The Tea Party has friends in high places.
Conventional wisdom would have dictated that Tea Party candidates and voters would oppose California Prop 19, which would legalize marijuana in that state. While many of the state’s celebrity Twitter users took to the medium to encourage California to Legalize It, one would have expected the most influential Tea Partiers to heft every bit of sway into pooping on the prop 19 party.
After all, Tea Partiers are widely believed to be 2 things above all else: conservative, and undereducated. One would not suspect a candidate who doesn’t know the First Amendment stipulates a separation of church and state to possess the intellectual rigor required to stand consistent with a libertarian platform when it means your 14 year-old may start getting legal, easy access to weed.
But it appears the Tea Party may be doing exactly that. The Christian Science Monitor today runs an interview with Leo Laurence, a “former California sheriff’s deputy and currently a writer and pro-legalization activist at Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP).”
Of his own Tea Party skepticism, he says “I had written that the tea party would probably oppose it, but then I got phone calls saying, ‘No, you’re wrong on that.’ Tea party people have a very strong position that the government has no right to get involved in your private affairs … when you’re not hurting yourself or somebody else. And that’s basically Prop. 19 in a nutshell.”
What’s more, Republicans in general do not reflect the same sentiment. Prop 19 California polls indicate 65 percent of Republicans overall oppose proposition 19, as opposed to only 25 percent who support it. The split reflected in the poll numbers highlights a deeper rift between the Tea Party and other facets of the GOP establishment. Recently Karl Rove, scion of the Bush-era GOP establishment, insinuated Sarah Palin was unfit to hold the office of the president. Yesterday, Palin called the GOP institution that would seek to discredit her “sleazy,” all while her Sarah Palin PAC donates significant funds to these very same “sleazy” candidates.
The Tea Party may be in a bit of an identity crisis, and they may well inherit the dominant power structure from incumbent Republicans, themselves becoming the “GOP establishment.” If that happens, it will be a bummer for those of us on the left. But hey, at least we’ll be able to spark up a J in peace.
November 02, 2010 at 9:30 pm, sloitdown said:
“…when it means your 14 year-old may start getting legal, easy access to weed.”
This is an absolute lie, the author best to check himself. It's hard to respect one's opinions when you haven't bothered to read the damned law. From experience, I had way easier access to marijuana than alcohol as a minor. Guess why… dealers don't ID! I voted YES! Freedom for all.
November 02, 2010 at 9:31 pm, dman said:
If the tea party is for pot then I will support the tea party. How can a mild, harmless drug be prohibited if the government supports individual liberty? If the tea party is for individual liberty then it will embrace legalization of pot. The reason that established parties do not support legalization is that it will be hard to tax when many people will grow their own medicine. Further, the alcohol industry is fighting against legalization because it knows that an alcoholic can stay away from alcohol successfully by sparking up medical pot. Pharmacutical industry stands to lose the most for obvious reasons. The multi-billions going to Mexico for it's ditch weed would dry up. The mexican drug cartels main source of revenue beign mexican-grown pot, their violence and atrocities would subside. Dman
November 02, 2010 at 9:39 pm, Clairechampion8 said:
How can the tea party support individual liberty if they wont support an individuals ability to get married to their partner if they are homosexual, or if they dont believe in the seperation of church and state, which, if such a seperation did not exist, would alienate people of non-christian faith or those of us who dont believe in god?
November 02, 2010 at 10:01 pm, Mikhail Chalecki said:
tea party movement has nothing to do with gay marriage. its about money, laws and constitutionality. but doesnt mean the constituency isnt retarded to have those opinions. the supreme court in california repealed prop 8, the one making gay marriage illegal, because its a blatant violation of human rights and segregates people as second class citizens. i believe the official stand of the og movement heads like rand paul would agree. i believe the republicans got scared of the movement and send in their big guns pallin and beck to fill it with retards as they have been doing. why? not sure. but they just had to control it somehow
November 03, 2010 at 2:55 am, RGee said:
Do you know how is in the tea party? I don't understand how you could support your assertion. Again, the tea party is limited. A Libertarian would tell you that whether gay marriage should be “legalized” is not the right question, since it suggests that the government even has a right to control marriage. The only proper role it has (at the state, and not Federal level) is to be a record keeper. It really shouldn't be deciding who gets married, so long as it is two people capable of entering into a mutually agreed upon and legally binding contract. At that point, all the government should do is keep a short record that these two have entered this agreement. That is it. If divorced, the two should simply nullify the contract, without the need for a long, drawn out process.
It's a contract. Nothing more, nothing less. Anything else falls under the domain of religion, which again, is not the proper role of government. It is the proper domain of private citizens living their private lives.
November 03, 2010 at 2:52 am, RGee said:
The author of the article claims tea party members are uneducated, when indeed, she fails to educate herself about the tea party. It doesn't take a lot – just some very basic, crude research.
The “tea party” is limited in its goal, and has overwhelming libertarian undertones. A Libertarian (such as myself) is overwhelmingly FOR 19, at least as far as giving a middle finger to the Feds and restoring at least a part of individual liberty, even if it is subject to excessive regulation and taxation(at least it is better than the current situation).
