Skip to comments.Patrick Kennedy sees ‘mad rush’ to legalize marijuana
Posted on 01/12/2013 5:01:28 PM PST by Wolfie
Patrick Kennedy sees mad rush to legalize marijuana
Ex-congressmans cautionary efforts provoke pushback
DENVER Not all Coloradans appreciated former Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy harshing their buzz Wednesday with his anti-marijuana effort.
Mr. Kennedy received a mixed reception at the unveiling of Project Smart Approaches to Marijuana, known as Project SAM, which seeks to spread information about the medical and public-health drawbacks of legalizing marijuana.
Project SAM was created because we were concerned about the mad rush to legalization in this country and the false dichotomy presented as policy, Mr. Kennedy said. Incarceration or legalization. Lock em up or let em use. This is not where we want this debate to devolve to. We need a more enlightened, thorough and thoughtful discussion and policy debate.
Immediately beforehand, Mason Tvert, Colorados best-known legalization advocate, held a news conference outside the Denver Press Club where he accused Mr. Kennedy of hypocrisy for lecturing the public on marijuana even though the Kennedy empire was built on liquor.
Why is it that someone who is an heir to an alcohol fortune would want to keep an alternative to alcohol thats less harmful illegal? said Mr. Tvert, who ran the successful Amendment 64 campaign. This is an effort to keep marijuana illegal when the public is overwhelmingly stating to recognize that it doesnt work.
He displayed a sign that purported to show the distinctions between Marijuana Sold by Stores and Alcohol Sold by Patrick Kennedys Grandfather.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Sounds like the fog is finally lifting from Kennedy’s brain. Soros must be very happy that a lot more people will be in the fog of dope....making it much easier to take us down.
Retarded potheads vs boozers?
I have no side in that fight
How about federalism or usurpation?
Oops, it's a Kennedy. He won't understand the debate.
Maybe you could consider it to be a 10th Amendment issue and act accordingly? Or does the 10th only apply to your own pet causes?
I thought only Obama supporters smoked weed. I’d have thought you’d want them to have all they want.
Dumb ‘em down and dope ‘em up.
I oppose legalizing drugs.
So you are OK with the fedgov saying states cannot have medical marijuana programs? Or that states cannot legalize pot?
I also oppose theraputic child rape
even if its state by state I oppose the legalization of narcotics
“medical” marijuana - what a friggin JOKE. Nothing but a smokescreen to call it “medical” and everyone knows it. In other words its a lie.
Nice dodge of the question.
Do you think the fedgov can override states regarding marijuana legalization?
Please answer, yes or no this time.
The pro-dope crowd is taking time off from fighting against tobacco to push the legalization of marijuana.
I really don’t care
would you deny “medical” marijuana - prescribed by an employee quack of the pot shop paid by commission - to children?
Nice dodge again.
Do you see a Constitutional problem with the fedgov preventing a state from legalizing pot?
I love “conservatives” on this site that “know” better than others what can be done by the individual or the States. So long as the wind is blowing in “their” direction, everything is honkie-dorie. Cross one of “their” pet peeves than watch out! The claws of government sponsored control (their perfect little ideas control) come out.
Not happy about raising up more head in the cloud low information voters
Are you willing to support the 10th Amendment and leave intrastate mj decisions to the states?
That’s how I see it, too. More drooling, glazed-eyed dopeheads... more compliant, low-information enablers for statist interests and control.
Or are you one of those so-called limited-government conservatives who don't want government limited from what they want to be done?
Yeah, like these yahoos pushing dope at children care about the 10th, 1st, 2nd, or any part of the Constitution.
Could you translate that into normal debate?
Normally I expect liberals to bring children into the debate.
Or are you yet another person who believes the 10th Amendment should be shaped to fit your views?
I think he’s trying to get in on the ground floor by pretending to be anti-. Then he will be converted. With his connections, he could own the place.
For once a Kennedy is right, and if anyone knows about drugs and addiction it is a Kennedy.
So who has the proper Constitutional authority to ban pot. The feds? Or the states?
So do you support leaving intrastate mj decisions to the states per the 10th Amendment, YES or NO?
they be experts on that
I know many of them. I have seen their descent, I have seen those who once were intelligent become Beavis and Butthead.
I also do not think the federal government has to go along with it.
If you say so.
That’s what I say. Society works better when some people sit it out.
There are limits to every right where a line must not be crossed. I drw that line at creating a nation of Cheech and Chongs.
So you are basically saying the fedgov has the enumerated power to ban pot, over the will of states.
Please show where in the Constitution they have that power.
A novel approach. Please provide a Constitutional argument for such.
I can drive my car.
To go for more dope.
Whack out the country so they will be drugged. :) No gun even fired.
No, I am saying that the federal government doesn’t have to go along with it. If there is reason for the feds to arrest, say an illegal alien, and he is a pot dealer - then that guy is in violation of federal law.
You are too wampy to admit you are giving the fedgov powers not enumerated to them.
I see I am dealing with yet another so-called conservative who wants the fedgov to have powers not enumerated to them, as long as the usurped powers pleases them.
Ta-ta, point made.
OK, an American citizen is growing pot in their own basement for their own use. No commerce, let alone interstate commerce, involved.
Please show where in the Constitution the feds have the enumerated power to say that person cannot do such, especially when their state such as Colorado under the 10th has said they are legally OK - under state law - to do such.
And please, answer the question without falling back on unrelated topics such as illegal immigration.
The feds can’t do anything if the person didn’t do anything to get ensnared in the federal web.
but morally it might as well be
an American citizen is growing children for their own use..
if the person didn’t get caught in a federal case, then its not going to happen right?
Don't be shy, say it loud and proud!
I agree with you, if any issue should be decided by the 10th, it this one..
Please answer the question. Yes or No. Do you agree with federal law about pot cultivation for personal use being illegal? Your dodges are getting tiresome.
Mr. Kennedy is a dork. How long can he make a living off of famous ancestors?
You are such a flaming liberal.
Liberals raise kids as justification for unconstitutional actions.
Just like you have done repeatedly on this thread.
First of all, a Kennedy talks about any kind of federal prohibition when his ancestor profited immensely from past prohibitions.
And then so-called conservatives chime in about fedgov pot prohibitions when there is no authority for such under the Constitution.
The federal government can have laws too, can’t they?
I thought you were talking about state laws bieng overridden by federal law.
I do not think fed law overrides state law. I do not think agents and agencies of the federal government (should) obey state laws either.
I am not a libertarian who wants to abolish the age of consent and legalize pedophilia and incest.
That does not make me a liberal.
I sure don’t know and it seems pretty obvious that the authorities are not real sure either, as States vote to allow it and the Feds say no.
Well, that is the debate here.
And once again, you are too dishonest to debate this. I have asked simple questions. And you have evaded them like the cheerleader for federal usurpation you are.