It is telling that no one in the Republican leadership criticized the Department of Justice’s new guidance that relaxes their attitude about marijuana. Maybe they are distracted by more pressing matters, but they do not ordinarily pass up chances to take shots at the administration. Their silence is especially surprising because the DOJ guidance fits into a pre-existing narrative that the GOP has been pursuing around the selective enforcement of the law. They didn’t like it when the administration stopped defending DOMA in court, or when they went to war in Libya without congressional authorization, or when the DOJ made a new guidance not to deport DREAMers.
By passing up a chance to amplify their message that the president is a tyrannical lawbreaker, the GOP is demonstrating that they don’t want to get on the wrong side of the marijuana debate. Call it the power of Generation X asserting itself.
One group isn’t happy:
Police Groups Furiously Protest Eric Holder’s Marijuana Policy Announcement
And that shows you what that police group is all about. This kills their gravy train.
People say Pharma is the biggest impediment. I disagree. A lot of police groups will lose their paramilitary style grade weaponry when they don’t need to combat “drug cartels” (as if that’s what they use it for, so they might still “need” it), and they won’t get to seize assets. Asset forfeiture is ignored on this issue outside of the big drug reform groups, and it’s frequently abused.
A police force made up of civilians who don’t abuse their power while abusing their fellow citizens is just a slippery slope to Socialism, comrade.
Gay marriage, legal pot, health care for all. This country’s going to hell in a handbasket. Time’s a changin’.
If we take the administration’s account of its objectives at face value, it is not seeking to topple Assad, but merely to punish him for doing a bad thing. Since he is currently in an existential struggle, though, only punishments that increase the likelihood of toppling are going to have any bite. All other considerations become secondary when survival is threatened. So either this is a Libya situation – where the US wants to topple a regime but not to come out and say so – or it is some bizarre notion of using war to inflict punishment without any strategic objective. What worries me is that the second is worse than the first, and also seems more likely the actual objective.
This is the comment I meant to put here:
I think it’s because they need to keep the libertarians on board, and the libertarians are committed on this issue. They are already close to civil war between the libs and the militarists, and Syria will escalate that. They can’t afford to have the Pauls attacking the party more right now, and the Pauls are too committed on this issue not to if they make a stink. In fact, I believe the Pauls, too, have been strangely silent. There is no GOP faction for whom drugs are the most important issue, so all are willing to let sleeping dogs lie for the moment.
this is my belief…they don’t want to alienate the libertarian pot folks
where Tea Party types have said anything reasonable is on drug offenses. The GOP dominated legislature actually passed a law reducing sentencing for drug crimes.
Scott vetoed it – but it was over the objections of Florida Tea Party leadership. This is not the same as pushing for legalization, but I think there is a growing sentence even on the right that our drug laws make no sense.
Note the margins on passage.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/10/gov-rick-scott-vetoes-bil_n_1414758.html