Plus, it'll provide that much more of a bad cut to the cartels. The only way to really solve this illegal immigration problem and restore the erosion of our liberty, the expansion of the Federal government, and the militarization of the police is to take away one of their biggest excuses – the war on drugs. Of course, MJ is only one part of that, but it is the most high profile part. Small steps to a big victory begins with MJ legalization (not just decriminalization), and most importantly, reminding the Feds they have no authority in this matter.
November 02, 2010 at 9:32 pm, Xander said:
I'd like to take this time to explain the stupidity of Alex Moore for thinking that prop 19 “..means your 14 year-old may start getting legal, easy access to weed.” Do you understand that because marijuana is illegal, it is far easier to get if you are a teenager, than alcohol is. I'm 19 years old and know this to be true, because i can easily walk down the street to get some weed, but can not get ahold of alcohol very easily. Every other teenager I know also finds it difficult to get alcohol, but easy to get weed. THIS IS BECAUSE IT IS ILLEGAL, you idiots need to understand that because its illegal, its so easy for kids to get. Drug dealers don't ask for ID, every store does.
November 02, 2010 at 9:43 pm, D149331 said:
you're retarded
November 02, 2010 at 9:48 pm, Rusty said:
Why is he retarded? Explain yourself.
November 02, 2010 at 9:48 pm, enlightened said:
No dude you're retarded for failing to see the logic behind what he was saying, when I was in middle school I could go to any of ten or so people in school and get pot, but if I wanted alcohol I was out of luck.
November 02, 2010 at 10:09 pm, tem said:
You Hit it right on the Head Xander, I think the real Problem is, The Government would lose alot of Revenue By legalizing it. After All They are The Biggest Dope Dealer's in the Country!!
November 02, 2010 at 11:19 pm, PhillyB said:
i 100% agree with you and not only that its the goverments fault that so meny people grow it and buy/sell it for the simple fact its is to get and people know they can make a few nice $ from selling it … if u legilize it then all thoughs dealers would go outta bissniss there for be harder to get as a teenager not only that then the police an the goverment would able to pay more attention on bigger problems like violent crimes for instince ….. like in my mind i honestly think they have a lot bigger problem to be dealing with instead of a stoner who just wants to sit down watch some movies have a puff an eat his cheese puffs liek come on they care more about that guy then the person next store makin bombs an planin to blow shit up
November 02, 2010 at 9:45 pm, Alex said:
Hey guys – to clarify, I know that passing prop 19 will not mean your 14 year-old will actually get legal, easy access to weed. 14 year-olds already have easy access to weed, and passing Prop 19 won't make it legal for them. What I was trying to communicate is that this is what conservatives fear when they imagine marijuana becoming legal. The fear is unfounded, and the issue of access is already a reality.
November 02, 2010 at 11:19 pm, Nutbastard said:
you may want to amend the article since the semantics are ambiguous. of course, doing so will do nothing for the other fallacies and overall ignorant stench of the rest of the piece. But it'd be nice if you made the effort.
November 02, 2010 at 11:42 pm, Alex24x7 said:
Then you should amend your article. Step up.
November 03, 2010 at 2:57 am, RGee said:
Really, just “conservatives?” Can you be clear? Are you referring to neo-conservatives (who I believe you are trying to stereotype)? Because I'm sure there are PLENTY of liberal Democrats out there who are also freaking out over legalizing weed. Think inner city leaders who pride themselves on outlawing everything they think is associated with crime, or liberal religious leaders, etc.
November 02, 2010 at 9:52 pm, Maddog133 said:
I just wasted 3 minutes of my life reading this ridiculous article. The author is the one that's “undereducated.” Do some research before you write to avoid looking like a jackass. Xander has it 100% correct. Back when I was in high school, marijuana was very easy to get. What's worse is that most people that sold it also sold other drugs. Drugs like heroin that are a detriment to our society. Which is better? A legal system, or a dealer with no moral compass?
November 02, 2010 at 10:25 pm, dante said:
chiilll out people just get high and give love
November 02, 2010 at 11:16 pm, Nutbastard said:
“Conventional wisdom would have dictated that Tea Party candidates and voters would oppose California Prop 19″
I am not a tea party member, but only someone who is completely ignorant about the core values of the tea party could say this with a straight face.
“One would not suspect a candidate who doesn’t know the First Amendment stipulates a separation of church and state to possess the intellectual rigor required to stand consistent with a libertarian platform when it means your 14 year-old may start getting legal, easy access to weed.”
Yes, that woman is an idiot, but it's nothing short of idiocy on her level to equate her with *every* member of her party. Way to stay objective. Furthermore, you ignorant twat, no 14 year old will have legal access to marijuana. Read the proposition. 21 and over. It's not rocket science.
“After all, Tea Partiers are widely believed to be 2 things above all else: conservative, and undereducated.”
Have any sweeping generalizations to make about various races or nationalities while you're at it?
“The Tea Party may be in a bit of an identity crisis”
Why do you think that? Because your tiny, emaciated brain can't conceive of a party that's neither republican nor democrat?
