Thank you for the answer, I appreciate your insight. 

I think this is reasonable compromise. The fact that there remains some penalty would hopefully make it harder to push to legalize harder drugs. That said there really is a difference between hard drugs and weed. 

Tommy

I this bill claims to be the decriminalization of marijuana.  

I pulled this from the bill :"(5)   Possession of 15 grams or less of marijuana is not a violation of this title, but shall be subject to the penalties set forth in section 5 of P.L.    , c.   (C.       ) (pending before the Legislature as this bill)."

Do you know what these other penalties will be and is it really legal if there are penalties under a separate section of law?

I think these facts may actually make some the polling on the Presidential race questionable. If people like Obama they may not want to tell a pollster that they will not be voting for him. The likability issue is artificially pushing up his other poll numbers but will not affect how people vote in November.

I heard Dick Morris say he did a 6000 person poll of likely voters and that he found Romney 52- Obama 42 with a very low margin of error. 

Shouldn't he be thanking Al Gore in all this

Could you please tell me who in America is advocating on behalf of child slavery?

Any disagreement with the political activity and methods of a gay person makes you anti-gay. By this logic the President is right anyone who disagrees with him or his methods is racist.

If the Republican's win the majority in the Senate in November I fully expect common cause to continue with it's law suit and allow Republicans  to govern without the 60 vote requirement. 

I think it is quite possible that he was being rejected for being a strong, out spoken advocate of an issue.  That the Representatives were not looking to approve anyone for a judgeship with that type of record. They were looking to approve judges who practice law but could not be seen as have a bias on any hot button issue. 

The fact that the issue was homosexuality was simply  unfortunate timing based on the national discussion. They would reject strong climate change, social justice, or any other issue. We want impartial judges on the bench.  Any time you have spent decades advocating on what is honestly a controversial issue you have forfeited impartiality. 

If he was openly gay but had not made it an issue he may well have been approved.  

If Romney wins the national vote but loses the Electoral College we will not hear anything about the "illegitimacy" of Obama's administration in the press

Morality in a budget process is tough. 

Is it moral to take money from my pay check for Social Security/Medicare benefits that I won't receive as the programs will be bankrupt before then. Not reforming entitlements is not "morally" sound as it negatively impacts future seniors especially future lower class seniors. 

It was my impression that Obama did very well with the "wall street" money last time. Romney seems to be doing better this time. I wonder if this is related to the stories showing Obama is behind his fund raising goals.

I also thought there were going to be more tuition hikes at the University of California yet they can still donate to a Presidential Candidate? 

Not sure that this is really related at all. Deb Fischer did not have much money to get this message across. The fact is Nebraska Atty General Brunning and Nebraska Treasure Stenburg were all over TV going negative on each other. They beat each other up so much Fischer was able to win.  

I think that Romney needs to go on the offensive on the economy and jobs. People maybe realizing that Obama is all talk and wants to distract from his record. ( This is supported by Independents in the above poll think the gay marriage thing was all political.)

Obama should get negative marks on the economy and isn't getting any real long term bounce from his distractions. He remains beatable. 

As a constructive suggestion maybe the Governor could cancel wild spending like the bullet train. This will cost billions to build and will need subsidies to operate once it is built.  

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bullet-risks-20120514,0,1408587,full.story

Raising tax on the wealthy at the State level has generally only resulted in less revenue. The wealthy hide assets or move. You cannot balance a State budget by increasing taxes on the rich. Look at Maryland, there tax on the rich was supposed to increase revenues by $106 million, instead they lost $257 million. 

The rich can leave, the poor can't leave as easily. If you drive out the wealth creators you have no tax revenue to spread around. 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/09/29/taxing_the_rich_107350.html

I do not have WIC either. I live in an older suburb of a city. We have a great school district with waiting lists to get in to our schools.  I was completely surprised to find out that almost 50% of the students in our school are on reduced meal prices. 

The middle class get killed in bad economies. I pay full price for my kids to eat at school and full price for my kids to eat at home. 

Free groceries, free cell phones, free or reduced school lunches. Its enough to make you wonder why you work. With all these benefits and 99 weeks of unemployment, I might live better without a job.

To the above question, I don't know that the government survives bread lines in the United States that are not related to a major World War. At the point that people can't get food and energy with out lines for a significant period of time the whole system crashes.