Sharron Angle has never made a secret of her conservative views — not while serving in the Legislature, running for Congress against Dean Heller in 2006 or running for state Senate against Bill Raggio in 2008.
The question is, are those conservative views in step with Nevada voters, or is Angle too far too the right, even for the Silver State?
Back in 2006, Angle gave an interview to the excretable execrable (and now defunct) Liberty Watch magazine, which covered politics when it wasn’t extolling the virtues of corrupt state senators, providing a forum for racist rants or profiling 9/11 Truthers. And that interview provides a little more insight into Angle’s conservatism.
Liberty Watch‘s website isn’t up on the Internets any longer, but a version of the interview is helpfully posted on the website of the Republican Majority Campaign PAC. Here’s the relevant passage, from a discussion about medical marijuana:
“My greatest problem with marijuana is that it’s illegal, which gives Nevadans a false sense of security in this whole thing,” Angle said. “If the DEA has the manpower and wanted to go after this, there is no place in Nevada state law that can protect people because federal law supersedes state law.”
Her opinion, though, ignores states’ rights and individual freedom. Also, Angle’s faith quickly surfaced, extinguishing her argument that she disapproves of medical marijuana primarily on the elementary premise that it’s illegal.
“I would tell you that I have the same feelings about legalizing marijuana, not medical marijuana, but just legalizing marijuana,” Angle offered. “I feel the same about legalizing alcohol.
“The effect on society is so great that I’m just not a real proponent of legalizing any drug or encouraging any drug abuse,” she continued. “I’m elected by the people to protect, and I think that law should protect.”
Wait, what? Alcohol — which is currently legal — should be treated the same as marijuana — which is currently not legal? Is she serious? A candidate from the state of Nevada, which is practically sponsored by booze companies, is not a proponent of legal alcohol?
Despite the 2006 interview, however, Angle’s spokesman, Jerry Stacy, said today Angle doesn’t want to bring back Prohibition. “Sharron doesn’t want to make alcohol illegal,” he said, noting that Angle has never introduced legislation along those lines, and even voted against taxes on booze.
“Alcohol is a legal substance, and adults can choose to imbibe,” Stacy said.
Meanwhile, Robert Uithoven, campaign manager for Lowden, was only to happy to confirm his candidate is just fine with legal liquor.
“I would say this is another example of Sharron Angle being a convenient conservative,” he said. “Adults should be trusted to drink responsibly, not have the government make that choice for them. … [Angle's remarks] completely contradict the personal responsibility of what our party stands for.”
Lowden has been an executive in the casino business for a long time, running hotels in Las Vegas and Laughlin, so you might expect her to oppose any efforts to crack down on the booze that’s the industry’s lifeblood. But Uithoven says it’s also a facet of Lowden’s overall philosophy.
“Sue Lowden believes that any Nevadan who wants to visit their favorite watering hole after a long day of work for a cold beer should be able to,” he said.
Angle continued in that 2006 interview to detail her stance on legislating morality:
So how far should government go in legislating morality? Angle believes there’s no way around it. Each and every lawmaker, from city councils to the president’s office, brings their moral convictions to the legislative table. In one way or another, from business practices to war, morals are going to be influenced and legislated.
“I don’t think you can get away from that; people just make value judgments,” she said. “We’re not a neutral society. Politics, especially, are not neutral and no one can come to the table value-less or moral-less.
“I have a very well-developed sense of right and wrong,” she continued, “so I would say to you that it’s not a political thing with me, but a character thing.”
And unlike politics, character is a much more difficult thing to change. The question remains, will voters think Angle’s Prohibition-era views — at least those expressed in 2006 — belong in the U.S. Senate?
Loading ...
This is what I was worried about!
Sharron Angle has been able to fly under the radar without any scrutiny, now that people are actually examining her record she doesn’t hold up!
We don’t need a career politician who advocates for prohibition and scientologist prison programs, votes to raise her tax-payer funded salary… then lies about all of it in pursuit of her new job!
On June 8th, tell Sharron Angle to find a real job and get off the taxpayer’s dime!
Angle absolutley frightens me with her extreme views (including Scientology) and I can see why Time Magazine feels that Reid can easily beat her.
This lady seems unstable. I want someone who can actually beat Harry Reid. And Sharron Angle is NOT that person.
I agree with CocktailWaitress. Nevada will be a national embarressment if this crazy woman wins. If Angle wins, it will be six more years of Harry Reid. Yikes!
The problem with Angle is that she will say just about anything for campaign contributions. This alcohol comment was just raw meat to bring the bucks in for her latest poor attempt to get something done.
The woman is all talk and no results.
As a retired Sailor, I don’t drink like I used to. But I still drink a little bit. Here and there. But, Steve, nowadays its purely for medicinal purposes, you have to understand. (NOTE: I typed that with my fingers and toes crossed….)
You’re telling a retired Sailor to vote for someone who demonizes alcohol and considers those who drink as godless lefties?!!?!?!!?
Not only will I not vote for her, I say slap her in jail for being un-American and force feed her brandy intravenously everyday….
No. Wait. I take that back. I just won’t vote for her. And I’ll be damned if I ever buy her a drink…..
So what’s next no Togas?
Sharrontology you can’t be serious. Harry and his friends are bashing tourism and here you are pulling a Dean Wormer and saying no booze? C’mon, tell that to all the people who make tips and salaries off the hospitality industry. Sharrontology are you sure weren’t having a few “Sex on the Beach” prior to the interview?
Lady, you say No Beer, I say to you No Vote from Bluto.
Lowden refuses to answer questions on civil rights, hangs up on reporter http://bit.ly/bS1gnX
Justin…how low can you go?
