>I think criminalization of marijuana is terrible policy. But is it unconstitutional? The Constitution provided a framework within which the citizens of the US

>I think criminalization of marijuana is terrible policy. But is it unconstitutional? The Constitution provided a framework within which the citizens of the US were able to elect representatives who passed laws that outlawed marijuana. You're not pointlessly mocking me, you're mocking me because mocking me IS THE POINT for you. Otherwise you wouldn't be bringing up arguments that I rebutted in the very first comment. >I re-re-read 'nirvana's point, and I think my interpretation is valid and that I haven't misrepresented him. Then you need some remedial schooling. Show me where these powers are enumerated? You can't so you pretend like the enumerated powers are irrelevant. >That's not how the Constitution works. This is a wish, at best an assertion, and certainly not an argument. But it is a statement of your fascist ideology. You want the government to have absolute power to regulate people's lives to the nth degree-- from their access to the internet to what health care they are allowed to have. The constitution explicitly doesn't allow this, so you pretend like it does. You know this, so you attack me personally, when I point it out. That's all this is. The facts of reality disagree with your ideology, so you engage in ad hominem. And you seem to always show up whenever I say anything mildly political to attack me for the same reasons. You can't tolerate someone who points out the truth. Because, if I were wrong, you would have made an argument. You didn't. You attacked me, not the point.