ON THE AGENDA
Stop wasting federal tax dollars: Last time I checked, both Attorney General Tom Horne and Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery were employees of the state of Arizona, not the federal government. ("Blunt Justice," Ray Stern, August 16; "Horne and Montgomery Move to Nix Medical Marijuana," Matthew Hendley, Valley Fever blog, August 23).
If Horne and Montgomery want to enforce federal marijuana laws, they should resign their jobs as elected Arizona officials and get hired by the feds as prosecutors. Until then, they should stop wasting our tax dollars in their personal war against Arizona's medical-marijuana users.
New Times feedback
Yes, Arizona's Proposition 203 conflicts with federal law. Stop fighting a law passed by state voters.
Mike Ross, Tempe
"Will of the people?" Yeah, right: What a ridiculous state we live in! Our illustrious Republican leaders do everything in their power to thwart federal law when it comes to illegal aliens, but when it comes to medical marijuana, they insist that federal law always trumps state law.
And these are the same Republicans who always harp about how the "will of the people" is what they're about. That they do what the do because of the "will of the people."
Well, the people — who include many Republicans in this state, including myself — want medical marijuana! Our Bible-thumping, Tea Party-loving attorney general and county attorney need to lay the hell off!
Richard Johnson, Tempe
It shouldn't surprise anyone: Does it surprise anybody that Tom Horne and Bill Montgomery are hypocrites? They fight the feds on illegal immigration and endorse them on medical marijuana. What the fuck!?
Tom Adkins, Phoenix
Not working for us: The voters voted [medical marijuana] in. If the politicians are against it, they sure aren't working for the people, only on their personal agendas.
Jim Cozzolino, Peoria
It's what politicians do: [Horne and Montgomery] are digging their own graves and don't even realize it by saying federal law trumps state law, [because this means that federal law trumps] their argument with Arizona Senate Bill 1070.
I find it amusing when politicians say one thing, and then the next [thing they say] contradicts the position they previously took.
David Saint, Phoenix
In a long line of yo-yos: Suddenly, our county attorney and state attorney general are worried about state law paralleling federal law? This must not be related to immigration.
Unless they are going to say illegal immigrants provide medical marijuana and federal agencies don't enforce drug laws. Yeah, that's it. That's the ticket.
What a couple of yo-yos the people have elected.
Tommy Collins, Phoenix
Good boy, Scott: As much as I actually support medical marijuana, it still is illegal under federal law, so I agree with [Horne and Montgomery].
Scott Kent, city unavailable
Where's pot in the Constitution?: There's not a damn thing said about marijuana or the ability of the feds to regulate it in the U.S. Constitution, but there is on immigration policy.
These backwards hypocrites need to be disbarred and tethered to ankle bracelets — or run out of town on a rail!
James Bailey, city unavailable
Bill, Tom, please remove heads from asses: I love it. Conservatives tout state's rights when standing up for a racist law like SB 1070 but then tout federal preemption to get rid of a (voter-approved) law that helps sick people.
Put simply, they use the arguments of state's rights and federal preemption at the wrong times and to further their own agendas.
No one would blame them if they used the federal and state argument at the right time.
If you like this story, consider signing up for our email newsletters.
SHOW ME HOW
Sometimes, federal laws are wrong (pot prohibition) and sometimes state laws are wrong (SB 1070, Jim Crow laws).
It shouldn't be hard to figure that out, but obviously it is. Apparently, these conservative wingnuts think what's wrong is right and what's right is wrong.
Tom, please pull your head out of your ass! That goes for you too, Bill!