Why Republicans are slowly embracing marijuana

[oldchuck]

I don't have anybody to complain to or about. All of my state's congressional delegation votes for Cannabis whenever they get the opportunity, Two are Democrats and one is an independent. @Jumpin/jack, I wouldn't vote for Feinstein, Boxer, or Brown either but that doesn't mean I would vote for a Republican.

 

[Jhhnn]

I have to disagree with most of the comments in this thread, I think you guys are missing the issue at hand.


State rights vs Federal power. If you understand politics, you know where the republicans side on this one.


The Republicans don't care about pot.


This is a state right's issue and especially with the recent press involving the BLM, they know they have to tow the party line on this one.

They could give a shit about pot. When republicans get turned on this issue, worry. They are going to set regulations to ass rape the individual rights to grow on their own and they will centralize the market, cornering it essentially, and handing over the reins to their own people who they will cherry pick to run our market.

States Rights is just divide & conquer, always has been. The only reason that Repubs want "small govt" is so that it'll be weak govt, easily overpowered by corporate interests. Make no mistake about it, the big money at the top of the Repub party intends to rule through sheer economic might & really excellent propaganda, the best in the world.

The citizens of CO & the Obama Admin turned their own rhetoric against them wrt marijuana legalization. Repubs are talking out of both sides of their mouths simultaneously-

http://www.mintpressnews.com/bill-o...s-for-respecting-state-marijuana-laws/187539/

Even some of the well indoctrinated Faithful may catch on.

 

[steadydets]

States Rights is just divide & conquer, always has been. The only reason that Repubs want "small govt" is so that it'll be weak govt, easily overpowered by corporate interests.

What do you mean by divide and conquer, I'm a little confused.


The only thing I'm really trying to say is that people confusing this vote as the republicans changing their opinion on legalizing marijuana are mistaken.

It's just a coincidence that these two issues converged on the same topic.

Kind of like when the ACLU went to court to defend Rush Limbaugh, irony, i know thee not.

 

[oldchuck]

^
I'll vote for that.

 

[Jhhnn]

What do you mean by divide and conquer, I'm a little confused.


The only thing I'm really trying to say is that people confusing this vote as the republicans changing their opinion on legalizing marijuana are mistaken.

It's just a coincidence that these two issues converged on the same topic.

Kind of like when the ACLU went to court to defend Rush Limbaugh, irony, i know thee not.

I misunderstood. Thank you.

 

[Jhhnn]

So much for Repubs "embracing marijuana"-

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/...or-feds-unless-they-crack-down-on-legal-weed/

Notice how they used a voice vote to achieve a bit of anonymity.

 

[steadydets]

So much for Repubs "embracing marijuana"-

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/...or-feds-unless-they-crack-down-on-legal-weed/

Notice how they used a voice vote to achieve a bit of anonymity.

lol, that was quick.

 

[m314]

So much for Repubs "embracing marijuana"-

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/...or-feds-unless-they-crack-down-on-legal-weed/

Notice how they used a voice vote to achieve a bit of anonymity.

The majority of Republicans in Congress are still against legalization. The first article was about how a growing number of them are now supporting individual states rights to set their own marijuana policy. A growing number of them support legalization, but not most of them yet.

Republicans aren't all alike. Social conservatives (who are in the majority in the party) still believe in prohibition. Libertarian-leaning Republicans say prohibition is wrong. Guys like Rick Santorum and Ron Paul don't really belong in the same party, but that's how it works with the two party system.

 

[Skinny Leaf]

Republican economic policy, in general, serves the financial elite & the negative effect that explosive inequality has on our society. Vote for 'em only if you're eager to be a bug on the windshield of financialized international corporatism. What's good for holders of great wealth isn't necessarily good for the rest of us at all. They thrive on contrived economic instability. The rest of us can't.

John Kerry's wife is who? I never knew there were no rich Democrats, thanks for the enlightenment.

 

[Jhhnn]

John Kerry's wife is who? I never knew there were no rich Democrats, thanks for the enlightenment.

Please. Rich Democrats haven't been raving about their "crushing" tax burdens for decades, parading around in their Chinese made "Job Creator!" outfits, whining about the Poors dragging down the middle class, fighting against financial & pollution regulation or financing decades of attacks on Estate taxes, either.

"They're just as Bad!" arguments are beyond tedious.

I don't mean to be harsh, but I get a little testy over the defeatism in it.

 

[MrGoodBudz]

Thats why I vote libertarian.