To: ConservingFreedom; Impy; stephenjohnbanker; BillyBoy; AuH2ORepublican; fieldmarshaldj
RE:”
if we can't afford to legalize drugs can we afford to keep the addictive mind-altering drug alcohol legal?” I have always said and still say that its best to let states make these individual decisions as test cases for us to observe and conclude on rather than a nationwide decree of legalization or Prohibition.
I always tell this to libs here who defend Obamacare;
I don't want a national King who calls himself conservative either.
Lets see how this test case in CO works out, I said this when it passed and repeat it now.
285 posted on
12/02/2014 8:46:07 PM PST by
sickoflibs
(King Obama : 'The debate is over. The time for talk is over. Just follow my commands you serfs""')
To: sickoflibs
That's the Constitutional position.
286 posted on
12/03/2014 7:13:20 AM PST by
ConservingFreedom
(A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
To: sickoflibs; ConservingFreedom; Impy; stephenjohnbanker; BillyBoy; AuH2ORepublican; ...
>>
Lets see how this test case in CO works out <<
The headline to this article has already answered that question. Not that any of the "weed is harmless and a bunch of people going around stoned in public won't hurt anyone" people on the left OR right will admit they were wrong.
>> I don't want a national King who calls himself conservative either. <<
I agree, but as Impy noted, check out post #3 on this thread. It seems some freepers are actually advocating that:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3228427/posts?page=3#3
288 posted on
12/03/2014 12:41:05 PM PST by
BillyBoy
(Thanks to RINOs, Illinois has definitely become a "red state" -- we are run by Communists!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson