Posted on 04/20/2015 3:54:05 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Ted Cruz is personally against the legalization of marijuana but the Republican presidential candidate said this weekend that he believes states have the right to put decriminalization laws on the books if they want - even though they directly conflict with federal law.
Cruz implied during a conversation with Daily Mail Online on Saturday that if he ascended to the highest elected office he wouldn't make his attorney general enforce federal laws pertaining to marijuana in states that have approved sales and consumption of the drug.
The position stands in contrast to the views of at least three of his GOP competitors, who last week said that while they believe in states' rights to self-determination, they'd lay the hammer down on Colorado and Washington for flouting federal law.
Asked Saturday during a New Hampshire campaign stop if he would direct his attorney general to enforce federal pot laws, Cruz said ‘yes’ before providing a lengthy answer that indicated he would not.
He first said that ‘if the attorney general and the president disagree with federal drug law they should come to Congress’ because Republicans and Democrats can come together on the issue of drug reforms....
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Let me be clear: Legalize marijuana.
How about beer drinkers and wine lovers? F them too?
I fail to see the jump from marijuana smokers to homosexuals. You know, people who get drunk piss me off but I’m not in favor of re-ratifying the 18th. Amendment.
Yeah. Like it’s outlawed bank robbery in all states.
It is not so much a matter of protecting people from their own stupidity as it is protecting ourselves from forces of mendacity. Government is the manifestation and application of force within a limited scope for the benefit of all who reside within that scope. That force serves as a curb on aberrant behavior. There would be far more robberies if the threat of authorized force were not a viable factor. Authorized force is demonstrable on a number of levels, and it is up to us to sort out the limits, methods, and means thereof. The very word “government” explicitly means restriction and discipline. How that concept can be lost in this place is difficult to fathom. This matter of MJ is better left to the States and local authorities.
Either or, just LEGALIZE IT!
My original point about the legalization of marijuana was to protect children. Multitudes do not have any parental direction of any kind. Once a state blesses the legalization of pot, like Colorado did, and Obama WON Colorado, and the potheads will probably again vote democrat, they will think it is fine to indulge. In other words, they will be seduced into doing something that is harmful before they have the ability to determine it is harmful themselves. To those who suggest (some of us) become Democrats (and are for federal tyranny - that still makes me laugh) because I am against the legalization of pot - go smoke a joint with your brother Obama; you are one with him on that matter.
In my humble opinion, of all the many ways the federal government has severely harmed this country, outlawing marijuana is not one of them. There are so many areas where the federal government has encroached on states’ rights that are so much more vital than smoking pot - it is not on my list of priorities, not even on the horizon.
Yes, and the Dems have used it as a weapon for their agenda.
A federal law that usurps states' rights is no more legit than one that infringes the RKBA. Agreed?
It's Just frustrating.
I'll be signing a multi-million dollar contract to play in the NFL the day that happens.
So what? So does alcohol, tobacco, and probably Big Macs, all of which are legal (for the moment anyway, until the nanny-staters prevail).
Teenagers aren't allowed to possess any drug, whether legal or illegal. And beyond that, they are also subject to their parents' legitimate authority.
We're talking about real Liberty for real grownups here, as well as the pursuit of happiness. An individual's concept of those things isn't bound by others' narrow-minded interpretations, whether those of an individual or a mob.
As long as nobody's rights are being infringed, truly free people can individually determine for themselves what "the pursuit of happiness" means to them, even if it means drinking excessively, smoking like a chimney, or cliff diving, for that matter.
It really is that simple! All else is authoritarianism and arbitrary law.
So why are you trying to muddle the discussion with "think of the children" emotionalism? It's clumsy propaganda.
As a staunch conservative and classical liberal, I could definitely support Cruz.
If Cruz keeps this up, he's going to be a legitimate contender in 2016.
I can't wait to seem him shred the propaganda of authoritarian socialists such as Hillary and her ilk, along with their "gotcha" media lapdogs as well.
This time around, the marxists may actually have come across somebody that can't be ignored, dismissed, or marginalized. And, hopefully, there will be no significant skeletons in Cruz's closet.
Cruz has my vote over all other declared candidates at the moment. The more I see, the more I like.
Tanks for the uber clarification - ignore my post........
Why not. Prohibition works if people are smart enough to export the stuff and not do it themselves like idiots.
What I mean is that if a pot smoker or a drinker pushes his cult like the homosexual polygamists in schools, harassing those keeping their kids from drug pushers behind rainbows, then I say enough of this BS.
i do not want me to be discriminated for being sober, nor my state treated like pariah for rejecting drug losers.
I made it clear the Feds should not support any cult. The Federal should not go to war over such triffles, including slavery. But when slave states and pot smokers start pushing their hegemony through the federal disrespecting States, going on Opium War like the British on the Chinese because some f@gs in San Francisco benefit, I say no.
What you’re describing doesn’t seem to be happening; no one is urging me to use marijuana, I’d have noticed.
Then why isn’t the 18th. Amendment still in effect?
However, pot is NOT a cult. It is a plant. States that outlaw it, and states that allow it, are dealing with use of plant. There are zero cults involved. Just FYI.
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.