Palin on Pot Policy

By TChris, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 12:46:46 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Jeralyn's summary of Gov. Palin's policy positions should please the most extreme members of the GOP. She is a model of intolerance; a model Republican.

It's interesting that she admits smoking pot. Is the new Republican strategy to admit the commission of crimes that the Republican Party would like to see vigorously enforced against everyone else? If "trying" pot has become so socially acceptable that a Republican candidate for VP can admit her criminal behavior, shouldn't Palin support the federal decriminalization of marijuana? Given her reliance on state law as a mitigating argument, shouldn't Palin oppose the Justice Department's interference with rights granted by California's medical marijuana laws?

Maybe those are her views. If she's not on record, it would make a good debate question. (Biden, unfortunately, might resort to his longstanding War on Crime stance with an equally disappointing answer.)

< Palin On Pot, Civil Unions, Gay Marriage and Abortion | Palin on Death Penalty, Abortion, War in Iraq >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Palin on Pot Policy | 43 comments (43 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

What say you? Does Palin's admission (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by oculus on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:08:44 PM EST

admission she tried pot in a state where it apparently was legal to do so at the time (although not under federal law) make Obama's admission he used coke (which isn't legal under either state or federal law) a non-issue?

Good debate questions. (5.00 / 2) (#15)
by TChris on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:31:58 PM EST

I would like to see some sort of medical marijuana question and some sort of federal sentencing question asked of both presidential and both VP candidates. Maybe for Obama and Palin: In light of your admitted behavior, what changes, if any, would you make to the federal drug laws, including drug sentencing laws? For all the candidates: Would your executive branch enforce federal laws that conflict with state laws permitting the use of medical marijuana?


Yes, please! (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:40:08 PM EST

It wouldn't even have to be a debate question--I'd settle for reading their answers.

Oculus--nope, the past behavior is not an issue to me, but rather the present stance and the amount of hypocrisy therein.


: I'm one of probably two (5.00 / 0) (#30)
by oculus on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:57:26 PM EST

likely voters who thinks Obama's past use of coke is not a positive or neutral factor.

I wondered how Alaskans would react (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by DemForever on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:16:31 PM EST

Here are some interesting responses:

"State Senate President Lyda Green said she thought it was a joke when someone called her at 6 a.m. to give her the news.

"She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?" said Green, a Republican from Palin's hometown of Wasilla. "Look at what she's done to this state. What would she do to the nation?" [...]

State House Speaker John Harris, a Republican from Valdez, was astonished at the news. He didn't want to get into the issue of her qualifications.

"She's old enough," Harris said. "She's a U.S. citizen."

: From the same story: (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by EL seattle on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:42:31 PM EST

Green, who has feuded with Palin repeatedly over the past two years, brought up the big oil tax increase Palin pushed through last year.
Democrats helped give Palin her victories on oil taxes and the natural gas pipeline deal, over the opposition of many of Palin's fellow Republicans in the Legislature.

In this context, Green's quote almost reads like a talking point to show how "maverick-y" Palin is, which would help strengthen the hype for McCain as being Mr. Maverick(tm).

: Stating the obvious (none / 0) (#12)
by Pianobuff on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:22:36 PM EST

I think it's pretty well known (and part of her biography) that there are many in her own party that do not like her. Time will tell whether this is an asset or a liability.

: Someone here posted an (none / 0) (#31)
by oculus on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:58:52 PM EST

interview of Palin on the subject of why Green hates her.

Tread lightly. (5.00 / 1) (#17)
by magisterludi on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:35:23 PM EST

Apparently not being critical or sarcastic about Palin the candidate is highly sensitive. Accusations of sexism ensue.

Tried it (none / 0) (#1)
by TomStewart on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 12:55:35 PM EST

didn't like it.

Likes oil though, so that makes up for it.

Why (none / 0) (#2)
by koshembos on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 12:58:38 PM EST

We all know that Palin a right winger; she clearly is not going to get any progressive votes. Why are we working so hard to put her in bad light? Centrist, who may be attracted to her, don't read this blog and I doubt her potential pick up vote read any political votes.

Her nomination showed that Obama's choice was terrible, that he didn't think about his VP seriously. She also stopped talk about the Democratic convention. She is the only executive in the mix.

Instead of shoving more dirt in her direction, we could've selected a better candidate and we had an excellent one.

She's a member of Feminists for Life (none / 0) (#4)
by nycstray on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:04:28 PM EST

which I find interesting. I need to do some research on them. Maybe she can "put McCain in touch" on a few issues . . . ?


They are an anti-abortion organization (5.00 / 0) (#6)
by TheRealFrank on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:09:57 PM EST

She's a Christian fundamentalist. Anti-choice, and even anti birth control of any kind.


: Wrong again (5.00 / 1) (#26)
by americanincanada on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:45:37 PM EST

We democrats should really arm ourselves with the truth before going out in support of a ticket we hope will defeat McCain.
SArah Palin is pro-contraception.

: she's for contraception from what I've read n/t (none / 0) (#8)
by DandyTIger on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:13:13 PM EST

: You have (none / 0) (#36)
by Wile ECoyote on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 04:59:42 PM EST

a link for that?

