Wherein We Discover What Republicans Are Smoking

What's more important to John Boehner than stopping Obama's amnesty?

One of the greatest modern mysteries is why elected Democrats are willing to fight for their demonstrably devastating beliefs while Republican politicians simply mouth platitudes to the base while kneecapping any effort to actually implement the conservative agenda that most Republican voters have been crying out for.

We've lost count of the number of times conservatives have threatened to finally give up on the Republican party; it hasn't happened yet.  Still, Mr. Obama's illegal amnesty may accomplish what Republican voters hadn't the guts for: as the Democrat party well knows, adding 10% of our population of dirt poor, uneducated people raised in socialism will inevitably make conservative electoral victories impossible.

So if ever there was a hill to die on, stopping Mr. Obama's amnesty is that hill.  According to the Constitution, the House of Representatives holds the power of the purse and has full authority to defund anything it doesn't want done.  Yet the Republican leadership didn't even try.

No, according to Congressman Jim Moran (D., Va.), the trillion-dollar "cromnibus" funding bill just enacted gave the Dems “virtually everything” they wanted.  What's the point in having a majority if you're simply going to do the minority's bidding anyway?  Do Republicans stand for anything anymore?

To our shocked surprise, it turns out that they actually do, and the "cromnibus" reveals what it is.

Did the Congress use their power of the purse to defund Mr. Obama's amnesty which will destroy the Republican party as we know it?  Nope.

Did they, perhaps, enact a ban on taxpayer funding of abortions?  Not that either.

How about taking even a little bite out of Obamacare, given that only 37% of Americans approve of it and it hits new lows every time a poll is taken? No, not even that.

Ah, but the Republican leadership did indeed put in one rider, opposed by the administration, using the Constitutional power of the purse to explicitly prevent any funds from being used for something Mr. Obama wants to do that they don't.  What might this issue be, more important than illegal immigration, abortion, or Obamacare?

It is... medical marijuana.

Our Congressional Choom Gang

You see, although many states have recently legalized medical marijuana, it is still against Federal law for virtually everybody to grow, acquire, distribute, or use the stuff.  In theory, even if you have a state-approved prescription for marijuana, the DEA can still throw you in the dungeon for a long time.  This doesn't happen often, but every now and again, the Feds pick somebody as an example just to keep everybody scared.

Not anymore!  According to the amendment, permitted by the Republican leadership, voted on by the House and Senate, and now signed by President Obama along with the rest of the pile of fetid garbage that is the funding bill:

None of the funds made available in this Act to the Department of Justice may be used, with respect to the States of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, to prevent such States from implementing their own State laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana.

The list of states is those which have passed laws legalizing marijuana to some extent.  The language here is exactly what conservatives have been screaming for Republicans to use against all manner of leftist depradations, despite preposterous arguments that it couldn't possibly work.

Yet with marijuana, not only can it work, it is working.  From today, residents of those states can inhale without fear.

That's not really such a bad thing; as federalist republicans, we believe that the several states should have the widest possible latitude to direct their own affairs, and if that includes reefer madness so be it.

The true madness, though, is why Republicans refused to use exactly this technique to address a problem that actually matters.  A few potheads, or even a lot of them, won't destroy this country.  An avalanche of socialist voters assuredly will.

Let's hope that the explanation for this travesty is that John Boehner's entire office was totally stoned - any other imaginable reason would be even worse.

Read other Scragged.com articles by Hobbes or other articles on Partisanship.
Reader Comments

I don't really understand why the marijuana provision is something you're calling out as a "thing the Republicans stood for". Was it originally proposed and written **BY** a Republican caucus specifically? My reading on that was that it was included by a bi-partisan effort of several caucuses and the GOP simply didn't fight it (like everything else). How is it specifically Republican?

December 17, 2014 11:24 AM

Yes, it was bipartisan, pushed by two California congressmen of both parties.

The point is that apparently it's something that the Obama administration didn't really want, and it uses the exact same methods which Boehner has said wouldn't work for defunding Obama's amnesty.

By allowing this provision, Boehner stood for it - if he hadn't allowed it to be voted on, it would never have made it into the bill. There's nothing whatsoever wrong with his doing so - but why does he continue to refuse for using the same technique to address a far more critical problem?

December 17, 2014 11:52 AM

Answer: because there is clear widespread support (in Congress, media and the public) for the marijuana provision, but not for standing against amnesty. Even if the public is majority against amnesty, he would still have to make a stand in Congress and the media. Boehner didn't "stand" for anything with the marijuana provision. It was the path of least resistance across the board. Amnesty requires that you fight with Congress, the media and a good chunk of the public.

December 17, 2014 11:56 AM
Add Your Comment...
4000 characters remaining
Loading question...