Representative Diana DeGette ((Remember her? She’s the “expert” sponsor of a gun control bill who didn’t realize you could reload a magazine. Perhaps she was stoned at the time?)) of Colorado (D) sent out an email recently praising the rollout of marijuana legalization in Colorado and asking for support to deflect federal tampering with the state’s will. In her email, she wrote:
. . . We can’t let the federal government override Colorado voters and regulate our recreational marijuana sales. I’ve introduced the Respect States’ and Citizens’ Rights Act—legislation that will help prevent the federal government from imposing its own marijuana regulations on states like Colorado. Can I count on your support?
We need to take this on from day one: make an immediate contribution to send a strong message: respect Colorado voters and respect states.
Respect states and their voters? Really? You’re gonna pull the states’ rights card on this issue? May I take this opportunity to point out how hypocritical that is coming from an activist member of the federal government, let alone a leftist like DeGette? DeGette is Vice Chair of the LGBT Equality Caucus, co-chair of the Pro-Choice Caucus, and an avid supporter of gun control. Do you think she wants to respect states like Utah that want to maintain prohibitions on homosexual marriage? Do you think she respects the wishes of Texas concerning abortion laws? Do you think she wants to uphold local laws that are “soft” on guns? Do you think she upholds South Carolina’s attempts to nullify Obamacare? Of course not.
Leftists love to talk about freedom, liberty, states’ rights, we the people, blah blah blah, when it suits their own purposes. But when it comes down to it, they only support the protection of the right to agree with them. You have the right, fully protected by the Constitution, to agree with DeGette and her cronies. That’s as far as your political protection goes.
But DeGette is not alone in this hypocrisy. It is of the utmost importance that we protect the rights of those who disagree with us. That is crucial to the rule of law. We cannot break down the protected rights of others (no matter how noble the cause or despicable the opponent) and then demand that our own protected rights be upheld when we are attacked. The nature of federalism is the protection of dissent. States’ rights are intended to balance the power of governance away from centralization by creating safe harbors for people who may not agree with the majority opinion of the nation.
I personally have no political or ideological problem with Colorado’s legalization of marijuana. But I find it frustrating that an issue as trivial as recreational marijuana should become our generation’s landmark issue for states’ rights. Not Obamacare. Not abortion. Not gun control. Not homosexual marriage. No. Marijuana is the one area leftists think the federal government should leave states sovereign. “Like, thus far and no farther, man. Chill with your tyranny and quit being so aggro.” Ridiculous.
Diana DeGette is an EMBARASSMENT to the State of Colorado, and is nothing more than a white Sheila Jackson Lee!!!
OF COURSE, if the State of Colorado wanted to thumb its nose at Obama’s gun control BULLS**T, DeGette would run you over to find a camera crew to complain about THAT!!!!!
I believe she is making a good point using state rights…. However, I do not think she is bright enough to realize the things she opposes should be handled the same way or could be handled the same way. Most liberals I know do not play devils advocate with their own thoughts before speaking them out to others… well to be far I know a few conservatives that do not do that as well… 🙂
States Rights is an un-American concept. The Constitution was constructed to protect the rights of the individual against the majority. When I hear the phrase “states rights”, I immediately ask myself, “The right to do what?” Usually, the answer is that they want the right to discriminate, the right to repress unpopular lifestyles, the right to assert the dominance of the majority and suppress the minority opinion, and the right to take away the inalienable rights and freedoms of individuals. Beware of state’s rights. It’s the right to hate, and the right to enforce that hatred through legislation. People have rights, not states.
People have the right to move to the state that suits them. I left CA because it was too expensive. Pot heads will move to CO. Homosexuals move to states that allows marriage (if they want it) or San Francisco. Nobodies forcing anything on anyone. Get up and leave if you don’t like it
Remember the American Civil War?! The South was not allowed to exercise States Rights! Gun control, Obamacare, etc., same issues. I personally oppose legalization of marijuana, for a good reason. Now children will be ever more exposed to this drug, along with cigarettes and alcohol. It equates to more intoxicated drivers on the road, and more cases of intoxication manslaughter, more attacks on law enforcement. It is a violation of federal law, and federal law should be enforced. Federal law is there because some persons (can you say Democrats?) are not capable of making wise and proper decisions for themselves, or for any one else for that matter…
When the southern states had to be forced at gunpoint, to free their slaves, they then wanted the “right” to deny blacks from gaining any political power by keeping them from voting. When they lost this legislative battle, the southern states wanted the “right” to keep black people segregated in the back of the bus, the back of the restaurant, out of white restrooms, away from white drinking fountains, and out of white schools. They wanted the “right” to enforce second-class citizenship on people whom they despised because they viewed them as less than human; all this, despite being Christians. Southern states had to be forced, again at gunpoint of federal national guardsmen, to treat black people with at least a visible degree of equality.