Seriously, Harry Reid thinks Sue Lowden does not support Civil Rights. Your boss is the one who has talked about “negro dialect” and did not want a black man appointed to the US Senate seat from Illinois.
The Reid campaign really is doing everything they can to make sure Lowden doesn’t make it out of this primary! With all this prohibition non-sense, I can see why Harry would prefer Sharron as his opponent.
A Reid supporter attacking Lowden on an Angle story means something! Harry is afraid of Sue Lowden! Why else attack her on a message board about Sharrontology?!! Vote for someone that Reid is afriad of! Vote for Sue Lowden!! The only person that can stand up to Reid.
I have a better idea! How about we send the Majority Leader back to Washington where he can continue to deliver for Nevada and sit both these fringe group ladies down for 6 years.
After having the opportunity to meet and talk with Sharron 1 on 1 and researching her legislative record online last week, I can see that bringing back prohibition is not something Sharron would consider. The question was on legalizing marijuana using alcohol as an example of another type of substance that can be addictive.
Did you hear what Clinton said about that?
Harry Reid is awful! Does it matter if it’s Angle or Lowden? ANYONE BUT HARRY REID!
Lol! I haven’t decided on a candidate yet, so I am reading EVERYTHING on ALL of them, that I can find. But I just have to chuckle, and say, that the majority of the posts here are SO CONTRIVED. I know propaganda when I see. There are some fake posts here from people in the competitors camps, you can bet on. They are word for word what the smear camps want you to think about Sharon. The problem is…these manipulations just confuses the average ‘thinking’ person all the more. Why on Earth would “Sharon Angle ABSOLUTELY FRIGHTEN me”. Get a brain people. And the Scientology Fear mongering stuff is just getting stupid too.
I don’t think she would be cutting off chickens heads on the senate floor or anything. Now that, would bother me. That said. I am not even sort of leaning toward Angle. But these concerns are way out proportion here. That said…Harry Reid couldn’t beat my cat in an election at this point.
You had it right the first time, Steve. “Excretable” is the perfect word for Liberty Watch, a toxic substance seemingly expelled from George Harris’ hate-filled innards, choking one’s nostrils with the sickening stench of bigotry and ignorance.
It’s heartening to see the ridiculous claims about Sharron that they are struggling to find. Means there is nothing concrete out there against her.
Sandra:
I’ve made no ridiculous claims. I’ve merely reported what Angle told an interviewer in 2006. Whether this is something people take into consideration when they vote, well, that’s up to them.
I moderated the Veterans in Politics endorsement comittee . We heard from most candidates. Unfortunately, Sue Lowden had a scheduling conflict and begged off. Harry Reid also was a no show. Sharon Angle was there and after due diligence, Veterans in Politics endorsed Sharon to be our next senator. Her views did not seem extreme. Another important fact is
Sharon came to the debate well prepared. Nuff said.
From this badly edited (on purpose?) site it’s hard to tell, but it sounds like some are saying Sharron Angle believes in/supports Scientology. Absolutely no way! (I’ve known her for 25+ years.)
Sharron is for states controlling issues that affect them. In that context it’s easy to see that her alcohol comments meant that if the federal govt. makes any laws regarding alcohol or marijuana, Nevada can do little about it because federal law supersedes state laws — despite Steve’s cry of states rights. (The states have few rights left; the feds have taken most away by tying federal funding [schools, highways, etc.]to the states allowing federal control over that specific issue.)
There is no way that Sharron would be a Reid clone in D.C. From what I’ve read, the clone would be Sue Lowden, who has flip-flopped on some issues and actually supported Reid in the past. Sharron Angle has been open and consistent in her views her entire political career — and even longer in her personal life.
First, I never said Angle would be a Reid clone in Washington — far from it. In fact, I’ve said Angle is the most authentic conservative in the race. I’ve also never made the charge that Angle believes in Scientology. I don’t much care which religion a politician practices, provided he or she doesn’t try to impose it on me. Perhaps you couldn’t tell those things from this badly edited site.
In any case, you may recall a thing called Prohibition, whereby the federal government superseded state’s rights and made alcohol illegal everywhere in the U.S. It was repealed some years back, but other drugs–including marijuana–remain under federal prohibition to this day.
And Angle said she DOESN’T want the strong central federal government to legalize marijuana, and that she feels the SAME WAY about alcohol. I.e. somebody who dislikes the federal government and wants it to be smaller in this one instance seems to favor federal state fiat over the nation. That should strike you as odd.
The Tea Party Express has spoken! While not tea bagging each other in Minnesota Airport Bathrooms…we vote for who WE…REAL Americans! WHITE America wants! YEAh!
“Liberty Watch” — lying pukes.
The only “liberty watch” that THEY are conducting is watching out for people and places with too much liberty.
When a teaparty type talks about “liberty”, just reverse the meaning, and you’ll get the truth.
Sharon Angle is honest and Harry Reid is not. I care about a person’s character and being honest about their views. I would vote for Sharon in a minute because although I don’t agree with her on everything, at least I can get a straight answer from her.
Lindsey:
If Sharron Angle is so honest and given to straight answers, why is it that her campaign never called me back to give a straight answer to the issue raised in this blog? Why does it appear that she has flip-flopped on major issues in this race? Why does she speak differently, depending on her audience? It seems those things are anything but “honest.” But good luck to you trying to get a straight answer from her.
There are some fake posts here from people in the competitors camps, you can bet on. They are word for word what the smear camps want you to think about Sharon. The problem is…these manipulations just confuses the average ‘thinking’ person all the more.