Michelle Malkin: Put aside the pot jokes and look again at Colorado legalization

Hotair ^ | 03/26/2014 | Ed Morrissey

[ansel12]

To quote what is making you react like a vampire to sunlight.
“”We need candidates who oppose those at all levels, state, federal, in city contracts, in County government, at every level.””

I like knowing what your politics are, and I have learned that.

[tacticalogic]

You keep repeating yourself, so I've apparently heard all you have to say on the subject.

Don't post to me any more.

[ansel12]

I hadn’t told you that while you avoided revealing your politics on the surface, by refusing to respond to posts to you about the conservative politics we need to advance, that you have revealed your true politics, so it was hardly repeating.

[tacticalogic]

Then stop posting to me anyway.

[ansel12]

I don’t think it works that way.

The best way to avoid being posted to on a thread, is to not post on that thread.

[tacticalogic]

I don’t think it works that way.

Let's find out.

[ansel12]

The mod will intervene to stop a flame war, but he won’t permit posters to a thread to block some freepers from responding to you, at your choosing.

[cloudmountain]

If the only way you could buy Aspirin was from a drug dealer, then Aspirin would be a gateway drug.

If "ifs and ands" were pots and pans there'd be no work for tinkers. "If's" are true FR fodder.

[tacticalogic]

The mod will intervene to stop a flame war, but he won’t permit posters to a thread to block some freepers from responding to you, at your choosing.

So the only way to stop you from badgering and lying about me is to escalate it into a flame war?

[ansel12]

A good way would be to quit pinging me to read your posts to me, as far as reading and responding to other posts you might make, well it depends on whether I think they need responding to.

Your arguments are clearly formed and concentrated, to promote the liberal agenda.

Immigration is federal, the military is federal, federal employment is federal, and the federal government has to make laws for how it decides on those issues, for instance, abortion on federal lands and in military medicine, gay marriage in the military and in immigration, and in federal employment.

We need candidates who oppose those at all levels, state, federal, in city contracts, in County government, at every level.

[ansel12]

Actually you don’t argue for the original intent of the constitution, you merely use it to promote the left’s agenda and to continue to elect liberal politicians who support your liberal, libertarian agenda.

Immigration is federal, the military is federal, federal employment is federal, and the federal government has to make laws for how it decides on those issues, for instance, abortion on federal lands and in military medicine, gay marriage in the military and in immigration, and in federal employment.

We need candidates who oppose those at all levels, state, federal, in city contracts, in County government, at every level.

[ansel12]

I have already, just read out exchange on this thread, look at your reaction to post 172, your reaction is like a vampire seeing a beam of sunlight.

[Mears]

Cool it for heaven’s sake.

.

[tacticalogic]

I tried being nice. Didn’t work.

[ansel12]

and demonstrate your determination to stay ignorant of the original intent of the Constitution so it doesn’t inconvenience you.

If that were true it seems like you would have been quoting which posts were doing that, but you haven't.

Since this is the jist of what I have posted,
""Immigration is federal, the military is federal, federal employment is federal, and the federal government has to make laws for how it decides on those issues, for instance, abortion on federal lands and in military medicine, gay marriage in the military and in immigration, and in federal employment.
We need candidates who oppose those at all levels, state, federal, in city contracts, in County government, at every level."", why not show me where the ignorance is?

While you are at it, why not tell us why you are against electing conservatives?

[tacticalogic]

If that were true it seems like you would have been quoting which posts were doing that, but you haven't.

I count the refusal to discuss, and try to prevent anyone else from discussing the Constitutional basis of federal drug legislation as wanton ignorance.

[ansel12]

When I first posted to your post 16, I tried engaging you on your list of liberal positions and the feds, it set you off on a wild trip of avoidance and name calling and cussing and calling the mods.

I showed you that in post 133.

To: tacticalogic
To: gdani
*””But when it’s something they are against - marijuana, assisted suicide, gay marriage, etc - they become the Fed Govt’s biggest cheerleaders.””*
If it needs to be under federal authority then we need to get an amendment. If they think we can abuse the Commerce Clause without unintended consequences they’re pissing into the wind.
16 posted on 3/26/2014 10:15:02 AM by tacticalogic

---

To: tacticalogic
Remember that abortion and gay marriage in the military and for federal employees, and in immigration, and homosexuals in the military, are all federal.

We need to select candidates who are against liberalism at all levels, from city hall to the state, to the Senate and Presidency, whether negotiating with a County union, or state legislation on gay marriage or abortion, or marriage recognition and abortion in the military, and not let them exist as leaders who support the left’s causes, by pretending that they are forced to support the left’s agenda.
27 posted on 3/26/2014 10:29:15 AM by ansel12

133 posted on 3/26/2014 3:10:06 PM by ansel12

You seem to oppose the “they” who oppose liberalism like gay marriage, according to post 16.

---

Your politics are pretty obvious and they are purely liberal, not something that you are forced to accept from the left, by the force of the constitution.