Feminists for Life (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by TomStewart on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:20:06 PM EST

is a sham operation. It's one of these organizations that preach 'alternatives' to young woman, tell them they have a choice to not abort, and they work on school counselors to make sure they don't advocate any abortion policies..but...

They don't provide any support, or any child care options for the young mothers they have told they should go through with the birth. They have no interest in helping the mother to care for the baby, they just want to make sure no one has the option to end a pregnancy. They have hijacked 'feminist' to fool people to think they're for women, but they're for themselves. They have no care options, but will sell you a nice silver logo pin for 75.00.

I think it was TPM that had a link to a person who had done a bunch of research on the group.


Thanks. (none / 0) (#22)
by nycstray on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:42:45 PM EST

TPM isn't reliable, imo, but I'll check around on that :)

apologies for going so OT!


Last I heard, (none / 0) (#41)
by Mr Natural on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 04:00:18 PM EST

Most of the time contraception performs as advertised. Maybe we should place a little more responsibility on the sexually active. Palin is as pro-contraception and education as they come. That she finds abortion repellent is her choice.

I wonder where this country would be if the religious right didn't have partial birth abortion, rare as it is, as a rallying point.


: But with the repubs (none / 0) (#46)
by TomStewart on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 10:11:13 PM EST

trying redefine contraception as abortion, we have to watch for that as well.
Yes, if everyone used contraception we wouldn't have to have abortion, but with the misinformation campaigns that right like to try, banning education that would teach kids the facts, then girls will end up with unwanted pregnancies. As long as this situation contnues, abortion will have to remain open to all who might need it.

It's always been a Right (none / 0) (#43)
by jondee on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 04:08:03 PM EST

ideal to cram (in a soundbite kinda way), as many lies into as small a space as possible: in this case "feminists" and "for life".


Wasn't pot legal in Alaska when she (none / 0) (#3)
by nycstray on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:01:38 PM EST

tried it? So would it still be seen as criminal behavior?

Yes and yes. (none / 0) (#27)
by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:46:53 PM EST

While at the time legal under state law, it is still was (and is) a Federal violation.


: How can you pass state laws (none / 0) (#28)
by nycstray on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:53:17 PM EST

that break federal? Sorry for the dumb question, but one law I stay on top of in NYS is on breed bans. It has helped slap down attempts to ban certain breeds in NYC (and other places in NYS). The argument is that passing a law to ban breeds breaks state law prohibiting bans.

maybe this is the hope we've been waiting for (none / 0) (#7)
by DandyTIger on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:10:30 PM EST

Maybe she will see the light as it shines down from somewhere up high, and she will say, hey, pot wasn't such a big deal. Let's make it legal. Maybe she has a secret plan and she's only saying she's against pot, but when she gets into the white house, she's going to make it legal. I think this hope for change is enough to base my vote on.

OK, really, really big snark there.

Issues vs Personalities (none / 0) (#9)
by Pianobuff on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:13:41 PM EST

I am suspecting that the last two months of the campaign will be about personalities, not issues, at least if McCain is allowed to drive the narrative. I'm not sure which Obama would prefer.

Didn't Roberts also admit (none / 0) (#14)
by Munibond on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:28:31 PM EST

to using marijuana? Seems like this is not going to be a persuasive argument against Palin's candidacy. As far as the hypocrisy is concerned, does Obama favor legalization of cocaine - or marijuana for that matter?

Per glassbooth (5.00 / 0) (#20)
by TChris on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:40:24 PM EST

Obama's positions are unusually reasonable: wants to decriminalize mj, supports medical mj, questions the value of funding drug eradication programs in Columbia. I would like to know if he will adhere to these positions in a debate, and whether he can force Biden to adopt them.


: That was in 2004 (none / 0) (#37)
by Munibond on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 05:26:20 PM EST

He backed away from decriminalization of marijuana in 2008 - Jerlyn has a March 2008 post about this.

Please! Stop! (none / 0) (#18)
by noalosfanaticos on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:35:38 PM EST

Read Hillary's response to Palin's nomination and learn something! Move on to McCain. Will you?

After what DNC did to Hillary and her supporters, whatever attacks on Palin will look just like what happened to Hillary (fair or not) or remind what DNC and the MSM did to Hillary. Do you really want to go there after spending over 6 million dollars to establish so-called "unity" in the party?

Already some sexist remarks made by Obama supporters are very very dangerous. Immediately assuming that Palin would be just a pretty face is sexist. I have read enough belittling of Alaska by prominent DNC leaders, laughing at public school graduates by Obama supporting journalists and joking about her number of kids by so-called feminist democrats. Enough is enough! Also, no thanks for the ageism insinuating that McCain can not be the president because he is OLD and survived cancer!!!

Stop. Take a break. Get a cup of coffee. She is a VP nominee (who cares? VP on the loosing ticket!) and Obama is winning in the poll. Why so desparate and defensive?

I agree (5.00 / 0) (#24)
by TheRealFrank on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:43:50 PM EST

McCain is wrong on the issues. He picked a VP who is also wrong on the issues.

Now let's get on with it.


This is not an attack on Palin (5.00 / 1) (#25)
by TChris on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:44:22 PM EST

I want to know her policy positions in light of her behavior. I don't care if she tried pot. Good for her. That says nothing about her character. I just want to know if she supports the enforcement of criminal laws against other people that she herself has broken. And more deeply, I want to know how she feels about harsh federal drug sentencing laws and states' rights to protect medical marijuana patients. As I said above, I'd like all the candidates to answer those questions.


So why not a thread on (1.00 / 1) (#35)
by tree on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 03:34:01 PM EST

whether Obama supports the enforcement of criminal cocaine laws against others that he himself has broken?

Do you really want to make this a campaign argument? Its a losing one.


MileHi (none / 0) (#38)
by tree on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 06:25:44 PM EST

I thought that "1"s are only used to indicate post that's name calling or smearing someone. Since Obama has admitted to cocaine use as a youth, I wasn't smearing. Its a fact. I'm trying to point out hypocrisy here. If Palin is a hypocrite for trying marijuana and still being in favor of its criminalization, then so is Obama for trying cocaine and still being in favor of its criminalization. If you've got an argument that shows me the hypocrisy is somehow different, then make it. A "1" doesn't explain your position.


Because... (none / 0) (#39)
by MileHi Hawkeye on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 06:43:56 PM EST

TChis's point seemingly went right over your head or perhaps you just posted without reading in your haste to call Obama a hypocrate too. For example...

"Maybe for Obama and Palin: In light of your admitted behavior, what changes, if any, would you make to the federal drug laws, including drug sentencing laws?"


: Appparently MY point (none / 0) (#40)
by tree on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 07:25:59 PM EST

went over your head or perhaps YOU just rated without reading, in your haste to downrate a comment that mentioned something you don't want to be discussed.
My point was that TChris headed this whole thread with a post strictly and exclusively about Palin, except for his last throwaway thought about Biden. As far as I know, he did not post a similar attack on Obama's hypocrisy. That was the source of my question.
He claims his post was not an attack on Palin but yet he talked about her hypocrisy. I don't buy that excuse and also consider it a bad campaign argument because Obama is vulnerable on a very similar issue.

Jeralyn's summary of Gov. Palin's policy positions should please the most extreme members of the GOP. She is a model of intolerance; a model Republican.
It's interesting that she admits smoking pot. Is the new Republican strategy to admit the commission of crimes that the Republican Party would like to see vigorously enforced against everyone else?
This is not the kind of post you make when you are simply seeking information on someone's views on drug policies. Its clearly meant as an attack. There's certainly nothing wrong with making an attack argument but my point is that its a stupid attack because Obama is just as vulnerable on this issue because of his past admitted cocaine use.
As for Tchris's other comment that you just posted, that was not the one I was replying to. It is located far away from the comment I did reply to. I'm surprised you didn't understand that. Use <parent> if you are unsure.
Thank you for responding. I do appreciate that. Perhaps it would have been better to do that originally than implying that I name called by rating me a 1.

: Wouldn't it be grand ... (none / 0) (#45)
by Mr Natural on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 04:14:49 PM EST

if we could actually talk some sense into the people we elect?
Do we still have more people in prison, per capita, than any other nation on earth, or did China edge ahead for the Olympics?
Is that what we get for being the richest nation on earth? More money for prisons?

Maybe I misread Palin's position. (none / 0) (#42)
by Mr Natural on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 04:05:53 PM EST

What I thought I read was that she didn't want her children smoking pot. Her children are minors. She said nothing about use later in life, although, obviously, she would not prefer that they be alcoholics instead.


Consider this (none / 0) (#29)
by Prabhata on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:56:57 PM EST

Smart Tactical Pick?
This guest post is offered by pollster David Johnson, the president of Strategic Vision.
Sarah Palin may be one of the smartest tactical moves made by the McCain Campaign and the Democrats should be very careful in their line of attack against her. Depending on how she is defined at the Republican Convention she could be a game changer.
Barack Obama is underperforming among female voters in the key states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Wisconsin in our polling. In these states he is only leading John McCain by 2% to 3% among females where traditionally there has been a double digit lead for Democrats. If Palin can help keep these voters in play and then energize base Republican voters, these states have the potential to flip.

: It was a strategic pick... (none / 0) (#32)
by Pianobuff on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 02:12:14 PM EST

...not tactical, and contemplated for some time.

: Underperforming ... (none / 0) (#44)
by Mr Natural on Sun Aug 31, 2008 at 04:10:31 PM EST

Barack Obama is underperforming among female voters in the key states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Wisconsin
is the new "performing."
And our party is once again divided.

Blow up doll? (none / 0) (#23)
by Prosecutorial Indiscretion on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 01:42:46 PM EST

This chick might as well be a damn blow up doll.

An anatomically correct one, I assume? Your comment made me throw up a little in my mouth.

Obama tried marijuana if I am not mistaken (none / 0) (#33)
by Saul on Sat Aug 30, 2008 at 02:17:20 PM EST

So that would be a wash.