Replies

Everytime I see a subject like this, I think to myself, "well, here's an issue that Rs and the LP can finally see eye-to-eye on." Everytime, I'm wrong.

I know that in reality, the Rs love Big Government as much as the Ds, but in theory, at least, they are supposed to support a platform of autonomy and states' rights.

So why is it here you don't support the LP's stance that CA should be free to make laws concerning CA? And when the Feds infringe upon the rights of the CA citizens, why shouldn't CA be able to defend itself against the tyranny of the Fed?

I think two things: I think most Rs are fine with states' rights as long as the states exercise those rights consistent with the Rs personal moral spectrum. In this case, drugs sort of rub the Rs the wrong way, so states' rights go out the window. I also think that the Rs have some sort of self-confidence issue so that whenever the LP makes a statement, many Rs immediately distant themselves from it, no matter WHAT that statement is.

This is an issue that Rs and libertarians should agree on 100%--CA can make laws according to the wishes of its legislature, so long as those laws fall within the framework of the Constitution.

I think most Rs are fine with states' rights as long as the states exercise those rights consistent with the Rs personal moral spectrum.

Republicans, Democrats, and Greens call it "balancing of equities" and "not going to extremes" and "moderation." The concept of standing by principles -- consistently -- is unthinkable to Demopublican Green socialists.