Sarah Palin And The Tea Baggers Love Mmj Too

[puravida1974]

It is so good to hear conservative voices on this site. Although I disagree with conservatism, I feel that it is vital for the conservative point of view to be present on this website. It is important for "John & Jane Q-Public" to see that the med mj movement is not just a certain "type of person" (I put that in quotations on purpose), but rather a large swath of America.

[Guest Wayne]

Deregulate everything. Who needs OSHA? If I own a tree trimming operation I don't need some government agency screaming "safety". Give a recent high school grad $7.50 an hour, a chainsaw, and get them to climb and trim. Ladders? Platforms? Ropes? Bull! Money I don't need to spend. Safety regulations are costly and stupid. If your dumb enough to swing that chainsaw while climbing around and lop off your arm, or fall out of the tree and break your neck tough bunny muffin. Go beg on the street.

[imiubu]

I thought that tea baggers were the guys on the bar in

the movie "Pecker" w/ Edward Furlong!

 

(sorry... couldn't help myself, had lemon cake for lunch )

[solabeirtan]

Deregulate everything. Who needs OSHA? If I own a tree trimming operation I don't need some government agency screaming "safety". Give a recent high school grad $7.50 an hour, a chainsaw, and get them to climb and trim. Ladders? Platforms? Ropes? Bull! Money I don't need to spend. Safety regulations are costly and stupid. If your dumb enough to swing that chainsaw while climbing around and lop off your arm, or fall out of the tree and break your neck tough bunny muffin. Go beg on the street.

Dont like OSHA get a job on an US offshore Oil Rig. OSHA's not allowed. Don't like Unions? They dont either. Be

Careful what you ask for, ....

[GanjaWarrior]

That is what Faux News was calling them before they knew what the porno meaning was. Besides the correct term would be teabaggie as they are being teabagged by the corporation who are sponsoring the movement.

 

I don't understand how pot smokers and bikers have become so conservative. The very people who will be some of the first to be in prison or left to fend for themselves if those people come to power. It is like gay people helping the Nazi's find Jews not understanding they were next.

 

 

Lmao...now that sounds like a Nazi (dem/ socialist, nationalist) using fear tactics to get us to look the other way while they prepare the camps...You give me a perfect example...."Besides the correct term would be teabaggie as they are being teabagged by the corporation who are sponsoring the movement. " so we should all be worried about this and just forget that the dems are doing the very same thing you claim the cons would do. Dont get me wrong, you are so correct, just blind to half the show going on in front of you.

 

As ive told you before the cons are the only ones with the true set of values to decriminalize it. the dems dont support personal responsibility, they sure as hell are not for small government.I know the cons dont actually practice any of this..... but they have some good ideas to build on.

[David1946]

Sarah Palin is not for MMJ

 

Not even close to supporting it. and remember it WAS a Tea Party/GOP candidate who said when asked about the rise in marijuana use especially for medical reasons his response? "We can build more prisons"

[AmishRnot4ganja]

That is what Faux News was calling them before they knew what the porno meaning was. Besides the correct term would be teabaggie as they are being teabagged by the corporation who are sponsoring the movement.

 

I don't understand how pot smokers and bikers have become so conservative. The very people who will be some of the first to be in prison or left to fend for themselves if those people come to power. It is like gay people helping the Nazi's find Jews not understanding they were next.

 

Perfect comparison.

 

__________________

 

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross”

~ Sinclair Lewis

[greenbuddha]

You guys might find this article interesting.

 

U.S. can't force people to buy stuff

By Ilya Shapiro, Special to CNNcnnAuthor = "By Ilya Shapiro, Special to CNN"; if(location.hostname.indexOf( 'edition.' ) > -1) {document.write('December 13, 2010 -- Updated 2323 GMT (0723 HKT)');} else {document.write('December 13, 2010 6:23 p.m. EST');}December 13, 2010 6:23 p.m. ESTvar clickExpire = "-1";STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Ilya Shapiro: Federal judge in Va. says government can't mandate health insurance purchase
• He says this is a correct reading of the Constitution's "Commerce Clause"
• Mandating health insurance is akin to forcing people to buy a consumer product, he says
• Shapiro: Case is far from settled and will probably go to the U.S. Supreme Court

Editor's note: Ilya Shapiro is a senior fellow in constitutional studies at the Cato Institute and editor in chief of the Cato Supreme Court Review. He has filed two briefs on behalf of Cato in Virginia's lawsuit challenging health care reform.

 

Washington (CNN) -- Today is a good day for liberty. By striking down the unprecedented requirement that Americans buy health insurance -- the "individual mandate" -- Judge Henry Hudson vindicated the idea that ours is a government of delegated and enumerated, and thus limited, powers.

 

But this should not be surprising, for the Constitution does not grant the federal government the power to force private commercial transactions.

