http://grittv.org/2010/03/20/a-progressive-case-for-states-rights/ Cultivating a Better Conversation Sat, 14 May 2011 01:31:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://grittv.org/2010/03/20/a-progressive-case-for-states-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-2964 Richard Sun, 21 Mar 2010 00:54:44 +0000 http://www.grittv.org/?p=5449#comment-2964 I always appreciate your questions, Laura, as you seem able to challenge the premises even of those with whom you appear to agree; try to find Katie Couric or Chris Matthews doing that. I remember an interview where your guest was bemoaning the immense maleavolent influence wielded by corporations and the powerlessness of government (the people) to oppose it. You pointed out the success of anti tobacco legislation, auto safety (seatbelts, airbags) and CAFE standards. I wonder how these two gentlemen and "progressives" in general would view the states' rights arguments employed by California just a couple of years ago to claim that federal law enforcement could not legitimately prosecute its citizens who were using medical marajuana in compliances with a state law. And guess who agreed with CA's argument? Justice Clarence Thomas. The states' rights position is not just a cover for bigoted attitudes, it is fundamental to our nation's federal structure. That federalism is one the greatest guards of our liberties. Keep up the good work. I always appreciate your questions, Laura, as you seem able to challenge the premises even of those with whom you appear to agree; try to find Katie Couric or Chris Matthews doing that. I remember an interview where your guest was bemoaning the immense maleavolent influence wielded by corporations and the powerlessness of government (the people) to oppose it. You pointed out the success of anti tobacco legislation, auto safety (seatbelts, airbags) and CAFE standards. I wonder how these two gentlemen and “progressives” in general would view the states’ rights arguments employed by California just a couple of years ago to claim that federal law enforcement could not legitimately prosecute its citizens who were using medical marajuana in compliances with a state law. And guess who agreed with CA’s argument? Justice Clarence Thomas. The states’ rights position is not just a cover for bigoted attitudes, it is fundamental to our nation’s federal structure. That federalism is one the greatest guards of our liberties. Keep up the good work.

]]>