Posted on 04/07/2014 6:07:55 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
The debate over legalizing marijuana for medical and even recreational purposes is blurring conservative and liberal lines.
With polls showing a slight majority of Americans now supporting the legalization of the drug, especially younger voters, and billionaire campaign financiers such as George Soros funding the pro-pot movement, a number of candidates are finding themselves at odds with their own party's positions.
Ari Fleischer, a White House press secretary for President George W. Bush, called marijuana "a sleeper issue," in the upcoming campaign and noted its trickiness, telling The Wall Street Journal, "All of a sudden the ground is shifting, and it's uncomfortable and complicated. Marijuana has become an issue that candidates have got to pay attention to."
Attention is on Maryland, where the state House of Delegates voted April 5 to decriminalize possession of small amounts of pot. That leaves Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley, the onetime tough-on-crime mayor of Baltimore, with a difficult decision.
O'Malley has said he is "not much in favor" of legalizing marijuana for recreational use, and called the drug "a gateway to even more harmful behavior," according to The Washington Post.
O'Malley is not alone in bucking the push by Democratic activists to follow the leads of Colorado and Washington in approving recreational marijuana use.
According to The New York Times, California Gov. Jerry Brown has said his state "ought to kind of watch and see how things go in Colorado" before approving a similar measure. Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy, meanwhile, said of his state: "Quite frankly, I dont think we are ready, or want to go down that road."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Same rule for a severe Alzheimer's patient, or someone drunk.
IMO if booze is legal and taxed, pot should be, too. BUT, let anyone grow it instead of only those big corporations with political connections.
“Society doesn’t have to officially approve of that kind of behavior.”
We don’t need a militarized police force kicking in people’s doors over it either.
So you think the Founders would have walked all over the Constitution so we could have a Drug War?
Jefferson did love French wines and Madeiras.
Still, prohibitions, taken to extremes, have unintended consequences.
If you are a real conservative, the line sharpens. This one separates “moderates” from conservatives....clearly.
Being concerned about the steady erosion of our rights is a very noble concern.
But if I could show you 10 ways that legal marijuana would dramatically increase and destroy the rights we have and the freedom and security we enjoy, would you still put up legal dope smokers?
I am willing to listen, but call me a skeptic. For well over 100 years there were no laws concerning use of recreational drugs. Are you going to argue that the people were LESS free before they criminalized drugs?
Did a Soros group pay you a little bit extra to add that flourish?
How does she act when she is not smoking?
It wasn't. Referring to a fellow Freeper as a prostitute for Soros is only Geraldo creative.
Speaking of unintended consequences...
How do you think the founders would feel about law enforcement enriching itself through asset forfeiture laws? The WOD brought us those.
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.