has long-term destructive impact in some cases - but not all. So I guess I can accept that pot, like alcohol, is the devil to some people.
Do you have a position on the legality of those two drugs?
I do not ascribe to criminalization of substances unless they are substantially dangerous. I do not categorize alchohol, tobaccy or firearms as such. Restrictions on their purchase by age is a reasonable approach.
By socially destructive I mean pot distorts relationships.
Do you categorize marijuana as substantially dangerous?
By socially destructive I mean pot distorts relationships.
It can do so; do you agree that alcohol can also do so?
Those tweets are not from Sarah Palin. Her twitter account is @SarahPalinUSA . Just FYI.
I do not categorize mj a diff than alch. Yes, clearly alch distorts relationships.
Satisfied?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.