November 02, 2010 at 11:31 pm, sofakingjewish said:
A mess is better then prohibition. Mfers need to step back and realize this is a start!
November 02, 2010 at 11:38 pm, centralcoastgal said:
I would rather work/play etc with a person who smoked weed then someone using pharmacuticals/ chemicals like meth or alcohol. Its a natural plant, sustainable, renewable, safe…. I truly believe that it will help in the border wars with Mexico and it definetly resolves a tremendous medical issues, including mine.
November 02, 2010 at 11:53 pm, Stephenchampagne said:
well i just gotta say that when i was 13 i good walk within 3 blocks of my mothers house and buy weed from atleast 4 different dealers and ofcourse it was all over school too. Alchohol was a pain in the butt however to get, because you have to try to find a buyer and thats not as easy as that may sound. nobody wants to go to the store for a minor to buy intoxicants, a few may do it but overall it makes it 100 times harder to get it. not to mention ive known dealers to put crack and crap like that in weed and sell it to kids just because they thought it was funny, and then theres the mexican dirt weed that floods neighborhoods and wreaks of kerosene because it was dowsed with it so it can make it past drug dogs. so although i dont smoke it anymore myself i do have enough sense to know that it needs to be regulated, and for many more reasons than these ive mentioned.
November 02, 2010 at 11:55 pm, Stephenchampagne said:
lets not forget about all the criminal records kids get for possessing it. do you really want you kids and grandkids made into criminals because of our policy?
November 03, 2010 at 12:02 am, Bowen_Arrow said:
This is the stupiest thing I've ever read! I truely feel dumber now, thanks for the sudden drop in IQ, who needs to smoke pot with crap like this going around.
November 03, 2010 at 10:19 pm, PJ said:
You do, apparently.
November 04, 2010 at 4:12 am, Bowen_Arrow said:
Good point! I think it is more that I haven't had any to chill with in a while my friend. I have no idea what my problem was. Sorry for being an ass. I do find it sad that 56% of a population has determined the other 44% are criminals. The greatest tragedy is that people are going to continue to die over a harmless plant, that could ease our addiction to oil and plastics, while providing a new agro rotation crop that would greatly improve the land. With all the benefits of legalizing the plant it is hard to imagine why we don't. Unless there is a top secret funding project hiding in the mix, wink wink.
November 03, 2010 at 12:34 am, Katie said:
It is funny that this article discredit's one of it's great supporters of this action as being “undereducated”..Decriminalization is great but do you really want to have the government control your marijuana? look at how corupt the food supply is, being dosed with chemicals and stimulants. Heard the song lyrics “every one's got a drug dealer on speed dial”? No matter what age a person is they will seek their drug of choice whether having government contol over marijuana may send them a few extra loops ultimately if their desire is great enough to obtain what they are seeking, they will. ….With gov't control do they makes house calls like a trustworthy dealer would? And also legalization with government control reminds me about the corruption of tobacco, the small town home growers were pushed out of business and left jobless once government took control of their crop. Now wtf is in that “controled” rolled up paper….
November 03, 2010 at 12:42 am, T Jen L said:
In my opinion if weed were legal less kids would do hard drugs. When you tell your son or daughter that weed is bad and its a drug and its illegal than what happens when they try it and find out they were lied to? So maybe mom dad and the government were lying about coke and heroin to. Thats what goes through kids heads and everyone knows it but no one does anything about it. Why? I really hope prop 19 passes and this trend sweeps the rest of the country. FUCK THE CARTELS!
November 03, 2010 at 1:39 am, Lj said:
Alex, I knew you were implying that's what conservatives thought. it was tongue in cheek… and Im high. Good article
November 03, 2010 at 3:03 am, William Cooke said:
I support the tea party and drug legalization. If you want a smaller government ending the drug war is a priority. You should be less dismissive of the movement. Some of your comments are unfair.
November 03, 2010 at 3:09 am, Guest said:
“”Death and taxes.” “Don't talk about politics or religion.” This is all the equivalent of enemy propaganda, rolling across the picket line.” – Alex Jones
Pretty good comments here, thanks for straightening out the author.
The original 'Tea Party' was a peace movement born out of the Ron Paul 2008 campaign before it was hijacked by neo-conservatives.. but I still don't like grouping all tea partiers and their beliefs into a single cohesive set when there is none.
November 03, 2010 at 3:17 am, Jim said:
Wait a minute … “Your 14 year old may start getting access to weed” … are you that out of touch with your child or other children's reality? Any 14 year old in the United States can get access to weed if they want. Its their choice … you need to educate them just like you should on alcohol and sex. Pretending they don't know better is not the answer. WAKE UP … they know more than you think.
November 03, 2010 at 3:23 am, frank said:
whoever wrote this is a moron
March 02, 2011 at 8:14 pm, Tucker said:
Well as a 16 year old pot sm
March 02, 2011 at 8:17 pm, Tucker said:
As a 16 yea old pot smoker, Christian, and TEA supporter would just like to say that it is way easier to get pot than it is to get booze or cigarettes. If weed was legalized it would be a real pain to get my hands on it. And most TEA members that I know smoke weed and want it legalized.