Skip to comments.
GOP hopefuls criticize Obama marijuana policy but hedge on their own
The Washington Times ^
| April 1, 2015
| Seth McLaughlin
Posted on 04/02/2015 10:26:36 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
To: SheLion; Eric Blair 2084; -YYZ-; 31R1O; 383rr; AFreeBird; AGreatPer; Alamo-Girl; Alia; altura; ...
Don’t bogart that Nanny State PING!
2
posted on
04/02/2015 10:29:45 PM PDT
by
Tolerance Sucks Rocks
(Celebrate Holy Week by flogging a banker. It's what Jesus would have done.)
To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
So if Louisiana were to legalize, Gov Jindal would side with the Federal government over the people of his own state.
Ever heard of the 10th Amendment, Governor?
3
posted on
04/02/2015 10:40:49 PM PDT
by
Ken H
To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
That strikes out Mr Jinal for higher office. If he doesn't understand the 10th and State sovereignty over Police Powers, he's not fit for office.
He may be a lot of things, including a republican, but he's no conservative.
The federal government needs to be put back in a very small constitutional box that it came in.
/johnny
To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Federal law is still the law of the land. It still needs to be enforced. So Governor Jindal, do you support enforcement of federal laws against prescriptions from Canada?
_________________________________________________________________
Under the Prescription Drug Marketing Act of 1987, it is illegal for anyone other than the original manufacturer to bring prescription drugs into the country.
However, federal officials have decided to exercise "enforcement discretion" in dealing with prescription drugs brought across the border, provided the drugs are not narcotics or other controlled substances.
http://www.elderlawanswers.com/buying-prescription-drugs-from-canada-legal-or-illegal-1204
5
posted on
04/02/2015 11:07:26 PM PDT
by
Ken H
To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Surrender your God given instincts to seek relief from pain and misery to the state or else!
Don't you dare attempt to skirt the leau! Nanny state needs the revenue!
Louisiana's just the kind of place that gleefully would deny the sick, suffering, and dying, their medical choices. The pigs and boozers put the cannabis users in the 30's German Jew citizenship status once again in the past 6 months.
6
posted on
04/02/2015 11:19:47 PM PDT
by
rawcatslyentist
(Genesis 1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed,)
To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Obama has created a new paradigm where the POTUS decides which federal laws are to enforced and which are not.
So this makes winning the WH even more important
7
posted on
04/03/2015 12:31:31 AM PDT
by
sickoflibs
(King Obama : 'The debate is over. The time for talk is over. Just follow my commands you serfs""')
To: sickoflibs
Obama has created a new paradigm where the POTUS decides which federal laws are to enforced and which are not. Do you think fedgov should start enforcing the Prescription Drug Marketing Act of 1987?
8
posted on
04/03/2015 12:43:43 AM PDT
by
Ken H
To: Ken H; stephenjohnbanker; Gilbo_3; Impy; NFHale; GOPsterinMA; BillyBoy; fieldmarshaldj
RE:”
Do you think fedgov should start enforcing the Prescription Drug Marketing Act of 1987?” Tell ya what,
Lets look ahead ~ 25 years from then to today,
Recall how GWB passed his tax cuts using budget reconciliation causing it to expire at the end of 2012, because he couldn't get 60 in Senate ??
(McCain naturally voted against it)
Obama has shown the way.
A GOP POTUS can announce that the IRS will only will enforce taxes that he approves of, and order the IRS to post whatever tax policy he wants, ignoring the law and congress.
Before Obama no POTUS ever considered such a power grab but the genie is out of the box.
9
posted on
04/03/2015 12:59:48 AM PDT
by
sickoflibs
(King Obama : 'The debate is over. The time for talk is over. Just follow my commands you serfs""')
To: sickoflibs
So do you think fedgov should start enforcing the Prescription Drug Marketing Act of 1987, yes or no?
10
posted on
04/03/2015 1:04:32 AM PDT
by
Ken H
To: Ken H
Your question is obviously a good one, but another question to go with it is:
What part of the US Constitution authorized the federal government to meddle in State police functions.
I really want the feds put back in that tiny little constitutional box.
/johnny
To: Ken H
12
posted on
04/03/2015 1:13:59 AM PDT
by
sickoflibs
(King Obama : 'The debate is over. The time for talk is over. Just follow my commands you serfs""')
To: sickoflibs
What do you think? I think you folded.
13
posted on
04/03/2015 1:19:08 AM PDT
by
Ken H
To: Ken H
RE:”
What do you think?
....
I think you folded. “ OK, but I still seem to be here posting.
And my posts still seem to turn up.
I must be missing something.
14
posted on
04/03/2015 1:23:46 AM PDT
by
sickoflibs
(King Obama : 'The debate is over. The time for talk is over. Just follow my commands you serfs""')
To: JRandomFreeper; Ken H
"What part of the US Constitution"
Like many federal activities or authority, this flows from two SCOTUS interpretations of the interstate commerce clause and the general welfare clause.
To: sickoflibs; Ken H
I must be missing something.Yes, you are: the opportunity to display principles and backbone.
16
posted on
04/03/2015 6:48:12 AM PDT
by
ConservingFreedom
(A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
To: Ben Ficklin
this flows from two SCOTUS interpretations of the interstate commerce clause and the general welfare clause. I wasn't aware that the SCOTUS had addressed the general welfare clause. And their misinterpretations of the interstate commerce clause are the judicial foundation for big liberal government.
17
posted on
04/03/2015 6:49:59 AM PDT
by
ConservingFreedom
(A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
AshLee Strong, press secretary for Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walkers Our American Revival political action committee, said: There are currently federal laws on the books that must be enforced, but ultimately he believes the best place to handle this issue is in the states.So how does he propose we get to that ultimately best place?
19
posted on
04/03/2015 7:10:34 AM PDT
by
ConservingFreedom
(A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
This issue is really mundane and those for legalization are single-issue voters. No need to abandon them. I like Ted Cruz’s position that while he is against it, it is a state issue. It would be one heck pf a chess move if he campaigned on legalizing marijuana at the federal level, which is his actual position, though he hasn’t actually said that federal marijuana laws should be repealed.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 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