Romney on Marijuana
Here’s Mitt Romney answering a question about medical marijuana, if you can call it answering.
I’m not going to get much into the rights or wrongs of marijuana, medical or not, the war on drugs, or all that jazz. Instead I’m going to address Romney’s dodging of the question. One might say he in fact answered the question very directly, “I’m against the legalization of marijuana.” That’s a fine answer, Romney, but you were asked a very specific question. “Will you arrest me and my doctor if we use marijuana to treat my ailments?” He just wanted an honest answer.
Some have sympathized with Romney, saying it’s a loaded question. If he answers yes, then he’s not sympathetic to the less fortunate. If he says no, then he’s a hypocrite.
I say well then Romney, own up to your policy. If your policy is marijuana is bad in all shapes and forms, and you believe the feds should arrest abusers, then own up to it. Tell the man he’ll be arrested.
Ron Paul gives a very straightforward answer to this question. He says the federal government has no business interfering with such matters. Paul says the states have the say here. He says he (or the federal government) will not arrest you.
The tragedy is that Romney dodges around the question so he can fool as many people into voting for him as he can. If someone is going to vote against him because they don’t think the feds should arrest users in sympathetic states, then that’s their prerogative, and shame on Mitt for not coming clean to them.
Mitt Romney, own up to your policies!
I seem to remember a similar situation. Let’s see… oh yes, in Matthew 22, among others. \r\n\r\nFirst, if one insists on a direct answer then the answer is obviously no. He’s not a policeman. He will be head of the executive branch if he’s elected, but he doesn’t make the laws he only enforces them. Presidents have values and policies and do their best to influence congress and so forth, but in the end the laws are made by congress and enforced by the executive branch. So no, he’s not going to arrest this dude unless congress passes a law saying he should. But that answer is no better than “owning up”, and he knows it.\r\n\r\nPolitics, by which I mean anything where you are in the situation where people will do everything they can to malign you to get the hand up, is not about being blunt. If you’re blunt and tactless, you will be torn to pieces. You can be honest and have character without giving yourself over on a silver platter to the people who would misrepresent you.\r\n\r\nAs for whether medical marijuana should be legal, it’s irrelevant to the situation. It’s relevant to whether you may want to vote for him, but he states his position clearly and doesn’t get drawn into entrapment. You the voter come away with all the information you need without the soundbite the media wants to malign him.\r\n
03 Feb 09:51 by
I look at Ron Paul’s answer as a cop out. Is he for or against the legalization of marijuana? We have no idea. I want a president that is willing to tell me what he is for or against. Instead, Paul just leaves the hard question to the states. As Hans says, Paul saying that “he” or the federal government won’t arrest you is just as ridiculous. Romney or the Federal government won’t arrest you, the local police or sheriff will arrest you.
04 Feb 07:42 by
Of course the president won’t personally go out arresting people. That’s not what I meant. As for Ron Paul copping out, I think that couldn’t be farther from the truth. What Ron Paul is saying is it doesn’t matter what his personal beliefs are on the subject of marijuana. It matters what the PEOPLE think, and it’s easiest to represent the PEOPLE at the state level. Paul is saying he strongly believes in state sovereignty, and that trumps what he personally might believe about marijuana.
05 Feb 11:42 by
Post a comment
Website and email are optional. Email will be displayeduser at example dot com.