Wednesday, September 15, 2010


Another commenter decries the rush to purity of the Republican Party/Tea Party Movement. The focus is on the recent Delaware Primary Where O'Donnell (the Tea Party insurgent) beat Castle - a noted Republican squish. (I have another take on this race at No Quarter)

Many conservatives feel empowered in the current environment. This empowerment hurt Castle in two ways. Many conservatives felt as though they could take a loss in Delaware and were willing to risk it on O'Donnell. They also felt as though a wave of public anger could indeed propel O'Donnell into the Senate and restore the GOP to "purity."
Fook purity. I just want the so called party of small government to live up to its advertising.

The fools could start with the Drug War.


H/T Instapundit

Cross Posted at Classical Values


RavingDave said...

MSimon, you are making the wrong argument. It doesn't resonate. You would have better luck amongst people who think like I do if you argued that Federal involvement in the drug war violates Federalism, and that each individual state has a right to legalize drugs if they chose to do so.

THAT argument makes sense to me, where the "WAR ON DRUGS = BIG GOVERNMENT" does not. A lot of people believe it is Necessary for the government to handle the drug war because they regard drugs as a threat. To argue that it may indeed be a threat, but each state has the right to decide that for itself is a much more persuasive argument.

I find myself with no obvious answer to that argument other than that I want to warn states that contemplate legalizing a drug(s)that it is damaging to their population and against their own long term interests, but I recognize that THEY can decide what they want to do for themselves. Even if it's stupid.

As an individual state enactment, it does not have the same potential to seriously degrade the whole country as would a national enactment.

M. Simon said...

Well I consider some Christian statists as a threat. None the less I ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to get government involved in my fears.

Why? If I give government the power some day they may turn it on me.

As noted in the comments on the Belmont Club - some anti-abortion groups are no longer asking for government to get in their fight. They want to change hearts. A difficult thing to do at the point of a government gun. The government gun typically creates resentment and a FU attitude. Worsening the problem.

It may be one of the reasons that our drug use rate in America is double that of the Dutch (who have gone half way with non-enforcement of the laws - except for suppliers - leaving the black market and its huge corrupting profits intact)

At $25 bn a year Federally (maybe double or triple that if you count all the costs) the Drug War IS big government.

It is so bad and so ineffectual that some prosecutors in Calif. are ready to throw in the towel.

BTW you keep believing in WORDS when reality doesn't match. Prohibited doesn't mean prohibited. It means distributed by criminals. I want to end criminal distribution of drugs. That we can do (see prohibition, alcohol).

I want to take drug distribution out of the hands of criminals and make drugs as hard for kids to get as beer. I'd like to bring our drug use rates down to Dutch levels and do what the Swiss have done in reducing crime by making heroin a Dr. prescribed drug.

Worship of state power is pernicious and is a common feature of the left and the right. It is a sickness and I intend to fight it with every tool I can use.