cannabisnews.com: Don't Swallow Drug Legalizers' Lies





Don't Swallow Drug Legalizers' Lies
Posted by CN Staff on July 17, 2005 at 10:22:57 PT
By Joyce Nalepka
Source: Providence Journal
Silver Springs, Md. -- I remember when illegal-drug horror stories, such as those that follow, were unheard of, or reported only in scandal-sheet papers at the checkout counter. Today, they're on the front page of our hometown newspapers.I think much of the blame belongs to uninformed or paid-off legislators, who have allowed public opinion to be twisted into forgetting what really happens when we let our guard down and don't teach disdain for illicit-drug use.
Rhode Island legislators have joined legislators in 10 other states in voting to let self-absorbed admitted drug-using adults buy public policy and promote "medicalization" of pot, instead of letting the U.S. Food and Drug Administration first prove it safe and effective. Doesn't anyone remember thalidomide?The most ridiculous point here is that the Supreme Court has ruled twice, once unanimously, that there is no medical-necessity defense for marijuana, and that federal law supersedes state law -- thus nullifying all 10 states' legislation that would support smoking marijuana cgarettes as medicine.Although the Rhode Island lawmakers passed the pro-pot legislation, Governor Carcieri fortunately has a backbone and vetoed it. However, backers of drug legalization, who are pushing this legislation, persuaded the Rhode Island Senate to override the governor's veto. (The House has delayed its vote on the override.)The campaign to get marijuana reclassified as "medicine" began in 1979. At the time, it was led by a group of admitted pot-smoking zealots with little money. They were mostly supported by the sale of drug paraphernalia, until parents united and closed the shops nationwide.Snipped:Complete Article: http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/joyce.htmSource: Providence Journal, The (RI)Author: Joyce NalepkaPublished: Sunday, July 17, 2005Copyright: 2005 The Providence Journal CompanyContact: letters projo.comWebsite: http://www.projo.com/Related Articles & Web Site:MMJ Information & Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/medical.htmMedical Marijuana On The Wayhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20954.shtmlCarcieri Way Off on Pot Factshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20931.shtmlMarijuana Veto Voted Down in Senate http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20926.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #34 posted by global_warming on July 27, 2005 at 17:41:27 PT
Matters of Heat
"Silver Springs, Md. -- I remember when illegal-drug horror stories, such as those that follow, were unheard of, or reported only in scandal-sheet papers at the checkout counter. Today, they're on the front page of our hometown newspapers."Be not confused by the "newspapers"The profits of a news source,May be quantified by the trees,And paper that is produced,Along with that famous "scoop"Children trying,To earn a desperate living.gw
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #33 posted by jose melendez on July 25, 2005 at 03:04:39 PT
show, thyself
" . . . prohibitionists are highly selective about the data they present and careless once they've presented it, hoping to substitute raw emotional appeal for a plausible explanatory framework. "http://www.reason.com/links/links072205.shtml
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #32 posted by global_warming on July 24, 2005 at 12:29:34 PT
People Get Ready-Mayfield
"It is a TRAGIC MISTAKE to look upon us as if we were criminals that wish to bring down society, or cause any harm."Every person in this USA, participates, in the shaping of our culture. From the Highest to the Lowest, we are all involved, as you said, we are all in this together.It is difficult to comprehend, the passion and the world view, of a Black Slave, working in the Hot Sun, a mere 160 years ago, better yet, some old Jew's passion, while he was stripped and worked to his death.It is equally difficult to fathom, the depth of despair and fear, that currently fills the Minds, of people, who use Cannabis.A Heretic Is:"someone who sees a truth that contradicts the conventional wisdom of the institution"--http://www.groupprocessconsulting.com/heretics/The greater sadness is I, must live with myself, there might come sometime, when my actions will be questioned, not only in the courts of man, but the higher court, at the throne, of the King Of The World.Mat 24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Joh 7:4 For there is no man that doeth any thing in secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly. If thou do these things, show thyself to the world.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #31 posted by global_warming on July 24, 2005 at 12:24:58 PT
So True
"We are all in this together."
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #30 posted by rchandar on July 23, 2005 at 17:01:50 PT:
global_warming
the claim that pot fuels violence is so ridiculous. First off, what do you expect when it's illegal? That well-armed criminals are going to carry on a lifestyle of peace and understanding? Second of all, it just isn't true; there are too many of us out there that believe fervently in the values of peace. The violence myth, even within hip-hop, I will say from some experience is a MASK. Whether you're "tough" or not, criminalizing laws--and in some cases, jail, requires that you show toughness, that we must follow the "better him than me" philosophy. At any rate, anyone--from the cop that busts you, to the prosecutor that tries to dismantle every meaningful theme of your life and how you've lived, to the judge who moralizes with you about how you are a sad person who deserves injury and death--will try to show off their "toughness" to you.It is a TRAGIC MISTAKE to look upon us as if we were criminals that wish to bring down society, or cause any harm. Demonizing people and scapegoating select groups is often the work of an unpopular government incapable of realizing the moral and practical ideas that got them elected. It's a cop-out and a sham, that's all. Keeping pot a criminal offense, year after year, conversation after conversation, has informed me of this kind of convenient scapegoating that allows other people to "look good" while they have identified "criminals." And lastly, I feel strongly that this type of thinking--the preferential targeting of marijuana, something which 40% of Americans have used in their lives--today, poses one of the greatest threats to American democracy that we can conceptualize and, YES--respond to.There is no one who rests immune to the disease of government-sanctioned violence. We are all in this together. If we don't fight the politicians who have ignored us, there will, for posterity's sake, be a high price to pay.--rchandar
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #29 posted by jose melendez on July 22, 2005 at 20:15:14 PT
lying prohibitionist outed in print
from: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v05/n1155/a01.html"Contrary to Nalepka's claim, the Supreme Court did not "nullify" state medical-marijuana laws. All 10 remain in full force. But the court, after reviewing the evidence, did declare, "[M]arijuana does have valid therapeutic purposes." That's why supporters of the Rhode Island medical-marijuana bill include the Rhode Island Medical Society, the Rhode Island State Nurses Association, the United Nurses and Allied Professionals, and many individual doctors and nurses."
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #28 posted by global_warming on July 21, 2005 at 16:18:39 PT
re:comment 22
It should be obvious to even the most retarded that according to the numbers, polls, and government census, millions of people have used Cannabis, yet we do not have millions of Heroin Addicts.There have been many who have experimented with youthful cultures, and even some of those youthful offenders, have become Supreme Court Justices, even Presidents, of this New Declaration, with a Constitution, that kicks ass, and buries the ashes of History, and lays bare (exposes) the flesh of each new generation.Peace, may, be some liberal invention, and conservatism may be getting its life from from confused liberals,.. with no cloths on, is a fat belly, ever going to convince me, to lift up my hand?Wars, may be bought and sold, and the merchants of war, always prosper. Is this life, and breath, more important, than Understanding? While some await the Savior, along with the multitude, that have no belief, time, and each measured breath, of all of our existence, secretly, counts, and records, our place in the Mystery, which is the Flesh, of the raiment of GOD.PEACE, is an Herbal and Healing World View,and a mindset, That comes with a Healing Hand,gw
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #27 posted by FoM on July 21, 2005 at 07:20:37 PT
Nicholas
I look at arguing with those who want to jail people who don't follow a certain way of thinking or acting like screaming at a wall. It won't change anything and it's a waste of valuable energy. I also believe in not acting like those who oppress us. I am snotty that way! LOL!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #26 posted by jose melendez on July 21, 2005 at 06:05:04 PT
Giggle: Prohibitionists make history.
In the long run, nothing could backfire more than intentionally fraudulent and demonstrably false and counterproductive prohibitionist propaganda. As has been shown, no one trafficked booze in schools until Alcohol Prohibition, and marijuana smoking was popularized by Harry Anslinger, to the point where well over half of all high school seniors now toke.Google shows this under a search for "joyce nalepka":http://www.albany.edu/history/histmedia/Carrie2.jpgIt's from this page:http://www.albany.edu/history/histmedia/
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #25 posted by Nick Thimmesch on July 21, 2005 at 05:12:54 PT
Sorry FoM..
....Joyce's always nastyto reformers at hearings and reminds me of something out of a bad John Waters movie.
http://www.chico.mweb.co.za/mg/art/film/column/000510-divine.jpg
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #24 posted by ekim on July 18, 2005 at 21:28:44 PT
More than 300 Connecticut doctors 
 Case Made Again for Prescription Pot
Posted by CN Staff on February 16, 2005 at 08:59:14 PT
By Gregory B. Hladky
Source: Bristol Press Hartford -- The doctor-widow of a cancer victim, the head of Hartford
Hospital's cancer center and a patient suffering from paralysis and spasms
all called on Connecticut lawmakers Tuesday to legalize medical marijuana.
"At a time when we were most vulnerable, I had to choose between my
livelihood and the welfare of my husband," Dr. Nancy Sheehan of the
University of Connecticut said about her efforts to buy marijuana for her
cancer-victim husband.Sheehan said that, until he died in 2002, marijuana helped her husband Jim
deal much more easily with the pain, loss of appetite and energy brought on
by his colon cancer. "His quality of life was dramatically improved," she
recalled.Dr. Andrew Salner, director of Hartford Hospital's Helen and Harry Gray
Cancer Center also spoke in support of allowing doctors to prescribe medical
marijuana. He said that "a select group of patients clearly are helped by
marijuana during their cancer experience."And Mark Braunstein, who was paralyzed below the waist by a severe accident
in 1990, described how marijuana has helped ease the spasms and pain that
have accompanied his injury.Although a medical marijuana bill won state House approval last year, its
opponents managed to kill it through the General Assembly committee process
before it ever reached the Senate for a final vote.A bipartisan group of lawmakers supporting the measure say they believe this
will be the year that Connecticut joins the 11 other states that have
approved medical marijuana laws to help victims of cancer, glaucoma and
other diseases.The new bill would allow a doctor to prescribe marijuana and allow a patient
to grow up to five marijuana plants for medical use without fear of arrest
or prosecution.But critics such as state Sen. George L. 'Doc' Gunther, R-Stratford, said he
doesn't think the bill will survive a Senate vote. "I doubt it," said
Gunther, the longest-serving member of the General Assembly."I don't think there is any justification for it," Gunther said.
"Oncologists, if they're honest, will tell you that we don't need it, that
we have much better, more effective medications available."Gunther also said he and other critics fear that allowing patients to grow
marijuana for personal medical use will eventually result in abuses. "It's
going to find its way into the illegal market," Gunther warned.The bill's co-sponsors, state Reps. Penny Bacchiochi, R-Somers, and Melissa
Olson, D-Norwich, rejected Gunther's arguments."More than 300 Connecticut doctors have signed on in writing that they
support this bill," said Bacchiochi."Illegal use of marijuana is going to go on whether we pass this bill or
not," Olson said.State Sen. Toni N. Harp, D-New Haven, is another supporter of the bill who
believes that it may stand a better chance of passage in the General
Assembly this year."I think the fact that it passed the House last year will give it more
momentum," Harp said. "There's a lot more energy around the issue this year
than in the past."Harp said that the Senate's reluctance to take up the medical marijuana bill
last year appeared to be related to the fact that 2004 was a legislative
election year. She said legislative leaders may have worried that the issue
could cause problems for some Democrats involve in close reelection races.Source: Bristol Press (CT)
Author: Gregory B. Hladky, Journal Register News Service
Published: February 16, 2005
Copyright: 2005 Bristol Press
Contact: editor bristolpress.com
Website: http://www.bristolpress.com
http://ww.compassionatemi.org
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #23 posted by jose melendez on July 18, 2005 at 20:21:38 PT
bullet in back violence blamed . . . on cannabis
Police chief concerned about contradictory toxicology findingshttp://www.kvue.com/news/local/stories/071805kvuerochaknee-cb.bc7916a.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #22 posted by global_warming on July 18, 2005 at 15:43:25 PT
re: Violence and Cannabis
"The most ridiculous point here is that the Supreme Court has ruled twice, once unanimously, that there is no medical-necessity defense for marijuana, and that federal law supersedes state law -- thus nullifying all 10 states' legislation that would support smoking marijuana cgarettes as medicine."Let us not forget, that this Supreme Court, has also recently ruled for Eminent Domain, and has revealed itself not a court of Law, but a collection of political and "profit" driven individuals, who can be either be bought or controlled by the powers of greed.Yes, Joyce, you have clearly addressed the problem of children being hooked on drugs, but, you ignore the fact, that many good people who use Cannabis, are neither robbing or at the scene of some horrible and violent episode in our communities.It is true that the robbers and those who commit violent acts, may also smoke Cannabis, somehow you have been convinced, that smoking Cannabis is the cause of this violence.Good people, will never be found, participating in violent crimes, they may smoke Cannabis, but they will not be lifting their hand against another person.gw
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by FoM on July 18, 2005 at 12:09:11 PT
Jose
I don't want to blame anyone for anything. I'm just picking on Nicholas. He knows I know in the long run everything is ok. I am careful not to say bad things about Joyce. I guess it's because I'm a woman and men are different. Men blow off steam and settle down quickly but when a woman goes off watch out! LOL!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by Richard Zuckerman on July 18, 2005 at 12:06:12 PT:
"LIES" BY THE LEGALIZERS
The above author's conception of "lies" by us Marijuana legalizers are simply a common ploy by the pro-government anti-drug establishment to mix Cannabis in with the truly dangerous drugs! While having lived in homeless shelters for many years, presently litigating an appeal from dismissal of my State Constitutional Tort lawsuit against New Jersey policemen whom fabricated a cover charge of "disorderly conduct", I have seen the effects of drugs on society. Cannabis has absolutely no ill effects. But Crack, the massive distribution in this country by Daddy Bush, See: www.copvcia.com, and Methamphetamine, of which Adolph Hitler was an addict [and had a flatus problem, which would place Uncle Adolph as a candidate for a Howard Stern Show Farting Contest candidate!!!] have serious addiction properties which causes the addict to steal from other people and become non-productive, while the medical establishment continues to refuse to acknowlege the high rate of addiction treatment from Ibogaine, www.cures-not-wars.org, for their government funded, pharmaceutical cartel supporting, revolving door addiction "treatment" facilities. The author of the above article is using a typical propaganda tool of the Karl Rove ilk to categorize all illicit drugs into the same category. The author of the above article should isolate each particular illicit drug and examine them separately!! While earning $10 as a showroom dummy in a lineup at the New York City Robbery Squad, located around 23rd Street, in Manhattan, New York City, about a week ago, one particular Detective, who is BOTH a Nurse and a New York City Police Department Robbery Squad Detective, expressed his concern about the Methamphatamine problem in the Mid-Western United States and what will happen when it becomes more popular in the teenagers of New York City. He did not raise a similar concern about Marijuana use, though. Joyce Nalepka's gross generalizations of Cannabis are unfounded and show her ignorance of medicine. Of course, she did not mention that the C.I.A. launders over $600 billion per year in drug money thru Wall Street. See: www.copvcia.com. CitiBank being the most notorious C.I.A. drug laundering bank. See: www.copvcia.com. CitiGroup, which is actually CitiBank, recently agreed to pay $2 Billion for their part in the ENRON scandal! The U.S. Pharmacopia had Cannabis listed as a medicine. We need to get away from the killer hospitals and pharmaceuticals. The recently passed CAFTA "free trade" agreement has a provision for their Codex Alimentarius movement to restrict our access to natural vitamins, minerals, and herbs, for the pharmaceutical cartel. We should return to the herbal treatments! You people voting Replicans and Democrats are causing the wars. 
Vote for Ralph Nader, Libertarian Party, and Green Party candidates.I wonder if Rhode Island has considered legalizing Hemp, which would not provide any intoxicating effect. Last Friday, I faxed a non-threatening letter to Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr., and President Bush, asking for suppport of H.R. 3037, "Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2005," with my comment that I would like to see Hemp to be used in lieu of fossil fuel, for the reasons expressed in www.HempCar.org. That article in today's newspaper about the study by Cornell University, about Ethanol's inadequate alternative to fossil fuel should not be placed on part with the viability of Hemp as an alternative source of fuel. During the most recent Earth Day celebration, at Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, there were automobiles displayed which are fueled from alternative sources of fuel. One of them stated that an Ethanol factory is being built in the southern part of New Jersey. New Jersey State Senator Bob Smith, who is the Chairman of the Environment Committee, has not responded to me at all after I asked him to submit legislation for legal Hemp and I cited www.HempCar.org. Perhaps he wants that Ethanol factory built so they can make money.To paraphrase a comment made in 1993 by President George W. Bush: "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and these are the ones you need to concentrate on." By the way, people, as if you were not aware, before George W. Bush became U.S. President, while employed with an Oil company, he engaged in illegal Insider Trading!Richard Paul Zuckerman, Box 159, Metuchen, N.J., 08840-0159, richardzuckerman2002 yahoo.com. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by jose melendez on July 18, 2005 at 11:54:24 PT
blame me, FoM
It's much easier if you blame me, FoM . . . that's what I do.Try it: "It's Jose's fault, for encouraging such vitriolic hate speech by posting comment #5."See what I mean? I feel better already!Of course, in the gospel according to John (Walters), feeling better is not getting better . . . apologies for the intentionally ambiguous postings, BTW.Just practicing politics.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by FoM on July 18, 2005 at 09:09:46 PT
Nicholas
Shame on you. Fight nice!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by jose melendez on July 18, 2005 at 08:34:00 PT
what's good for a goose . . . 
from: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.folklore.urban/msg/4e580dca1aa9bba4?output=gplainThe McDonald's Coffee Stirrer thread seems to have both drifted off topic
and mostly disappeared from my view. Anyhow, below is an email response from
Ms. Nalepka, the woman who apparently started the ball rolling on the
product redesign of the coffee stirrer spoon. I have not received a response
to my email to McDonald's.[quoted with the permission of the author] Ms. Cancona,
 Thanks, I was just curious who, after all these years, was looking for
 the information.
 I will give you my best recollection of what happened. There is also
 note of it in a book titled: Marijuana Alert, by Peggy Mann, I believe. At any rate, we were involved in closing drug paraphernalia shops in
 Maryland and Senators Charles Mathias (R.MD) retired, and Senator Joseph
Biden, (D. DE) held hearings in Baltimore to bring attention to the issue.
 Some drug paraphernalia dealers and/or manufacturers were supoened to
 testify and one-by-one they held up alternative types of pipes made from
toilet
 paper rollers, apples, etc. and one of them--clean shaven and the price
tag
 still hanging from his new business suit, held up a McDonald's coffee
stirring
 spoon and commented, "This is the best coke spoon in town and you get it
every
 morning with a cup of coffee at McDonalds." Why would you close us down?' My own testimony was held over till the following day and on the way home,
I
 decided to try calling McDonalds and attempt to reach the president. Asit turned out, McD's is in Illinois allowing me to make it home before they closed. I tracked down the number, asked for the President's name (Ed Schmidt)
 and asked to be connected. His regular "secretary--this was still an OK
word
 then--was out and the young lady who was replacing her put me through.
 I explained what had just happened in the hearings and Mr. Schmidt asked,
 "Well what do you want from me?" I told him I wanted him to redesign the spoon and allow me to go back to
 the hearing the following day and announce that legitimate businesses
wanted
 no part of the drug culture that was destroying so many young people."
 He responded, "Lady, do you know we have over 4500 stores?" I didn't
 respond but asked, "I'm not interested in that, how many children do you
have.
 Don't consider doing it for me--do it for your own children."
 He asked me to call back in 20 minutes. I did and the same young lady
 told me he was "in Europe." I protested that I had just spoken to him and
he
 had asked me to call back. She connected me and he said, "We'll do it."
 Not long after, McDonald's designed a drug prevention project of their
 own and sponsored some events at our national conferences.
This event, of course, did not solve the drug problem; however, it did
 send a strong message to families whose side McD's was taking. We
received
 press clips from all over the world.
 Please send me copies of anything you write.   Joyce Nalepka 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by Nick Thimmesch on July 18, 2005 at 07:59:50 PT
Don't Swallow Drug Legalizers' Lies
Joyce don't swallow nothing: as her husband knows oh too well.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by jose melendez on July 18, 2005 at 04:29:19 PT
two way fraud: FDA harms consumers AND producers 
"unauthorized by statute, unconstitutional and imprudent."http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050705-122607-6854r.htm "Before his appointment to the FDA, FDA's chief legal counsel Daniel Troy represented drug companies that challenged FDA actions. He also represented the Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corp. in the tobacco industry's successful suit against FDA efforts to regulate advertising and promotion of tobacco. A federal appeals court in 1998 upheld Troy's argument that tobacco isn't a drug and the FDA couldn't regulate it under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. The U.S. Supreme Court later agreed.Also in 1998, Troy successfully fought the FDA to allow drug companies to provide doctors with articles that discuss unapproved, or "off-label," uses of their medications."http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0129-08.htmand from: http://tinyurl.com/8daq3 July 18, 2005 	latimes.com :
Activist Enlists Unlikely Ally in Bid to Legalize PotBy Eric Bailey, Times Staff WriterHe is an unabashed Big Business conservative. She's a liberal who favors the little guy. He's a Washington insider dating back to the days of Nixon. She's all of 29 yet has landed in jail plenty of times for underdog acts of civil disobedience.Now Beltway lobbyist Jim Tozzi and bicoastal activist Steph Sherer have teamed up for an uphill cause: They aim to legalize medical marijuana in all 50 states.Sherer's stake is personal and professional. She uses cannabis daily for a spinal injury suffered during her arrest at a Washington protest five years ago. Sherer also runs Oakland-based Americans for Safe Access, a nonprofit bent on making marijuana available to any patient in need.Tozzi, graying and dark-suited at 67, has come to her aid with a federal law spawned at the behest of corporate America. In 2000, Tozzi helped craft legislation that lets the private sector challenge the scientific reliability of government regulations.Medical marijuana activists like Sherer consider Tozzi's handiwork a potential boon for a movement thwarted by cops and the courts, most recently a U.S. Supreme Court decision that declined to protect cannabis patients from federal prosecution.Sherer, an energetic new combatant in a battle that's raged for generations, said she believes medical marijuana activists now have the scientific goods to counter government assertions that pot has no proven medical efficacy.If U.S. health officials fess up that marijuana is good medicine, she says, the government won't be able to continue blocking the 33-year effort by activists to have cannabis dropped from the restrictive list of illicit drugs, which includes heroin and LSD. That, in turn, could stoke research into prescription forms of cannabis, as well as wider and less contentious medical use."There's no way the statement that marijuana has no accepted medical value is true anymore," Sherer said, citing 6,500 scientific articles from around the world on medical cannabis, as well as the thousands of doctor recommendations in California and nine other states still defying federal prohibitions.So far, federal officials have rebuffed the pleas of Americans for Safe Access.Arthur J. Lawrence, the assistant U.S. surgeon general, wrote in an April 20 rejection letter that the federal government already has undertaken an exhaustive review of marijuana's medicinal merits. That effort began in 2002 when medical marijuana supporters petitioned U.S. regulators to yank cannabis from Schedule 1, which is reserved for abused drugs devoid of medical value. Lawrence reasoned that Scherer's Data Quality Act request amounted to a duplication of effort.Scherer countered that Lawrence is ignoring mounting evidence that pot is good medicine and the act's intent: to quickly correct mistakes in the government record. Americans for Safe Access, which claims 12,000 patients on its rolls, has appealed. U.S. Health and Human Services officials have until Tuesday to respond.The Bush administration gives no indication of bending.Although there have been "suggestions" that some elements of the herb might be developed into prescription drugs, potential benefits are outweighed by a "manifest risk" of widespread abuse, said David Murray, a White House Office of National Drug Control Policy analyst.Even if new marijuana-based drugs were approved, Murray said, they would not likely have "the character of the raw crude leaf."For Sherer, relief comes with a dropper of liquid cannabis extract six times a day.The drug, she says, doesn't make her high but eases otherwise unyielding pain and spasms at the base of her neck.Growing up in Austin, Texas, Sherer always preferred microbrew beer to marijuana. But that relationship with cannabis changed in 2000, she said, after a U.S. marshal hit her from behind during an International Monetary Fund protest. Scherer's civil lawsuit against the U.S. is winding toward trial.The blow caused a ligament in her neck to snap. After a year of treatment with heavy pain medications, Sherer said, her kidneys began to shut down.When her doctor asked if she knew anyone who smoked pot or how to get it, Sherer wondered if he had gone off the deep end.The recommendation that she use pot as a painkiller changed both Sherer's medical status and her career path. Instead of focusing her budding organizational skills on world trade issues, she made medical marijuana her prime cause.Americans for Safe Access has since has blossomed into one of the most active medical marijuana groups in the nation.Last summer, Sherer discovered Tozzi's law and got an idea. She would turn the pro-business act on its head and apply it to medical marijuana, arguably one of America's most quixotic consumer causes.She had never met Tozzi, but the godfather of data quality showed up uninvited when Sherer held a news conference last October in Washington to announce her scheme.Sherer fretted that Tozzi was up to no good. Instead, he said he wanted to help."I figured a little shot of support from me, from someone they'd never expect, would help a group that has been battered around quite a bit," he said.Tozzi, having spent a lifetime working Washington's back corridors, calls himself "a regulatory nerd." He started in the Office of Management and Budget during the 1960s, after a military tour in Vietnam and a failed attempt to make it as a jazz trumpet player in New Orleans. By the Reagan era, Tozzi had climbed to a top spot at OMB.He promptly shifted to the private sector, got a big office near Dupont Circle in Washington and, the ultimate insider, forged a reputation as a lobbyist who can massage the Washington work product for clients like the tobacco industry and chemical companies.Tozzi played a key role in 1996 in establishing the Center for Regulatory Effectiveness, a business advocacy group that runs a website devoted to monitoring the wind shifts of government regulations. Out of that he launched the Data Quality Act.Just a few lines tucked into a 712-page omnibus bill, the act has had far-reaching fallout.Environmental and consumer groups consider Tozzi a sort of regulatory Dr. Evil, a stealthy genius whose little tweak of federal rules has hurt attempts to tame exploitation of the wilderness and workplace. Businesses view it as a way to check unwarranted government regulation.Salt companies used the act to challenge government pronouncements about negative health effects. Builders fought claims about polluted runoff from construction sites. Chemical companies battled rules that threatened top-selling products.Despite her liberal credentials, Sherer has developed an effective working relationship with Tozzi. And mutual admiration."I was expecting someone from the shadow government, like the cancer man from the 'X-Files,' " Scherer said. Instead she got "this charismatic character who fills every corner of the room with his personality."Tozzi, meanwhile, thinks Scherer is underemployed. "She's doing God's work at great personal sacrifice," he said. "But when she gets this issue straightened out, she can go anywhere."Sherer introduced Tozzi to medical marijuana patients. One in particular struck him.She was a schoolteacher in her early 60s who looked "just like Betty Crocker," Tozzi recalled. The woman said she had always been a law-abiding citizen but had been forced to buy pot on the streets to treat her multiple sclerosis."I don't know if she was more bothered by the pain of her illness or the pain of her actions," he said.But this master of the regulatory chessboard had more than just altruistic motives. Since its inception, the Data Quality Act has been under attack as a weapon of big business, a stealthy way to keep federal agencies tied in knots over what constitutes sound science.Eager to blunt such criticism and dash attempts to thwart his law in Congress, Tozzi has pushed public interest groups to start deploying the act against the bureaucrats. Legalization of medical marijuana, he said, could prove a powerful court test of government resistance to his beloved Data Quality Act.But does this bid by Scherer and Tozzi stand a chance?Peter Meyers, a George Washington University law professor who in the 1970s fought for removal of cannabis from the federal government list of dangerous drugs, doesn't hold out much hope. He considers marijuana prohibition a part of a broader moral crusade being waged by the Bush administration."This has nothing to do with the medical debate," he said. "I think it's simply politics."Jon Gettman, a George Mason School of Public Policy senior fellow who is leading the current bid to get marijuana removed from that list, believes the Data Quality Act challenge puts extra pressure on federal regulators.And he welcomes the oddball pairing of Tozzi the conservative and Sherer the activist."The idea of overlapping interests and strange bedfellows is a sign of a very healthy political system," he said. "I think James Madison would be delighted." 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by observer on July 18, 2005 at 00:42:30 PT
propaganda analysis
[8]
Although the Rhode Island lawmakers passed the pro-pot legislation, Governor Carcieri fortunately has a backbone and vetoed it.
(Sentence 8) re: "pro-pot" - Because they hold differing opinions on drug policy, say prohibitionists, "legalizers" should be silenced or jailed. (Dissent Attacked (propaganda theme 8) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme8.htm#8 ) 
 
 
[9]
However, backers of drug legalization, who are pushing this legislation, persuaded the Rhode Island Senate to override the governor's veto.
(Sentence 9) re: "legalization" - Any mention of lessening the harshness of drug laws is portrayed as a sinful "legalization". Only total prohibition (or more jailings) will be righteous. (Total Prohibition or Access (propaganda theme 7) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme7.htm#7 ) 
 
 
[14]
Today, these zealots are older admitted drug users, with access to millions of dollars, provided by currency trader George Soros and Peter Lewis, founder of Progressive Insurance.
(Sentence 14) re: "drug users", "users" - The rhetoric of prohibition will try to use labeling and guilt by association to link drugs and drug users with hated groups. (Hated Groups (propaganda theme 1) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme1.htm#1 ) re: "drug users" - Prohibition propaganda claims that all use of any "drug" is abuse. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) re: "George Soros", "Peter Lewis" - Anyone who disagrees with prohibition is attacked as part of the problem. No dissent is permitted. (Dissent Attacked (propaganda theme 8) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme8.htm#8 ) 
 
 
[27]
In Florida, little Jessica Lunsford also died because of drugs -- not her own drug use, but the crack use of an addict, who stole her from her bed in her grandmother's humble home and killed her.
(Sentence 27) re: "addict" - Prohibition propaganda often uses crude forms of name-calling to link a targeted drug with groups the majority dislikes. (Hated Groups (propaganda theme 1) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme1.htm#1 ) re: "drug use" - The rhetoric of prohibition will assume that "use" and "abuse" are identical. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[28]
Near Harrisburg, Pa., a toddler left in the care of an 18-year-old marijuana user was repeatedly burned by his lighted joint and had marijuana smoke forced into her mouth.
(Sentence 28) re: "marijuana user" - "This strategy equates the use and abuse of drugs and implies that it is impossible to use the particular drug or drugs in question without physical, mental, and moral deterioration." [W.White,1979] (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[34]
Her crack-addicted mother had remembered to feed her but not to change her diaper.
(Sentence 34) re: "addicted" - Drugs, claim the prohibitionist, cause insanity, violence, and terrible sickness. (Madness,Crime,Violence,Illness (propaganda theme 2) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme2.htm#2 ) 
 
 
[36]
A 13-year-old Texas youth was found with heroin near his body and marijuana and needles elsewhere in the house.
(Sentence 36) re: "youth" - "Chemicals have long been inextricably linked in prohibitionist literature with the ... corruption of young people." [W.White,1979] (Children Corrupted (propaganda theme 5) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme5.htm#5 ) 
 
 
[39]
O'Reilly and every state legislator who voted for these bills nationwide: Illegal drug use does matter.
(Sentence 39) re: "Illegal drug use", "drug use" - Prohibitionist propagandists repeatedly assert that "use is abuse." Details about "using" as opposed to "abusing" drugs are ignored. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[40]
The horror of abuse to the children of those who "just use their drugs at home" must be considered.
(Sentence 40) re: "children" - Prohibitionists are champions of "the child", "kids", "children", etc. Only continued or increased punishments of all adults caught using "drugs" will send the correct "message" to children. (Children Corrupted (propaganda theme 5) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme5.htm#5 ) 
 
 
[41]
Joyce Nalepka is president of Drug-Free Kids: America.
(Sentence 41) re: "Kids:" - "Since the Harrison Act of 1914, the user and the seller of illicit drugs have both been characterized as evil, criminal, insane, and always in search of new victims, the victims are characterized as young children." [W.White,1979] (Children Corrupted (propaganda theme 5) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme5.htm#5 ) re: "Drug-Free" - Onward prohibitionist drug warriors, fighting the epidemic and scourge in the battles of the war against drugs! (Drugs declared evil by politicians, that is.) (Total Prohibition or Access (propaganda theme 7) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme7.htm#7 ) 
 
 summary: drugwar_propaganda = 100%I thought the text was interesting because of these details:asserted: $drug_related at 100% ($prohibition $prohibitionist $legalization $paraphernalia $illegal_drugs $drug_ngo)asserted: $drugwar_propaganda at 100% ("campaign" $propaganda_theme1 $propaganda_theme2 $propaganda_theme3 $propaganda_theme5 $propaganda_theme7 $propaganda_theme8 $propaganda_theme4), 1 hitsasserted: $propaganda_theme1 at 100% ("drug users" "users" "user" "addict"), 6 hitsasserted: $propaganda_theme2 at 60% ("addicted" "damage"), 3 hitsasserted: $propaganda_theme3 at 50% ("America"), 1 hitsasserted: $use_is_abuse at 100% ("Illegal drug use" "drug use" "drug users" "marijuana user"), 7 hitsasserted: $propaganda_theme4 at 100% ($use_is_abuse)asserted: $propaganda_theme5 at 60% ("children" "Kids:" "baby" "youth"), 4 hitsasserted: $propaganda_theme7 at 100% ("Drug-Free" "legalization" $legalization), 2 hitsasserted: $propaganda_theme8 at 90% ("George Soros" "Peter Lewis" "pro-pot" "billionaires"), 5 hitsasserted: $prohibitionist at 100% ("Joyce Nalepka" "Nalepka"), 2 hits 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by runderwo on July 17, 2005 at 19:25:15 PT
oreilly
Yeah, I'm pretty sure I remember an O'Reilly episode where he sent a reporter around to "score" some medical cannabis. The reporter faked some condition to a doctor, then took his recommendation and went and bought some cannabis from a dispensary pretending to be someone who needed it. Then the fact that it was so easy to obtain was brought out on the show as "exposing" this hidden legalization scheme or whatever. If in fact that show did exist, it's totally stupid because faking an illness is a way to score any prescription drug in an illegitimate fashion; this is hardly a phenomenon related to cannabis alone.Of course, the question wasn't asked - SO WHAT if a few people cheat the system? What's more important, relieving the suffering of most of the people who have legitimate need for it, or ensuring that nobody might possibly *gasp* get high and have a good time of it while pretending to be ill? I think the most reasonable thing to do is to focus on the most blatant and evident abuses, and to not worry about every little way that people might cheat. Kinda like how prescription drugs in general are handled.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by Taylor121 on July 17, 2005 at 16:23:01 PT
I can't wait 
I can't wait till the House votes. I can only hope that they will actually go through with the override, and when it happens it will be a much needed victory. We have had set back after set back this year. 2006 could be a huge year for reform, but I think it is necessary that this passes to show that momentum has not completely stalled.I don't even need to address this article. Bill O'Reilly is not a libertarian. The court decision did not "nullify" state laws, it simply allows the Feds to arrest patients. However, state and local law enforcement do not follow state law and we are talking .02% of the total being arrested by the Feds. These laws are important.Oh and one more thing. Thank God the MPP is paying the legislators just like every other lobbying force. We have no hope of getting through FDA studies until we get our own source, and guess what, the DEA has denied that. Until we actually get a shot to get marijuana through that process has medicine, we must keep passing state laws. If you are in Rhode Island, there is nothing more important than writing your Reps right now, but ALSO to tell everyone you know and convince them to do the same.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by billos on July 17, 2005 at 15:38:23 PT
This woman is a joke!!
Joyce Nalepka is Dr. Barthwell's vomit and biological waste. I guess when "Barfwell" left she had to leave a follower to take the Amerikan posistion on how cannabis is EVIL.
Remember Dr. Barfwell, who I believe went to England to pursue a career in THC proliferation via the drug Sativex, but while employed in the States Barthwell propagated the propaganda that Cannabis is nothing but EVIL!!
Joyce....you SUCK. And so do you Barthwell.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by legalizeit on July 17, 2005 at 15:08:55 PT
Prohib Nutjob
A quick C-News search turned up the following:http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread16433.shtmlYet another crusader on a continuing campaign against something she doesn't even understand.In a feeble attempt to proving the "dangers" of pot, she relates a string of horror stories involving crack, heroin, etc. (Slippery slope, pot=everything else. Not enough reports of people killing or dying over pot, so drag out stories involving hard drugs to make SOME sort of point.) Only one of her vignettes mentioned only pot, and that was obviously a trashy and despicable person with far more problems than pot could even begin to cause. (Of course, no mention of that person drinking - he most likely was, but drinking is harmless unless you're driving. Right? Yes, because it's legal. No harm would EVER befall someone partaking of a government-approved mind alterant!)What's really sad is that a paper would actually print this garbage.Nothing to look at here, Sheeple of R.I. - just ignore her drivel and move along.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by mayan on July 17, 2005 at 14:59:52 PT
Joyce
80% of Americans disagree with you regarding medical cannabis. Your lies are outdated and counterproductive to your prohibitionist cause. The more you lie the more allies we gain. Does the truth mean nothing to you? The truth is the foundation of everything that is good. There can't be much that is good in your life because you are living a lie. Just keep on lying because the only people who still subscribe to your dying prohibitionist ideas are either very ignorant of the cannabis plant,have jobs that depend on cannabis prohibition or are cannabis dealers themselves. Joyce, you can come here and have a civilized debate with us anytime. You used to post here and we treated you with respect and debated you with facts. Your arguments didn't hold water then and they certainly don't now so I don't blame you if you cower at the thought. I imagine there are dozens of enlightening LTE's in response to your lies every time you get in the paper. Keep it up because the 20% who still agree with you will eventually come around and join us! Thanks, Joyce!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by global_warming on July 17, 2005 at 14:32:34 PT
Same Old Crap
Where have I heard this same old rhetoric, this same old discussion, seems like good people are destined to suffer, and forget their affliction, memory, that is so easily tarnished, by the glint of "money", this tired old bitch Joyce, should have died years ago, these tired old policemen, will never share their last crumbs.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by JHarshaw on July 17, 2005 at 13:32:22 PT
Grocery money?
Greetings.Actually it is the Government that is spending YOUR grocery money to maintain prohibition.Just a thought...Peace and pot
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by jose melendez on July 17, 2005 at 13:24:22 PT
talking point easily debunked
Re: " . . . the Supreme Court has ruled twice, once unanimously, that there is no medical-necessity defense for marijuana . . ." Caught you lying again, Joyce:Q: " . . . decided
 that there is no medical necessity defense against prosecution " A: False. They decided not to address the issue: "Respondents also raise a substantive due process claim and seek to 
 avail themselves of the medical necessity defense. These theories 
 of relief were set forth in their complaint but were not reached by 
 the Court of Appeals. We therefore do not address the question 
 whether judicial relief is available to respondents on these 
 alternative bases. We do note, however, the presence of another 
 avenue of relief. As the Solicitor General confirmed during oral 
 argument, the statute authorizes procedures for the 
 reclassification of Schedule I drugs. But perhaps even more 
 important than these legal avenues is the democratic process, in 
 which the voices of voters allied with these respondents may one 
 day be heard in the halls of Congress." http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-1454.ZO.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by jose melendez on July 17, 2005 at 13:14:04 PT
criminalizers suck, just not pops
http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/23503/
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by john wayne on July 17, 2005 at 12:36:35 PT
joyce shows her age and irrelevance
> Doesn't anyone remember thalidomide?Uh, Joyce, maybe everyone is too busy remembering vioxx and then switching to medical cannabis to think about drug scandals from 50 years ago.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by FoM on July 17, 2005 at 12:23:02 PT
Portion of Article About The Beatles
Excerpt: There is a long history of drug use among artists and musicians, but the Beatles celebrated use of marijuana and hallucinogenic drugs helped bring these drugs into the mainstream, along with the psychedelic aesthetic and interest in alternative consciousness. But as Stark sees it, "Drugs were out there, I don't see them as the drug salesmen of the sixties; just as alcohol was part of the Jazz Age, drugs were part of the sixties." He maintains that their drug use was far more extensive than anyone knew at the time, and questions producer George Martin's assertion that they "were more brilliant than they realized and it would have happened without drugs." In fact, Stark goes so far as to say that the Beatles "would not have happened" without drugs. "Without pot and acid, there would have been no "Rubber Soul," no "Revolver, "no "Sgt. Pepper;" we don't know what they would have created, but these would not exist as we know them." Though he doesn't dwell on this point, his entire argument hinges on it to some extent in that all the social change he attributes to them  the feminization of culture, the popularization of Eastern philosophy, the revolution in the recording industry, rock'n'roll morphing into "rock" and becoming an art form, and even the collapse of the Berlin Wall  he is indirectly attributing to their use of creativity-enhancing drugs. It begs the question as to which was the real agent of change: the Beatles or the drugs. Complete Article: http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050717/NEWS1403/107150071
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by runderwo on July 17, 2005 at 11:50:37 PT
thalidomide
Actually, the thalidomide comment is even more ironic than I thought, because thalidomide WAS approved by the FDA. And look how that turned out! What point is she trying to make?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by runderwo on July 17, 2005 at 11:48:32 PT
unreal
You know, I'd almost find this comical if I didn't envision so many readers nodding their heads in agreement. The idea that medical cannabis users could even be compared to heroin and crack addicts, and irresponsible ones at that, really is laughable.The whole article is based on observational selection and ignores the fact that there are many responsible drug users (including alcohol drinkers, tobacco smokers, OTC drug users, etc) who do not let their recreational use get out of hand. Furthermore, it sneeringly assumes that medical users just want to get high. Also, she is apparently unaware of nobody in recorded history suffering permanent injury or death from the active ingredients in cannabis, and she deliberately obfuscates the issue by limiting the discussion to "marijuana cigarettes", as if anyone in the know would find that to be convincing anyway. As for the FDA comment, hasn't anyone ever heard of Vioxx? FDA approval does not equal safe, because the FDA's structure invites putting corruption and politicization above demonstrated safety and medical necessity.The comment about $1500 being paid to two representatives is interesting. I don't know the nature of this payment, but she could at least be Fair And Balanced(TM) and report the amount that prohibs are dumping into politics too.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment