GOP congressman: Republicans should embrace marijuana legalization

[SHRED]

Dana Rohrabacher?

Come on Democratic National Headquarters WAKE THE FUCK UP and make legalization a goal!!!!

Otherwise there is always the alternative of letting Republicans like Paul and Rohrabacher lead on this.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/gop-congressman-republicans-should-embrace-marijuana-legalization/2014/11/14/49e20ad8-6b77-11e4-a31c-77759fc1eacc_story.html

[Alittleliberal]

1. They are going to steal this as a "Freedom" issue for 2016

We will be sitting their with our pants around our ankles wondering what just happened.

[SHRED]

2. Yep while the Democratic "leaders"...

...clutch and wet themselves in the corner out of fear.

[Alittleliberal]

6. Comment from one of them on the article

"I wish I could vote for him. We need more Republicans to stand against the nanny state and prohibition. Let's get back to freedom."

SMH this could very well be the nail in the our party's coffin.

[bigwillq]

7. Yup (nt)

[VanillaRhapsody]

3. Someone I know holds these positions...

Medical marijuana maybe ok; states decide recreational use. (Jun 2014)
Reduce sentencing disparity for crack, but not retroactively. (Dec 2007)
1969: held herself aloof from college drug counterculture. (Jul 2007)
Divert non-violent drug offenders away from prison. (Jun 2007)
Gov. Clinton implicated in his brother Roger’s drug arrest. (Feb 2004)
Address drug problem with treatment and special drug courts. (Oct 2000)
Ambiguous reports of 1960s college alcohol & drug use. (Aug 1999)
Involved parents most influential in reducing teen drug use. (Sep 1996)
End harsher sentencing for crack vs. powder cocaine. (Jun 2007)
Require chemical resellers to certify against meth use. (Sep 2007)

[Comrade Grumpy]

8. This is going to be on the ballot in a bunch of states in 2016.

California, Arizona, Nevada, for sure.

Massachusetts, Maine, New Mexico, quite possibly.

Missouri, Arkansas, petition drives are getting underway.

It could drive Democratic turnout--Dems are much more likely to support legalization than Repubilcans--but not so much if Dems don't embrace it. Don't leave it to Rand Paul.

[VanillaRhapsody]

9. I'm not...I am supporting the person who holds those ^^^ views...

[Comrade Grumpy]

14. Which views?

[RKP5637]

4. The republicans will lead the way and the democrats will scramble around to follow the lead. SOS! nt

[RussBLib]

5. this is one issue I would support the GOP on

If the Dems are too stupid to wake up and smell the weed, they deserve a pummelling.

[VanillaRhapsody]

10. I wouldn't vote for a Repuke even FOR weed.....NEVER!

[Comrade Grumpy]

15. But there are surely others who would, thus the need for Democrats to get ahead of this.

We know you're true blue. It's the undecideds and independents who concern me.

[VanillaRhapsody]

16. then they are not Democrats....they are Left Leaning Independents...

Republicans will NEVER legalize....it just won't happen....not even Rand Paul....

They still rely on the "Old Fogey" Republican voters... you know the rabid religious types...

[Comrade Grumpy]

18. The Democratic candidate will need the votes of independents.

"Record High of 42% of Americans Identify As Independents"

http://www.gallup.com/poll/166763/record-high-americans-identify-independents.aspx

Compared to 31% who called themselves Democrats and 25% who called themselves Republicans.

[BlindTiresias]

11. Dems need to get with the program

or get left in the dust. Failure to capitalize on the legal cannabis issue may be a fatal move.

[jamzrockz]

12. But they will not

embrace marijuana legalization. The Chris Christie and Bush wing of the party is much more influential that the Paul wing and they will just find a way to undermine the effort. God forbid some weed head commits some heinous crime and that alone will be used to scare the public. Think a smear media campaign 10x the size of gamergate smear campaign against male gamers and that is what you will get.

They are called repukes for a reason. They always find a way to screw things up and give the democrats an out.

[starroute]

17. Rohrabacker was a pot-smoking libertarian hippie back in the 60s

See http://www.libertarianpeacenik.com/articles/lporigins.htm

So he comes by it naturally -- but that's still no reason to let him and Paul coopt an issue that should belong to progressives.

