Judge takes swing at war on drugs

Rocky Mountain News ^ | January 29, 2003 | Karen Abbott

[lodwick]

bttt

[realpatriot71]

Guess its time to start arresting the adults who smoke and drink. That should keep it away from the kiddies.

That'd show 'em, huh?

[tacticalogic]

the ideology of pro-doperism

Don't forget to throw in something about satanic music.

[Wolfie]

That'd show 'em, huh?

Sure would. Not that I'm expecting even a modicum of intellectual consistency on the subject.

[Dane]

Dane, Dane, Dane. Once again, you're doing your feeble best to deflect to debate, in this instance trying to apply the liberal label to anyone in favor of changing the federal drug war. Despite the wide range of figures on the right who are questioning the approach the feds are taking towards drugs, you insist that it's all just a bunch of liberal hooey, as if anyone except a few of your cohorts on FR believes you. But go ahead, spew your nonsense, because more and more people in positions of power and influence are questioning the insanity of doing more and more of what is failing.

Huh I guess the defeat of the 3 main pro-drug intitatives(in Arizona, Nevada, and Ohio) pushed by the pro-drug lobby and defeated by wide margins last November doesn't mean a thing. The only place where a pro-pot intiative passed was in that "conservative" bastion called San Francisco.

I guess the real world isn't allowed to intrude into your tiny but vocal pro-drug mutual admiration society on FR.

[dogbyte12]

William F. Buckley funded National Review with donations by George Soros after all. Milton Friedman's chair in economics was financed by NORML.

Dane, KC and the lot just make themselves silly. So, just let them keep posting. I know more prominent conservatives opposed to the WOSD than liberals. If Dane would like to get me the quotes from Paul Wellstone, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Maxine Waters, and Barbara Boxer calling for the end to the WOSD, I am glad to hear it.

[MrLeRoy]

I thought we settled our differences somewhere along the line. But for the record, I accept your apology.

[MrLeRoy]

Sandra Day O'Connor serves on the Supreme Court.

And it took you only 14 minutes to find that out. Very good---have a cookie.

Now you have another 14 minutes to find out whether she's a conservative like her appointer, Ronald Reagan.

[dirtboy]

Huh I guess the defeat of the 3 main pro-drug intitatives(in Arizona, Nevada, and Ohio) pushed by the pro-drug lobby and defeated by wide margins last November doesn't mean a thing. The only place where a pro-pot intiative passed was in that "conservative" bastion called San Francisco.

There have been many, many state initiatives regarding pot, some pass, some don't. Several states have decriminalized pot. So state action gives us a range of laws to see what works and what doesn't. But the state initiatives that pass are setting up a challenge to federal usurpation regarding these laws, as the feds are currently ignoring medical marijuana laws in several states, despite the fact that the pot in question does not cross state lines. That, in the end, is the true positive of the entire pot debate - states are fighting to regain their 10th Amendment right to set their own laws regarding matters that do not cross state lines.

I guess the real world isn't allowed to intrude into your tiny but vocal pro-drug mutual admiration society on FR.

I'm not pro-drug, Dane, I'm pro-Constitutional government. If individual states wish to inact pot restrictions, that is their perogative under the 10th. The federal government has no proper authority to inact three-quarters of the laws they force on the American public, pot laws are just one small aspect of that usurpation. But since you have your own agenda that blinds your to emotion instead of reason (a very liberal tendency, mind you), you applaud usupration instead of fighting it.

Once again, better sane than Dane.

[clamper1797]

Thanks ... now lets get back the job at hand ... getting rid of the INSANE WOsD.

[MrLeRoy]

Judge Kane is a Jimmy Carter liberal.

Provide evidence for your claim---recalling that "Jimmy Carter appointed Judge Kane" is no more evidence for "Judge Kane is a Jimmy Carter liberal" than "Ronald Reagan appointed Justice O'Connor" is evidence for "Justice O'Connoris a Ronald Reagan conservative."

[dirtboy]

Now you have another 14 minutes to find out whether she's a conservative like her appointer, Ronald Reagan.

I guess we shouldn't ask him about David Souter as well. Might make his little pointy head implode from the strain.

Better sane than Dane...

[clamper1797]

And it took you only 14 minutes to find that out. Very good---have a cookie.

Yeah ... that search engine must be running slow today ....

[MrLeRoy]

Last I looked, booze and smokes are still legal - how much of a deterrent is that to keeping kids from doing them?

A recent survey (posted on FR) showed that kids now find marijuana easier to get than smokes or beer.

[dirtboy]

Huh I guess the defeat of the 3 main pro-drug intitatives(in Arizona, Nevada, and Ohio) pushed by the pro-drug lobby and defeated by wide margins last November doesn't mean a thing.

Actually, Dane, you just made a great argument for curtailing the federal drug war - it will allow the states to decide their own policies regarding pot, as these states are doing here. Thanks for helping demostrate how federalist, constitutional representative government is supposed to work.

Now if you would just express the same enthusiasm for the rights of other states to regulate pot use without federal interference.

[Protagoras]

Of course the dirty little secret of this thread is that Judge Kane was appointed in 1977, that means appointed by Jimmy Carter.

What is the point? Is there a comment on topic?

[dirtboy]

Here's a smoking gun regarding the liberalism of Judge Kane:

Adarand Defeats Clinton Administration

The Clinton administration suffered another defeat in its defense of race-based decision making, adding yet another litigation victory for the MSLF case in Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña. After nearly two years of delaying tactics by federal lawyers, Judge John Kane, Jr., appointed to the bench by President Carter in 1977, ruled that the manner in which the government awards federal highway contracts based on race is unconstitutional. Judge Kane ruled that the program was not "narrowly tailored" since it was "both underinclusive and overinclusive." "Indeed," declared Judge Kane, "under these standards, the Sultan of Brunei would qualify [as socially and economically disadvantaged]." The Clinton administration has appealed the decision.

Whoops, wait a minute. That looks like something Scalia could have written. What gives?!??

[MrLeRoy]

NICE work, db! Now hand Dane a crowbar so he can get his foot out of his mouth.

[vin-one]

I don't think he could pull it out it is so far down his mouth,
trying to sputter Soro's, and hillary, he is having trouble breathing.

[dirtboy]

Kane seems like quite a crusty character. He cut his teeth in the early civil rights movement but apparently did not go over the edge like so many of his brethern.