Ted Cruz attacks Obama for not arresting cannabis users in Colorado

[CarolKing]

One of the reasons idiots like this gets into office is low voting levels, and voter distrust of politics. Ted Cruz was one of three who voted against John Kerry for Sec of State. Ted Cruz was a baby when John Kerry received 3 Purple Heart medals for his bravery in the Vietnam war.

Shame on Ted Cruz for blocking legislation to agree on a budget with his theactrics. The government shutdown in Oct cost the country 2.1 billion dollars and just added to the deficit. The Tea Party organization is ruining any agreements between the 2 parties. I think it's time for a three party system.

 

[aesthyrian]

A three party system can be a dangerous thing without certain limits. Think of Canada, didn't Harper become their Prime Minister and he only had like 40% of the overall votes? That's not a true winner.

However, if we were to implementing instant-runoff voting, I believe that would provide much better results. Fantasies, I know.

 

[CarolKing]

President Obama said today, when asked about cannabis, he said that it was no worse than alcohol. Its a vice like smoking cigarettes. He wasn't encouraging this for young people though.

I say go Obama!!

Take that extra step and let the states decide, States Rights!

 

[lwien]

President Obama said today, when asked about cannabis, he said that it was no worse than alcohol. Its a vice like smoking cigarettes. He wasn't encouraging this for young people though.

I say go Obama!!

Take that extra step and let the states decide, States Rights!

Yup. While he didn't endorse it, he sure as hell went a lot further in that regard than any previous president.

 

[aesthyrian]

President Obama said today, when asked about cannabis, he said that it was no worse than alcohol. Its a vice like smoking cigarettes. He wasn't encouraging this for young people though.

I say go Obama!!

Take that extra step and let the states decide, States Rights!

It's a step. But I still take offense at Cannabis being compared to Tobacco or Alcohol. We all know it serves a much greater purpose than those two drugs, and is much less harmful.

Plus the whole physically addictive thing..

Still, progress.

 

[CarolKing]

It's a step. But I still take offense at Cannabis being compared to Tobacco or Alcohol. We all know it serves a much greater purpose than those two drugs, and is much less harmful.

Plus the whole physically addictive thing..

Still, progress.

Better than grouping cannabis with heroine and meth, it's a start. they just need a little cannabis education.

 

[grokit]

Yeah man, baby steps are okay with me as long as they're headed in the right direction!

 

[Gunky]

Obama could go a long way in the right direction by pardoning people like Eddie Lepp, a medical grower locked up pointlessly and for a ridiculously long sentence. There are many such people, hung out to dry by this stupid drug war. It's not right that in Colorado people can go into a store and buy this stuff and Obama is ok with that and meanwhile people like Eddie Lepp are rotting in jail for helping patients. Obama should get busy letting them out.

 

[CarolKing]

Lets go to the Denver County Fair.
This summer visitors at the Denver County Fair will have a chance to celebrate legal rec cannabis at events including a Grateful Dead Karaoke competition, a joint rolling contest and a best homemade Bong Battle.
They will have the Best Brownie Recipe, Best Homemade Roach Clip and Doritos Eating Contest.

Dana Cain Director of the Denver County Fair explained that the Pot Pavillion is for 21 and over and no actual cannabis will be on site. Judging for plants, brownies and other recipes will be at a location away from the fairgrounds. She emphasized that the privately owned fair will be respectful of those who may not share enthusiasm for the product.

They will not be selling cannabis at the fair.

 

[arf777]

A lot of presidents make some unpopular decisions his last year in office. I'm hoping Obama changes the laws regarding cannabis in this country, I think if he did it now, there would be too many people pissed, mostly conservatives.

I am concerned about the laws in WA state regarding testing drivers for cannabis when checking for drivers under the influence. Cannabis stays in your system a long time compared to alcohol, and varies depending how much fat you have in your body.

Ted Cruise is an ass. If the country was stupid enough to vote George W. Bush into office. - all bets are off.

Hey, don't forget W was NOT elected. Read the Bush v Gore opinion. the vote count in 2000 was stopped by Federal order, in direct contradiction of Florida law. That was a coup, not an election. And not the 1st time in US history (see the election of 'Rutherfraud' B. Hayes- it even involved manipulation of Florida vote counts).

Didn't get anywhere near as much attention, but there was massive evidence of vote count manipulation in Ohio in 2004 as well. Kerry decided not to litigate it, in part given the make up of SCOTUS and their decision in 2000. IMHO, history will consider W one of only two unelected US presidents (assuming it doesn't happen again).

With the WA thing, if they don't develop a real cannabis intoxication test, as opposed to presence of cannabinoids test, expect serious litigation the first time they pull it on a lawyer or someone with a good lawyer. There is established precedent that driving with, for instance, oxycodone in your blood stream is not de facto indicative of oxycodone intoxication.

 

[CarolKing]

Hey, don't forget W was NOT elected. Read the Bush v Gore opinion. the vote count in 2000 was stopped by Federal order, in direct contradiction of Florida law. That was a coup, not an election. And not the 1st time in US history (see the election of 'Rutherfraud' B. Hayes- it even involved manipulation of Florida vote counts).

Didn't get anywhere near as much attention, but there was massive evidence of vote count manipulation in Ohio in 2004 as well. Kerry decided not to litigate it, in part given the make up of SCOTUS and their decision in 2000. IMHO, history will consider W one of only two unelected US presidents (assuming it doesn't happen again).

With the WA thing, if they don't develop a real cannabis intoxication test, as opposed to presence of cannabinoids test, expect serious litigation the first time they pull it on a lawyer or someone with a good lawyer. There is established precedent that driving with, for instance, oxycodone in your blood stream is not de facto indicative of oxycodone intoxication.

The 2000 election, that whole thing was a circus, the broken chads, missing ballots. What a difference history would have made if Al Gore had gotten into office rather than George W. Bush. Think about the thousands of dead American soldiers and those coming back with missing arms and legs, the brain damage and mental problems such as PTSD

Americans going to war under false statements from a Secretary of State and a president filling American heads with lies and untruths. All the billions of dollars spent crippling our country financially.

All the children that have moms and dads that never came home, such a needless loss.

I appreciate everything our brave men and women soldiers sacrificed.

If any president needed to be impeached it was George W. Bush, what a disgrace for America.
The worst president in American history. I don't know how he can sleep at night.

Sorry, too far off topic. I just get all riled up!

 

[grokit]

Back to the topic of this thread,
I bet cruz wishes he could take this statement back.

At least since christie self-destructed!

 

[lwien]

My prediction. Hillary will run against Jeb Bush if she and Bill can stay healthy. If she does, she will win. If she can't run due to health issues either with her or her hubby, the Dems will nominate John Kerry, and that could be a close race against Jeb, a Republican who is actually a moderate which is kind of refreshing. I REALLY like the way that Kerry has been presenting himself in his gig as Secretary of State.................very Presidential. I like him.

Anyway, that's the way I see it shaking out.

I have no idea what in the hell this has to do with Ted Cruz. ........

 

[DanAndroid]

By way of political background, I vote for whomever I believe is most likely to do the things they say they will and, in a way that I agree with. Party lines don't matter to me.

That said, on the face of it this doesn't make sense coming from Ted Cruz.

I know it may be expected but still, it doesn't make sense.

Generally Cruz has been more of a "Don't Tread on My State" sort of politician with a position more towards state Rights than toward Federal rights.

But then again, if one looks at the explanation for the criticism, Cruz is actually making a very valid point.

He is not against the legalization, per se, what he is against is the Federal government legally getting in the way of states exercising their rights without interference at the Federal level. i.e. the Federal level is dropping the ball on legalization.

Another way to think about this is that the success of legalization efforts in any given state is and always has been at the whims of the Federal government which could change with the breeze. That's not too conducive to developing a stable market place and will always be a hindrance to states looking to legalize it within their borders.

Technically Cruz is correct, he's just "wrong" in the way he communicates it.

He's right, although nickle and diming states here and there is what we will have to put up with for a while, this REALLY needs to be taken to D.C..

But, I don't see that happening until at least after the elections this Fall. :-(

 

[arf777]

By way of political background, I vote for whomever I believe is most likely to do the things they say they will and, in a way that I agree with. Party lines don't matter to me.

That said, on the face of it this doesn't make sense coming from Ted Cruz.

I know it may be expected but still, it doesn't make sense.

Generally Cruz has been more of a "Don't Tread on My State" sort of politician with a position more towards state Rights than toward Federal rights.

But then again, if one looks at the explanation for the criticism, Cruz is actually making a very valid point.

He is not against the legalization, per se, what he is against is the Federal government legally getting in the way of states exercising their rights without interference at the Federal level. i.e. the Federal level is dropping the ball on legalization.

Another way to think about this is that the success of legalization efforts in any given state is and always has been at the whims of the Federal government which could change with the breeze. That's not too conducive to developing a stable market place and will always be a hindrance to states looking to legalize it within their borders.

Technically Cruz is correct, he's just "wrong" in the way he communicates it.

He's right, although nickle and diming states here and there is what we will have to put up with for a while, this REALLY needs to be taken to D.C..

But, I don't see that happening until at least after the elections this Fall. :-(

Uhm, did you read the quote that started this? He was criticizing the Feds for NOT arresting people in states that have made pot legal. That is not defending states rights. That is not saying the Feds are behind the times on it. Quite to the contrary, he is saying the feds are listening to the US public (who are now majority for legalization) and respecting the rights of the states of CO and WA, and he doesn't like that in this one instance 'cuz he hates the substantive law. I see no way that relates to what you are saying.

And as I have pointed out in this thread before, Cruz needs to check his legal history. Selective enforcement, especially of intoxication and substance-related law, but for criminal law in general as well, goes back CENTURIES in the legal traditions the US works in (UK-derived common law and equity). When someone like Cruz is given a pass while driving drunk, by an unelected cop usually with no legal training whatsoever, there is no protest. But when an elected President and his Senate-approved AG do the same thing, all of a sudden he wants Congress (and remember, we're talking about the least productive Congress in US history- most filibusters, fewest laws passed, lowest percentage of the country's bills paid) to have a hand in it. This from the same man who has repeatedly said he will compromise with Obama on nothing.

And BTW- Cruz CAN'T run for President, EVER (without amending the Constitution). He was born in Alberta, Canada. He is simply not eligible. Unlike Obama, who was born in Hawaii.

 

[Vicki]

Yeah, but the jerk still wants Obama to arrest cannabis users. If he didn't, why is he bitching because the feds aren't doing their jobs?

See?! I told you! He is bitching because Obama is NOT prosecuting cannabis users based on federal law. Dangerous to our liberty? Fucking brain dead idiot! Just when I think the Tea Party can't get more stupid, they prove me wrong every damn time.

http://hemp.org/news/content/texas-...cing-federal-marijuana-laws-dangerous-liberty

GOP Senator Ted Cruz of Texas has once again blasted President Obama for not enforcing federal marijuana laws in states which have legalized cannabis.

Sen. Cruz said he supported an "intelligent conversation" about drug policy in a new interview with the libertarian magazine Reason, reports Eric W. Dolan at The Raw Story. But Cruz certainly didn't provide any intelligent conversation, himself.

"I will say one thing that's been dismaying about the Obama Administration," Cruz said. "The Obama Administration's approach to drug policy is to simply announce that across the country, it is going to stop enforcing certain drug laws.

"Now, that may or may not be a good policy, but I would suggest that should concern anyone -- it should even concern libertarians who support that policy outcome -- because the idea that the President simply says criminal laws that are on the books, we're going to ignore," Cruz said. "That is a very dangerous precedent."

Cruz claimed Obama overstepped his authority by declining to arrest marijuana users and sellers in Colorado and Washington. Only Congress could enact such a policy, he said.

"Anyone who is concerned about liberty should be concerned about the notion that this President over and over again has asserted the right to pick and choose what laws to follow," Cruz said. "That is fundamentally dangerous to the liberty of the people.

"The concept of the rule of law doesn't just mean you've got lots of laws; just about every society has laws, and indeed dictatorships typically suffer from an abundance of laws," Cruz said. "What rule of law means is that we are a nation of laws, not of men, that no man is above the law, and especially not the President."

At a rally last month, Cruz had attacked the President for not arresting pot smokers in Colorado who violated federal law by using state-legal marijuana.

"These are criminal laws, these are laws that say if you do X, Y and Z you will go to prison," Cruz blustered. "The President announced, 'No you won't.' "

Federal law prohibits marijuana as a dangerous Schedule I controlled substance, but voters in Colorado and Washington in November 2012 approved ballot measures to legalize its limited possession and sale by adults.

The U.S. Department of Justice announced that it wouldn't try to overturn the new state laws, and would only block their implementation if eight federal guidelines weren't followed. The guidelines prohibit such things as sales to minors, marijuana outlets near schools and parks, and transportation of cannabis across state lines.

 

[pakalolo]

@Vicki, I think you should be happy about this. It shows that Cruz is out of step with the trend in public thinking on this issue. I don't think it helps him at all. It is a point addressed to the choir, but the choir is getting smaller and smaller.

Most of us Canadians are a lot more sensible about things like this.

 

[arf777]

See?! I told you! He is bitching because Obama is NOT prosecuting cannabis users based on federal law. Dangerous to our liberty? Fucking brain dead idiot! Just when I think the Tea Party can't get more stupid, they prove me wrong every damn time.

http://hemp.org/news/content/texas-...cing-federal-marijuana-laws-dangerous-liberty

GOP Senator Ted Cruz of Texas has once again blasted President Obama for not enforcing federal marijuana laws in states which have legalized cannabis.

