Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)
Sun Mar 16, 2014, 03:53 PM Mar 2014

Wait a minute!!! Im comfused about something here....

The Republican-controlled House passed legislation on Thursday to force President Barack Obama to crack down on states that have legalized marijuana in any form.

Introduced by Reps. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), Jim Gerlach (R-Pa.) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), the ENFORCE the Law Act (H.R. 4138) would allow the House or the Senate to sue the president for "failure to faithfully execute federal laws," including those related to immigration, health care and marijuana.

"President Obama has established a disturbing pattern of cherry picking the laws he wishes to enforce," Issa said in a statement. "The Constitution charges the President with the responsibility to faithfully execute all the laws and not just the ones he supports."

A Judiciary Committee report submitted by Goodlatte last week regarding H.R. 4138 chastised the Obama administration for selective enforcement of the Controlled Substance Act, which prohibits marijuana outright. "The decision by the Obama administration not to enforce the CSA in entire states is not a a valid exercise of prosecutorial discretion," the report reads. "The guidance of U.S. Attorneys establishes a formal, department-wide policy of selective non-enforcement of an Act of Congress. This infringes on Congress's lawmaking authority, by, in effect, amending the flat prohibitions of the CSA to permit the possession, distribution, and cultivation of marijuana so long as that conduct is in compliance with state law."


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/14/republicans-force-obama-legal-marijuana_n_4964995.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592

I thought these fucking idiots supported state rights?
9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Wait a minute!!! Im comfused about something here.... (Original Post) davidn3600 Mar 2014 OP
Well, yes, but ya gotta make exceptions Jackpine Radical Mar 2014 #1
They support whatever is convenient. Consistancy is a nuisance for them. It's not like their valerief Mar 2014 #2
They only like state's rights when it's the stuff they are for. meadowlark5 Mar 2014 #3
Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Igel Mar 2014 #4
Huh? OilemFirchen Mar 2014 #6
and for no unions. n/t dixiegrrrrl Mar 2014 #8
Must be Election Season Wellstone ruled Mar 2014 #5
Does this really represent the will of their constituents? Loudly Mar 2014 #7
The Repubs are desperately seeking HeiressofBickworth Mar 2014 #9

valerief

(53,235 posts)
2. They support whatever is convenient. Consistancy is a nuisance for them. It's not like their
Sun Mar 16, 2014, 03:59 PM
Mar 2014

constituents will notice.

meadowlark5

(2,795 posts)
3. They only like state's rights when it's the stuff they are for.
Sun Mar 16, 2014, 04:12 PM
Mar 2014

Same for free market.

Those things only apply when it's what they want. And I honestly don't think the dipshits even see the hypocrisy. They're so arrogant and self righteous they can't recognize how hypocritical so much of their legislation is.

Igel

(35,320 posts)
4. Sounds familiar, doesn't it?
Sun Mar 16, 2014, 04:26 PM
Mar 2014

We also used to hate uneven and capricious enforcement of the law. In fact, a number of laws were thrown out as punishment for the executive branch--if you couldn't enforce the law in an equitable way when you were able to, the application was deemed un-Constitutional and a denial of due process.

Now, just as we hated state rights "on principle" we like uneven enforcement "on principle."

It's painful sometimes to see those traits that we all have in common as humans.

OilemFirchen

(7,143 posts)
6. Huh?
Sun Mar 16, 2014, 04:49 PM
Mar 2014

All states have laws which differ from other states, courtesy of the Tenth Amendment. Those which were "thrown out as punishment for the executive branch" were, in fact, ruled unconstitutional, as a violation of Article Six, and/or the Fourteenth Amendment.

What do you mean by "uneven enforcement"?


BTW, in answer to the OP: States' Rights has always been shorthand for segregation, period.

 

Wellstone ruled

(34,661 posts)
5. Must be Election Season
Sun Mar 16, 2014, 04:33 PM
Mar 2014

Going to see more of this type of shit. With the chickensh*t reporters out there,this is just more raw meat for them.

Remember:Stupid can not be cured.

HeiressofBickworth

(2,682 posts)
9. The Repubs are desperately seeking
Sun Mar 16, 2014, 07:49 PM
Mar 2014

some kind of charges that would fit the definition of causes for impeachment. Ginning up something about "failure to faithfully execute federal laws" might just fit the bill. Even more reason Dems need to get out to vote in large numbers. If Repubs win the senate, impeachment will be right around the corner. The key is to remember that they will do, say, act anything to discredit or eliminate this (Black, Democratic) president.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Wait a minute!!! Im comfu...