[Savannahmann]

19. I've made a similar call myself, several times.

Apparently it means I'm some sort of secret Right Wing troll according to some. I've warned that the populist issues embraced by Rand Paul will make him a serious contender for the Presidency, especially if the following groups get behind him in Iowa and New Hampshire.

The Legalize Marijuana folks. Polling indicates that 52% of the people support legalization. http://www.pollingreport.com/drugs.htm

That means that several left leaning independents will go to Paul in the Primaries, especially in Iowa and New Hampshire, and if he picks up steam with his positions, then South Carolina will fall as well.

Worse than that is the fact that Paul is on the Populist side of other issues. Including but not limited to.....

Privacy Advocates who are among the plurality that oppose the NSA surveillance programs that continue to this day because of fear. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/01/20/poll-nsa-surveillance/4638551/

Demilitarization of the Police is also another of those darned things that Paul is on the Populist side of. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/08/21/us/poll-nyt-cbs.html?_r=0

He has a bullshit economic plan, so he's paying attention to the most important issue according to polling.

I could go on, and on, and on. Everytime I warn people about the pending populist wave that Paul is set to ride into the White House, I'm informed that there simply put is no way that the Republicans will nominate him. That's the bloody point. If Paul gets a strong ground game in Iowa based upon the simple set up that was used successfully by Barack Obama, you know, the current President, he can win in Iowa. That gives him a lot of press attention going into New Hampshire, and on down the pipe to the rest of the States. He emerges as an early front runner, and the also rans start dropping out and endorsing him.

The business folks will get behind him because he supports lower taxes for corporations of all sizes. That gives him the money, and he gets the support of a lot of issues voters. People who would otherwise vote for Democrats.

So why don't the Democrats get behind these high polling populist issues? Why, because we are afraid. We learned about looking soft on things, so we compensate by being tougher than Buford Pusser. We're afraid of being blamed for Terrorist attacks, so we keep spying on everyone despite the fact that it hasn't prevented one attack, not one. We're afraid of being labeled as soft on the drugs, so we don't even whisper a word about legalization.

The sad part is this. Legalizing the drugs is the only way to stop them once and for all. Product liability lawsuits would bankrupt the cartels in less than a year. Most people don't know that raw gasoline is used in the production of Cocaine. How long would the Jury be out before finding for the plaintiff that this was an unsafe product and the cartels need to take better precautions? The court wouldn't even get to finish lunch before the Jury was back, and you all know it. They would deliver awards that would see everyone on the plaintiff's side calling their Porsche dealers with glee in their voices.

Paul would push for legalization on the Federal level. For the simple reason it guarantees his re-election. He might well fail, but he'd still secure the votes by commuting sentences and pardoning folks left and right, power that is guaranteed to him by the Constitution without any Congressional approval required.

So Democrats are going to run on the same old worn out record. We stand for more of the same. Paul will be the fresh voice, the new vision that inspires the flood of voters the way that President Obama did in 2008.

There is an old saying. You can lead, follow, or get out of the way. Democrats are not leading, and I wonder if we'll take the lead on issues that should be ours solidly.

But go ahead, claim I'm a RW troll or whatever. I put up with that for the last year every time I warned that control of the Senate was in danger. Every time I warned about an optic that looked bad for us and we needed to address, i'm nothing but a RW troll.

Just to make sure I have this conspiracy theory right my friends. I'm supposedly a RW troll who points to polls and public opinion to suggest platform issues that the Democrats can and should embrace in order to help the Republicans win. Because Democrats being on the populist side of the issues where majorities of voters are is somehow good for the Republicans, or something.

[B Calm]

20. I want both parties to embrace it.

[Bluenorthwest]

21. Congressman Earl Blumenauer (OR-3): It's Time To Rethink Federal Marijuana Policy

" It is time for Congress to face the facts surrounding marijuana, its use and regulation, and develop a legislative framework that accounts for the inevitable transition of marijuana policy -- one that is already well under way. Federal marijuana policy use should be modernized to reduce confusion, uncertainty, and conflicting government priorities. Maintaining the status quo creates an inconsistent legal environment that wastes law enforcement resources and misses out on potential tax revenues."

Dana Rohrabacher has long been a supporter of cannabis reform and medical marijuana, I think he had a family chemo issue, can't recall exactly. He's a winger in all other ways, but it is not surprising for him to talk this way.
What is surprising to me is that Democrats do not know the Democrats who also talk that way....