Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ken H

1) No, I don’t think the federal government has broad authority to take actions based on the “general welfare.” Its powers are well defined, and anything not specifically granted to the federal government is reserved by the states.

2) No, I don’t agree with Wickard. I don’t think it fits an original or even reasonable reading of the Commerce Clause.

None of this means I support legalized drugs. The states certainly have the authority to restrict pretty much whatever they restrict, including homosexual activity (SCOTUS usurpations notwithstanding).

Of course, we are well, well beyond all that now. Ending the drug war is far down on my list. Short of revolution and all the massive risks that entails, we aren’t going to change 80 years of socialism overnight. It’s going to take time. I’d like to see some push back toward the right. That’s a reasonable expectation.


71 posted on 09/09/2009 3:37:42 AM PDT by CitizenUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]


To: CitizenUSA
Short of revolution and all the massive risks that entails, we aren’t going to change 80 years of socialism overnight.

That's the thing about restoring freedom - you don't centrally plan it. Some people work on firearms freedom aspects of 80 years worth of socialism, other people work on pharmaceutical freedom aspects of 80 years worth of socialism. That's how it goes with freedom.

Rolling back the police/prison state may be down on your list, but it's nearer the top of other peoples' lists.

74 posted on 09/09/2009 4:01:34 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson