Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
How can a Federalist President force his Justice Dept to pursue a case against states' rights to regulate marijana use within their borders? How is that not directly contradictory to everything states' rights stands for? I know this does not include you, but many in your party are FINOs - federalists in name only. They scream about states' rights on issues regarding religious expression which they favor, but when the federalism would allow the states to do something they don't like, they admit their hypocrisy and scream for federal intervention. You can't have it both ways. You can't cry for the ten commandments on the courthousse steps on one hand and then demand a federal amendment defining marriage on the other. I agree that the states should control drugs, abortion and the definition of marriage. I'm no fan of consistency, but in this circumstance, its the only way to be fair and intellectually honest in the administration of our laws. Picking and chooisng what the states can and can't do based on the insane ideologies of the looniest mouths in your party makes a mockery of the whole states' rights issue. You can't be a full of steamin shit shit hypocrite and advocate anything effectively.
|
A big fat 2. From an ideaological standpoint, the GOP is a total joke.