You may be correct, but change to… Southern Democrats.
It is apparent that you are a dumbocrate as you know nothing about history! The NORTH had just as many slaves as the South did & even the president owned them. As far as I am concerned they could cut the country in half & give back all the things the South invented & the north stole & I bet the South would survive & the North would starve & beg for food stamps. In the Civil War the north could not even fight by themselves but had to hire another country to fight for them SO SHUT THE HELL UP!!
I do know this about history… when the south stepped out of line the north had to march down south and “bitch slap” the rebels so hard they still haven’t forgotten the beating they took! As for today, if it wasn’t for blue states subsidizing the free loading red states they wouldn’t have indoor plumbing yet!
That’s right BOOB you do not know very much at all & it shows very well i your writing & ranting & raving without any factual basis! Grow up & get a pair! Or come to to the south & we will remove them for you you punk!
Stay the hell in the backward north where you were born with a golden spoon in your mouth & your mama & papa with a hand full of food stamps!
Read the Constitution moron. Un-American? The Federal Government was granted limited powers with the rest reserved to the states and the people. Libs like you don’t like the concept because if your progressive utopia is only implemented in individual states, the people are free to escape your tyrrany by moving to another state. You prefer all of your policies to be Federal so no one can escape your tyrrany. It always comes down to progressives desire to control people and force them to act in the manner they determine to be appropriate. Progressives are alot like Muslims. Believe as we do or face punishment. The Federal Government has been acting unconstitutionally for at least 100 years.
Ever heard of the 10th Amend.? Last I checked, it is part of the Constitution….as in the Bill of Rights. Apparently, that finger you hold up displays your IQ.
@Bob – You might wish to read up on the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America and the history of how the Framers concluded that it was necessary to restrain the federal government from excessive control and interference with the States. Too, you may wish to bone up on the 14th Amendment of that same document of origination, which applies to the States those rights affirmed and responsibilities mandated.
The only rights of individuals “protect[ed]” by the Constitution are those affirmed in the Bill of Rights – the first ten Amendments. The term “States’ rights” is actually shorthand for the concepts embodied in the 10th Amendment, though you are quite correct in asserting that the body of our Constitution was constructed, not primarily to protect the individual from the whims of a majority, but to assure that the federal government did not overreach limits with which Americans were uncomfortable under British rule.
By Constitutional law, no government within the purview of the United States and our Constitution may “…take away the inalienable rights and freedoms of individuals.” Your assertion to the contrary is incorrect.
Cogito, ergo armatus sum.
Go easy on Bob as he is a low information DUMBOCRATE with no morals or an iq over 1!
Let the gays move to California and live right on the fault line. Let the pot heads move to Colorado and enjoy their high. Let the demoncrats move to hell where they belong.
I do agree with everything you said, mostly the demoncraps should go to hell where they belong
aren’t teabaggers already living in hell??? What could be worse then living in some “flyover” red state?
Bob, Please, please fly over us! We prefer it that way.
Being your neighbor.
All I have to say about legal pot is its going to insure that people stay in a liberal stupor.Marxist dems know it will dumby down the younger low info people.Garaunteed dem voters.
“Michael Minkoff” is about ten steps below being a half-wit by bringing up any side issue that he’s interested in to counter this attack against the federal government! You should be ashamed and have your computer confiscated (by your beloved federal government!)
You should read the whole article.
This “legalization” of a substance to “control” the low-info “voters” is the same as the USSR, keeping vodka cheap and plentiful during the “communist” years. (Altho I don’t really believe that communism is dead -it has spread it’s tentacles to other countries). Who was it that said that the USSR would take down America without a “shot” fired. They’re pretty darn close!!!!
Unfortunately, food was not plentiful. (Approximately 7 million starved to death under Stalin.) And marijuana gives people the munchies. They might be even harder to control if you give them marijuana and no food.
Speaking of “low info” voters, I hate to break the news to you but the USSR dead & the USA is the leader of the world! DUMB ASS!!!!
Missimg from this list of liberal hypocricy is immigration law. The feds pass immigration laws, refuse to enforce them and then sue states that try to enforce them.
Maybe if they would all just get stoned and stay that way we could run the government as we see fit.
For years I have been asking anyone who advocates laws to “control” drug use to kindly direct me to the part of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution empowers Congress to legislate what substances an adult may or may not introduce into their tender body by whatever means they see fit. To date no one has responded. Anybody here want to tackle that one?