 

Even if the Supreme Court has broadened the scope of Congress' authority under the Commerce Clause -- it can now reach local activities that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce -- never before has it allowed people to face a civil penalty for declining to buy a particular product. Hudson found therefore that the individual mandate "is neither within the letter nor the spirit of the Constitution."

 

Stated another way, every exercise of Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce has involved some form of action or transaction engaged in by an individual or legal entity. The government's theory -- that the decision not to buy insurance is an economic one that affects interstate commerce in various ways -- would, for the first time ever, permit laws commanding people to engage in economic activity.

 

Under such a reading, which judges in two other cases have unfortunately adopted, nobody would ever be able to plausibly claim that the Constitution limits congressional power. The federal government would then have wide authority to require that Americans engage in activities ranging from eating spinach and joining gyms (in the health care realm) to buying GM cars. Congress could tell people what to study or what job to take: We need fewer lawyers and more engineers, right?

 

As Hudson put it, "This broad definition of the economic activity subject to congressional regulation lacks logical limitation and is unsupported by Commerce Clause jurisprudence."

 

Indeed, not even in the infamous 1942 case of Wickard v. Filburn -- when the Supreme Court ratified Congress' regulation of what farmers grew in their backyards on the theory that such local activity, in the aggregate, affects national wheat prices -- have courts faced such a breathtaking assertion of raw federal power. Even at the height of the New Deal, Congress did not attempt to force people to buy wheat to support the new national agricultural policy.

 

So too now, when there is a stark difference between Congress' power to regulate the health insurance industry and a purported power to require someone to buy health insurance. It's the same difference as between the power to regulate the auto industry and -- under some scheme to bail out companies that are "too big to fail" -- to require everyone to buy a Chevy.

 

To be sure, there are situations in which the government may force individuals to engage in business. Most notably, it can require hotels and restaurants to serve all patrons. But nobody has to become a hotelier or restaurateur, or purchase lodging or food -- and individuals are not commercial enterprises.

 

As for the oft-invoked car insurance analogy, being required to buy insurance if you choose to drive is different from having to buy it because you are alive. And it is states that impose car insurance mandates, under their general police powers -- which the federal government lacks.

 

And so today was a bad day for those who say that Congress is the arbiter of its own powers and that the only checks on federal power in the regulation of commerce are political. We have come far from the time when pundits dismissed the lawsuits challenging the new health care law as frivolous political gimmicks.

 

This is still the beginning of a long legal journey -- there's a hearing this Thursday in the Florida-led 20-state lawsuit, then appeals in all the various cases, and none of this will be over till the Supreme Court has its say -- but we can now see the day where this unprecedented claim of federal power is definitively rejected as fundamentally contrary to our constitutional order.

 

As Hudson said, "Despite the laudable intentions of Congress in enacting a comprehensive and transformative health care regime, the legislative process must still operate within constitutional bounds. Salutatory [sic] goals and creative drafting have never been sufficient to offset an absence of enumerated powers."

 

It is perhaps most appropriate that this ruling happened during the Christmas season, for now we can all see that yes, Virginia, there are limits on government.

[smokeythebear]

my girlfriend and I went to a TEA party in town this summer. we set up our ezup tent, raised our American flag, and then our 3'x5' cannabis leaf flag was raised. we got lots of looks,lol. when the people who were running for spots came up to talk we went to the front with our signs. DRUG WAR = BIG GOV. & BIG SPENDING 1 TRILLION WASTED SO FAR, (there might have been more on the sign.)had it on a 8 foot 2x4

 

a few people came up and talked to us, one of the city council guys was running for state rep. and he came to tell me how he didn't like what I was doing. He kept talking about "drugs" I said I'm not talking about all drugs just marijuana, after a little arguing he said okay i give ya marijuana but.....I smiled cause I knew I won once he said but :-)

 

I tried getting a bunch of people to join me down there but no one showed, figured there's a lot of people down there and a bunch were soon gunna be in office why not tell them how we felt.

[AmishRnot4ganja]

my girlfriend and I went to a TEA party in town this summer. we set up our ezup tent, raised our American flag, and then our 3'x5' cannabis leaf flag was raised. we got lots of looks,lol. when the people who were running for spots came up to talk we went to the front with our signs. DRUG WAR = BIG GOV. & BIG SPENDING 1 TRILLION WASTED SO FAR, (there might have been more on the sign.)had it on a 8 foot 2x4

 

a few people came up and talked to us, one of the city council guys was running for state rep. and he came to tell me how he didn't like what I was doing. He kept talking about "drugs" I said I'm not talking about all drugs just marijuana, after a little arguing he said okay i give ya marijuana but.....I smiled cause I knew I won once he said but :-)

 

I tried getting a bunch of people to join me down there but no one showed, figured there's a lot of people down there and a bunch were soon gunna be in office why not tell them how we felt.

 

Ha! That's great. When all these people come out and demonstrate about losing their constitutional freedoms, it must be hard for them to accept that using marijuana is/should be a constitutional freedom as well. I love it when the realization hits them and they get that kind of slack-jaw look on their face.