Sen. Cruz said he supported an "intelligent conversation" about drug policy in a new interview with the libertarian magazine Reason, reports Eric W. Dolan at The Raw Story. But Cruz certainly didn't provide any intelligent conversation, himself.

"I will say one thing that's been dismaying about the Obama Administration," Cruz said. "The Obama Administration's approach to drug policy is to simply announce that across the country, it is going to stop enforcing certain drug laws.

"Now, that may or may not be a good policy, but I would suggest that should concern anyone -- it should even concern libertarians who support that policy outcome -- because the idea that the President simply says criminal laws that are on the books, we're going to ignore," Cruz said. "That is a very dangerous precedent."

Cruz claimed Obama overstepped his authority by declining to arrest marijuana users and sellers in Colorado and Washington. Only Congress could enact such a policy, he said.

"Anyone who is concerned about liberty should be concerned about the notion that this President over and over again has asserted the right to pick and choose what laws to follow," Cruz said. "That is fundamentally dangerous to the liberty of the people.

"The concept of the rule of law doesn't just mean you've got lots of laws; just about every society has laws, and indeed dictatorships typically suffer from an abundance of laws," Cruz said. "What rule of law means is that we are a nation of laws, not of men, that no man is above the law, and especially not the President."

At a rally last month, Cruz had attacked the President for not arresting pot smokers in Colorado who violated federal law by using state-legal marijuana.

"These are criminal laws, these are laws that say if you do X, Y and Z you will go to prison," Cruz blustered. "The President announced, 'No you won't.' "

Federal law prohibits marijuana as a dangerous Schedule I controlled substance, but voters in Colorado and Washington in November 2012 approved ballot measures to legalize its limited possession and sale by adults.

The U.S. Department of Justice announced that it wouldn't try to overturn the new state laws, and would only block their implementation if eight federal guidelines weren't followed. The guidelines prohibit such things as sales to minors, marijuana outlets near schools and parks, and transportation of cannabis across state lines.

You'd think, as a Harvard-educated attorney and former working prosecutor-litigator, Cruz would know something about THE LAW. But he clearly only remembers the parts that support his agenda (I assume he has the same selective memory re the science he learned at Princeton, still home of the Institute for Advanced Study).

If he does not like selective enforcement by the executive branch, he should take it up with Oliver Cromwell (and EVERY GOVERNMENT ON THE PLANET, from Russia to China to Canada to his beloved Texas, where they do the same fucking thing). Even the out-of-control Roberts SCOTUS has not tried to fuck with that. Without selective enforcement, half the US population would have to work for the cops or prosecutors, to get every violation of every law 'dealt with'; and the other half of the population would be in prison.

 

[Vicki]

@Vicki, I think you should be happy about this. It shows that Cruz is out of step with the trend in public thinking on this issue. I don't think it helps him at all. It is a point addressed to the choir, but the choir is getting smaller and smaller.

Most of us Canadians are a lot more sensible about things like this.

I am. I am just trying to make a point to the people that said he wasn't doing this.

 

[lwien]

Most of us Canadians are a lot more sensible about things like this.

Eh?

 

[pakalolo]

Eh?

Sorry.

 

[Tweek]

Eh?

You could be Canadian.

 

[lwien]

You could be Canadian.

 

[grokit]

More Ted Cruz action...

The tea partiers are still trying to codify discrimination and destroy the republican party.
It seems to me that this is more about asserting the right to discriminate than anything to do with
religion or politics, it's more about equal rights than anything else.
My point is that discrimination has no place in religion or politics, and should never be codified into law.
Oh yeah Cruz also wants the feds to arrest pot smokers!
While I'm not an activist for this cause, this is still appalling to me:

Tea Party Senators Introduce
‘You’re Not Married Anymore’ Bill to Nullify Same-Sex Marriages
Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Mike Lee (R-UT) have introduced a Senate version of the “State Marriage Defense Act,” a bill that would prohibit the federal government from recognizing same-sex couples’ marriages if they live in a state that doesn’t recognize them. This “You’re Not Married Anymore” bill would mean that families would lose all their federal protections simply by crossing the border into another state.

The legislation is a workaround since the Supreme Court overturned the Defense of Marriage Act last year...

 

[lwien]

Actually, I'm kinda glad he's doing this and it's coming to light. Shit like this will guarantee that they won't win the next election.

Anti-gay
Anti-pot
Anti-science (Does not believe in evolution or global warming)

Religious fundamentalists. It doesn't matter what religion they are, fundamentalists are fucking insane, be they religious, political or constitutional.