Posted on 09/23/2002 8:56:33 AM PDT by Commie Basher
===============================
NEWS FROM THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY
2600 Virginia Avenue, NW, Suite 100
Washington DC 20037
World Wide Web: http://www.LP.org
===============================
For release: September 23, 2002
===============================
For additional information:
George Getz, Press Secretary
Phone: (202) 333-0008 Ext. 222
E-Mail: pressreleases@hq.LP.org
===============================
Libertarians urge California Gov. Gray Davis to protect medical marijuana patients from federal agents
SACRAMENTO, CA -- Should California Governor Gray Davis call out the National Guard to defend medical marijuana patients from federal agents? That's the question Libertarians will be asking today as thousands of medical marijuana advocates descend on the state Capitol in Sacramento to send the federal government a message.
"The National Guard is charged with defending lives and property when disaster strikes – and the federal raids on medical marijuana clinics have been a complete disaster," said Libertarian Party Political Director Ron Crickenberger, who is attending the rally.
"These DEA bullies with badges have ransacked clinics, brutalized helpless, dying people, and trampled state law. Now the only question is whether Davis will live up to his responsibilities as the state's chief law enforcement officer or continue to kowtow to the federal government."
Agents from the federal Drug Enforcement Administration have raided dozens of marijuana clinics over the past few months, despite the fact that the possession, use, and cultivation of medical marijuana was legalized statewide with the passage of Proposition 215 in 1996. But now Californians are fighting back. Santa Cruz and other localities are making "medipot" available during public rallies at City Hall as protesters chant, "DEA, go away!"
Monday's Medical Cannabis Freedom Day rally, which kicks off at noon on the south steps of the Capitol, was created as a way for medical marijuana supporters statewide to demand an end to federal interference.
But will calling out the National Guard be necessary? Libertarians hope not.
"No such confrontation would be needed if Davis and Attorney General Bill Lockyer had the backbone to speak out more forcefully against this unwarranted federal intrusion," Crickenberger said. "Davis has asked the federal government to stop the raids. And last week, Lockyer sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and DEA head Asa Hutchinson 'questioning the ethical basis' for the raids.
"But meekly asking the DEA to stop hasn't worked. Davis and Lockyer should publicly and unequivocally demand that the raids stop. They should remind Ashcroft and Hutchinson that their boss, President George Bush, pledged during the campaign to 'respect states' rights' on medical marijuana. And they should inform the federal government that any future harassment of medical marijuana patients will be treated as an assault under state law.
"If Davis lacks the courage to stand up to the federal bully when lives are at stake, he should have the decency to resign."
Other groups participating in the rally include the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP); the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML); Students for a Sensible Drug Policy; and the Drug Policy Alliance. Organizers are also demanding a federal pardon for Bryan Epis, a Libertarian Party member who faces 10 years in prison for cultivating medical marijuana.
>>>That is semantic sophistry. Will you answer his question without obfuscation, or are you unable to?
Bull!
I'm not obfuscating. The facts are the facts. Anyone can say anything they want to. Opinions are held by a multitude of people. A thorough reading of the details contained in the Libertarian platform and the details of the libertarian philosophy, would clear up any ambiquity, one might have relating to this factional entity. Another fact, better then 99.5% of American voters, don't agree with the Liberatraian Party platform. Libertarianism is nothing but a fringe extremist political faction. That's quite clear. Attempting to fabricate your opinion into fact, may secure you some support here on Freerepublic, but doesn't work in the real world.
Pahuanui, welcome to Free Republic. Reagan Man likes to shoot from the hip sometimes, but otherwise is a capital fellow.
What's wrong with legalized prostitution? Rich celebrities, executives, and politicians already have their call girls and mistresses -- and the cops look the other way. Laws against prostitution are yet another discriminatory and hypocritical law, aimed at the poor and lower classes. Same as drug laws.
You have a lot of upper middle class parents screaming for laws against drugs -- until their brats get busted, at which point they want special treatment.
Clowns and crooks would be more accurate. And I've met more than one or two.
>>>Libertarains believe in open borders and unlimited immigration, the legalization of all drugs and prostitution.
>>>Some do, yes.
So, I am right. But it would appear, you're confused.
I know all there is to know about the Libertarian Party platform and the libertarian philosphy. If someone chooses to deviate from the libertarian norm, thats a different story. Perhaps those individuals should become political independents and stop presenting themselves, as something they are not. I know Harry Browne. I remember the other LP candidates for president throughout the years. I'm familiar with Ron Paul and his fellow libertarian pals. I've argued with many a Libertarian and libertarian, right here on FreeRepublic. You can't deceive this astute political observer and lifelong conservative. So don't try!
In all seriousness, I think it would evolve as such in a land of smaller political subdivisions. Que sera, sera.
FreeRepublic has its fair share of them too. As do all political parties.
You can choose to believe whatever you like. If that means you believe there is some correlation between the two statements you posted, so be it.
If this is the extent of your knowledge of libertarianism, no wonder you are coming across like a complete idiot.
Libertarianism is minarchy. The smallest amount of government necessary to maintain and protect the equal Rights of everyone. Big Government Statists, like yourself, feel that people CANNOT behave themselves unless the Nanny State FedGov is breathing down their necks. In the absence of Government telling you how to run your life, would you personally run amok? Why assume others would?
Those who do think they could get away with such shinnanigans would be sorely disabused when pistol-packin' citizens put an end to their rampage. Or the police come and take them away for their initiation of force, and throw them in jail without fear they'd be back on the streets to make room for some mandatorily sentenced dope-head.
Keep talkin' pal. Your fanaticism gives us all a chuckle and really points out what a moral relativist you are.
Those irritate you?
Just curious.
M
And you are a gentleman, LC.
Thus, in a libertarian society, immigrants who passed property lines without permission would be regarded as trespassers. The ranchers in Arizona and Texas who arrest border-crossers would be heroes, not villains.
Are you suggesting that border property owners should have the ability to regulate national immigration policy? If so, why not purchase a section of border and charge $1,000 for anyone who wants to enter. Would this be consistent with the platform?
Likewise, if you didn't want to rent your apartment complex to Bangladeshis who'd try to move ten family members in and slaughter goats in the courtyard, you would not have to.
Well just where does the LP think they are going to live because they are going to come anyway. I could just see it now, Colonias going up all over the country, squatters everywhere. The mess this would create would require a massive expansion of Government, something the LP claim's their against.
I submit that a libertarian society would have immigration, but no immigration "problem."
I submit that that sounds more than a little naive.
So long as we have public, as opposed to private, ownership of entry into the US, then in my opinion, the public's will in this regard should be followed and the fact is the majority of ALL racial and economic groups OPPOSE the current level of immigration. Thus, unlike the LP, I agree that immigration should be curbed, if not eliminated entirely, so long as the points of entry are "publicly" owned.
Now I can agree with you on that statement.
Unfortunately as the leading economic power all the looters and socialist of the world will hate us no matter what we do. I'm an isolationist at heart too but its just not feasible the LP's best points and the ones it should stick to are its unbridled commitment to laissez faire capitalism including abolition of the income tax and invidual rights. It tends to be wrong about foreign policy and immigration with the exception of the objectivist who wanted to nuke the Arabs a long time ago.
Well you see, that necessarily implies the remark I made had something to do with a group of men standing in a circle masturbating each other. In fact, I simply asked you to provide the basis for your conclusion that the golden rule and libertarian philosophy are at the opposite ends of the spectrum.
If you would prefer to contemplate circle jerks instead of answering my question, that is entirely up to you.
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.