Skip to comments.
Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery calls veteran 'enemy' during marijuana debate
ABC15 Arizona ^
| 3/31/2015
| Sara Goldenberg
Posted on 04/01/2015 6:44:29 AM PDT by Conscience of a Conservative
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-104 next last
To: tacticalogic
Better yet to be a non atheist before getting in the foxhole :-)
81
posted on
04/03/2015 10:58:08 AM PDT
by
HiTech RedNeck
(Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
To: HiTech RedNeck
I appreciate the concern, but I think it’s misdirected.
82
posted on
04/03/2015 10:59:24 AM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: Smokin' Joe
The Fedzilla really needs to be reined in, tightly.
A responsible way to handle medications that are likely to be hazardous if misused is to put their use in the care of doctors. The devil is in the details and this is where states can vary.
83
posted on
04/03/2015 11:00:04 AM PDT
by
HiTech RedNeck
(Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
To: tacticalogic
84
posted on
04/03/2015 11:00:31 AM PDT
by
HiTech RedNeck
(Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
To: HiTech RedNeck
This is not about this thread, is it?
85
posted on
04/03/2015 11:20:39 AM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: Smokin' Joe
By that rationale, the Federal Government can regulate what you eat. Marijuana is not food. It is no sort of necessity at all.
To: Conscience of a Conservative
I am not a lawyer, but I think Ream has a libel case against Bill Montgomery for a comment he (Montgomery) made in a follow up email. As I read it, he accused Ream of encouraging people to break the law. Ream did no such thing. He only commented that he personally used it recreationally. That's all he said about it. Here is Montgomery's comment =>
_________________________________________________________________
"Is [Ream] an enemy like ISIS or Al Qaeda? Of course not. But if he or any other vet is going to use their status as a veteran to encourage people to break the law, then that does make them an enemy of our constitution and our laws and that is a sad commentary on where we are at," he wrote in an e-mail.
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2015/03/video_see_bill_montgomerys_religiously-based_arguments_vs_marijuana_destroy.php
87
posted on
04/03/2015 12:54:38 PM PDT
by
Ken H
To: DiogenesLamp
Marijuana is not food. Is it 'food' when it is in edible form?
It is no sort of necessity at all.
Neither are most of the things you eat, easily substituted with a flavorless soy paste with select added nutrients.
If you grant the government the power to regulate anything you consume, the precedent is established for them to regulate everything.
With Obamacare, what you eat has become part of the 'public good'.
It can also be argued that spices have no food value, with the exception of just enough sodium to keep your electrolytes balanced. Therefore, the government can regulate what (if any) spices you are allowed to use, just for one example.
Now before you say that will never happen, I never thought they'd regulate how much water my toilet flushes, what kind of light bulbs I can get, or whether I'd have to drive with a strap across my lap, but damn, they did it anyway.
88
posted on
04/03/2015 8:27:52 PM PDT
by
Smokin' Joe
(How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
To: HiTech RedNeck; tacticalogic
Theres king obama and then theres KING JESUS Yes there is, but some here deny both.
89
posted on
04/03/2015 10:11:13 PM PDT
by
itsahoot
(55 years a republican-Now Independent. Will write in Sarah Palin, no matter who runs. RIH-GOP)
To: Smokin' Joe
I am not going to participate in this silly attempt to compare marijuana to food.
To: itsahoot
Yes there is, but some here deny both. And some here cannot abide a constitutionalist.
91
posted on
04/04/2015 5:59:30 AM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: tacticalogic
And some here cannot abide a constitutionalist. Rights belong to those that enforce them. How about Lois Lerner who clearly broke the law, then look at Menendez or Petraeus and you begin to see how that Constitution works when you have a king.
I am and always have been a strict Constitutionalist but the fact is, the president, Supreme Court and Congress are not and even worse neither are the people especially now that we have no borders.
92
posted on
04/04/2015 11:34:38 AM PDT
by
itsahoot
(55 years a republican-Now Independent. Will write in Sarah Palin, no matter who runs. RIH-GOP)
To: Texas Eagle
Always nice when someone who claims to be for the Constitution lets the mask slip and the ugly fascist monster is revealed.
93
posted on
04/04/2015 11:39:32 AM PDT
by
Lurker
(Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
To: itsahoot
I am and always have been a strict Constitutionalist That rings pretty hollow when you work at finding excuses to abandon constitutional arguments.
94
posted on
04/04/2015 12:25:06 PM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: Texas Eagle; dware; Conscience of a Conservative; discostu; Lurker
.
>> What is put into marijuana to make it medical? <<
.
Availability.
Understanding.
Need.
Scientific curiosity.
.
95
posted on
04/04/2015 1:32:30 PM PDT
by
editor-surveyor
(Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
To: tacticalogic
That rings pretty hollow when you work at finding excuses to abandon constitutional arguments. I don't abandon them, I just find them pointless if there is no one to enforce the Constitution, and there isn't.
96
posted on
04/04/2015 9:58:38 PM PDT
by
itsahoot
(55 years a republican-Now Independent. Will write in Sarah Palin, no matter who runs. RIH-GOP)
To: itsahoot
A distinction without a difference.
97
posted on
04/05/2015 5:02:46 AM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: tacticalogic
A distinction without a difference. Why don't you take your copy of the Constitution to DC and make a few Citizen arrests, after you accomplish that, then I will be open to discuss the merits of Constitutional arguments. Quoting the Constitution on these forums with no enforcement power has exactly the same effect as shouting at the TV set.
98
posted on
04/05/2015 11:15:40 AM PDT
by
itsahoot
(55 years a republican-Now Independent. Will write in Sarah Palin, no matter who runs. RIH-GOP)
To: itsahoot
Why don't you take your copy of the Constitution to DC and make a few Citizen arrests, after you accomplish that, then I will be open to discuss the merits of Constitutional arguments. Quoting the Constitution on these forums with no enforcement power has exactly the same effect as shouting at the TV set. So does talking to you.
99
posted on
04/05/2015 3:12:07 PM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: tacticalogic
So does talking to you. I am glad you understand your limitations.
What are the Constitutional means of dealing with a Lawless President?
Which of those Remedies have been used?
Who has used them?
What has been the effect?
Exactly the same as talking to me I would guess, which makes my point.
100
posted on
04/06/2015 6:45:51 AM PDT
by
itsahoot
(55 years a republican-Now Independent. Will write in Sarah Palin, no matter who runs. RIH-GOP)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-104 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson