Ashcroft Ruling Blocks Ore. Assisted-Suicide Law 

  Ashcroft Ruling Blocks Ore. Assisted-Suicide Law 

Posted by FoM on November 07, 2001 at 10:18:19 PT
By Dan Eggen and Ceci Connolly, WP Staff Writers 
Source: Washington Post 

Attorney General John D. Ashcroft effectively blocked Oregon's landmark assisted-suicide law yesterday, authorizing federal drug agents to identify and punish doctors who prescribe federally controlled drugs to help terminally ill patients die.In a memorandum to Drug Enforcement Administration chief Asa Hutchinson, Ashcroft wrote that assisting in a suicide is not a "legitimate medical purpose" under federal law. He said DEA agents should seek to revoke the drug licenses of Oregon physicians who help patients commit suicide.
The opinion reverses a 1998 administrative decision by former attorney general Janet Reno and effectively bars Oregon physicians from legally prescribing narcotics to help patients commit suicide under the state's Death With Dignity Act, according to Oregon officials and medical experts. All 70 people known to have died under the law took federally controlled drugs such as the barbiturate secobarbitol, state officials said.Although Ashcroft's decision appears to leave open the possibility of using less powerful drugs not regulated by the DEA, Oregon officials and medical experts said the risk of harm to patients and difficulties for physicians would be too high. Other states that enact assisted-suicide laws would face the same restrictions, officials said.Ashcroft's letter does not call for criminal prosecution of physicians. But some predicted the decision would make doctors more hesitant to prescribe powerful painkillers that could be used to commit suicide.The assisted-suicide order is the latest social policy decision by Ashcroft likely to please conservatives. The attorney general raised the ire of gun control groups by adopting a view of the Second Amendment advocated by the National Rifle Association, and has indicated a willingness to settle the federal government's landmark lawsuit against the tobacco industry.Kevin Neely, a spokesman for Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers (D), said the state would seek a court injunction today to prevent the DEA from acting on Ashcroft's decision.Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who personally opposed the assisted-suicide law but has led efforts to block Congress from overruling it, said the opinion undermines the will of Oregon voters. They approved assisted suicide in 1994 and 1997 referenda."I guess the Bush administration is frustrated by the inconvenience of the democratic process," Wyden said. "They have administratively tossed the ballots of Oregon's voters in the trash." No other state has a law allowing assisted suicide.But Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) hailed the decision as a triumph of principle over politics. A broad alliance of religious, medical and social groups that oppose Oregon's law said the order was a sensible way to halt what they consider a violation ofa physician's ethical code.The influential American Medical Association also supported the move, although with misgivings.Burke Balch, medical ethics director of the National Right to Life Committee, said drugs "should be used to cure and to relieve pain, not to kill."The ruling "is a carefully crafted one that, at one and the same time, ensures that patients will get adequate pain relief while preventing facilitating their killing with federally controlled drugs," Balch said.Ashcroft based his decision on a unanimous ruling by the Supreme Court in May that said federal drug laws do not allow for the medical use of marijuana to ease pain from AIDS, cancer and other diseases.The court did not overturn state laws allowing patients to use marijuana for medical reasons, but made the drug more difficult to obtain by denying patients the right to claim "medical necessity" as a reason to ignore federal statutes.In a separate 1997 decision, a unanimous Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution does not guarantee Americans the right to commit suicide with the help of a physician, leaving the issue to state legislatures to decide. The ruling upheld laws in New York and Washington states that made it a crime for doctors to give lethal drugs to dying patients.The high court also refused in 1997 to hear a challenge to Oregon's assisted-suicide law.Under Oregon's Death With Dignity Act, physicians may provide, but not administer, a lethal prescription to terminally ill adults who are Oregon residents. The legislation requires that two physicians agree that the patient has less than six months to live, has voluntarily chosen to die and is able to make health-related decisions.Former DEA chief Thomas Constantine determined in 1997 that doctors could not prescribe deadly doses of drugs, including narcotics such as morphine, covered by the 1970 Controlled Substances Act. But Reno overruled Constantine in 1998, saying that the federal statute was never meant to regulate medical practices.Ashcroft, an ardent abortion foe who was then a U.S. senator from Missouri, complained that Reno was "bending the rules" in issuing her administrative decision.At least 70 terminally ill people have ended their lives since the law took effect, and at least 26 others have received prescriptions for lethal doses of drugs under the program, according to Oregon health officials.Scott Swenson, executive director of Oregon Death With Dignity, predicted that the Justice Department decision would make doctors, both in Oregon and elsewhere, less willing to prescribe sufficiently strong pain medicines for people with cancer and other chronic diseases."It is going to have a chilling effect on doctors, pharmacists, hospices and anyone else concerned with pain care and palliative care across the country," he said.Yank D. Coble Jr., incoming president of the AMA, which has long opposed physician-assisted suicide, said the group shares those concerns.But Hutchinson sought to ease such fears yesterday, saying that the DEA "fully supports the use of appropriate medications" to help alleviate pain.Staff writer Susan Okie contributed to this report.Source: Washington Post (DC)Author: Dan Eggen and Ceci Connolly, WP Staff WritersPublished: Wednesday, November 7, 2001; Page A01 Copyright: 2001 The Washington Post Company Contact: letterstoed washpost.comWebsite: http://www.washingtonpost.comRelated Articles:Feds Are Busting The Wrong `Drug Ring' Feds Crack Down -- on Medical Marijuana

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help

Comment #33 posted by theropinfool on November 09, 2001 at 06:00:32 PT
economy and thrift
Graffiti scrawled on an overhead walk bridge along Pacific highway 101 in Seattle was this: Wage slavery, it happened to you.Men are cheap especailly when they are hungry.We can go from Hooverville to Bushville real fast and you won't need a car to get there.President Hoover: Throw down your shovels and sit on your asses.President Roosevelt: Pick up your shovels and get off your asses.Have a nice day
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #32 posted by Lehder on November 09, 2001 at 03:19:24 PT
lookinside, i read your post twice - i like your visions so much! thanks for the smiles! yes, it's going to be tough for the pols to find a good excuse for the fallout of the bush misadventure in afghanistan. tougher still to blame it on drugs! even mainstream news is showing that world enthusiasm is beginning to slacken and it will slacken here too. mainstream disenchantment will grow, and all the kings kops will not keep it for the proposed 'austerity program' and the virtues of thrift: thank you for participating. one day you will enjoy the money you are saving for yourself and yours rather than giving it to the bank and the urine testers at walmart. and i hope that many others will join, even just as an experiment from now until christmas, longer if it's effective. i could easily be wrong about the economy, we'll see.explaining to friends and relatives your reasons for not buying much in the way of gifts this year, and asking not to receive much, is a great way to begin discussion of the evils of the drug & terror wars. the program will be effective because it only enhances what is already occurring. 2001 is virtually guaranteed, already, to be the bleakest retail season since the depression. and if ten million disenchanted "consumers" care to cast their votes by saving their dollars, we can send a strong message!Ho Ho Ho & happy new year to all
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #31 posted by lookinside on November 08, 2001 at 20:50:48 PT:
 freedom fighter, lehder, et al...
great string!...i refinanced in august..gotta great rate and went from a 30 to a 15 year payments are the same as before...but now i might live long enuff to pay it entire family decided not to exchange gifts this year...we all have homes full of things....nobody is in need of anything...getting together is more than enough...that's alotta money that won't get spent, except maybe at the grocer's...(family motto: we don't eat to live, we live to EAT!)i haven't been to a store in 3 months...i drive old cars and repair them as needed...we aren't spending on ANYTHING until bush is out of office and the economy is busy again...found a good computer repairman...VERY important!travel?...not this year...i've driven my own car about 500 miles in the last 6 months...i'd rather spend my weekends at home hanging out in cnews...i want the american people to HATE george w. bush...i want to see those who support his idiocy hit where it hurts; in their wallets...i wanna see them whine and wonder why their products are gathering dust...i want to see 75 cent gasoline...and nobody traveling...i want to see the afghani pipeline become economically unfeasible...i want to see the oakland police arrest any DEA agents that attempt to shut down the co-ops...i want gray davis to tell the prez that any attempt to enforce unconstitutional laws will be repulsed by patriotic californians...i want to see our republicrat politicians whining that losing the war in afghanistan wasn't THEIR was all that idiot, dubya's doing...i want the voters of america to yawn, change the channel and watch the simpsons...and vote the jerks out!incumbents are the enemy!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #30 posted by freedom fighter on November 08, 2001 at 19:52:02 PT
Can you say ddddd
depression?Bush will be known as a president who caused the second greatest depression the world have ever known. Recession is just a nice word for a short bear market.. I agree with Mr. Lehder.. Do not spend a dime.. I personally am out of work immediately after the terror bullcrap from Mr. Bush... Pretty soon, Mr. Bush gonna have to declare that anyone who does not spend a dime this christmas a terrorist.Does anybody remember the first depression?? ;))ff
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #29 posted by Lehder on November 08, 2001 at 17:00:26 PT
bush has a problem
(as if you didn't know)
in order to keep 'patriotism' at a record high and to keep his horrid war popular through winter and to maintain momentum for his nightmare of repression he's got to keep the threats to america uppermost in everyone's mind. plane crashes, more announcements of high probablility or 100% probability of explosions "over the next few day", anthrax, nuclear terrorism, be alert!!, next we'll hear about agroterror and threats to the food supply and new threats every month. (all the while his business partner osama relaxes in the tropics on a cia-paid vacation) but all these dangers scare people. they're not spending, not flying and buying as they should, and are unlikely to 
resume their duties without feeling safer and more confident about their futures. so there's a contradiction there that can be exploited by being virtuous - thrifty.on the other hand, i just read sudaca's narconews links in comments to another article. and the death and war machine of the drug-dealing government is just too big. and i gotta admit, the government's cessation of issuing 30 yr bonds was a masterstroke. they skyrocketed, rates fell, people will refinance their foolish mortgages now and have hundreds more to spend each month on plastic crap at walmart. still, if they're out of work then they have nothing to spend.
it was an idea. i'm being thrifty until i see for myself that it really is useless. thanks for reading, null. and i think you are right that it will be a very bleak christmas for the economy. fine with me.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #28 posted by null on November 08, 2001 at 16:31:23 PT
yes lehder!
an excellent post, Lehder! Look at Bush Sr. Won the Gulf War and lost the re-election. WHY?????? One word: recession. If the economy tanks then almost every incumbent will go.Christmas is coming up and is the PERFECT opportunity to excercise thrift. Anyone who knows about retail will tell you that holiday shopping makes or breaks most stores for the year. Be an economic luddite and don't spend! And when people ask what you want for Christmas, REALLY encourage them not to get you anything. Or just a little something homemade.The U.S. economy runs on a simple premise: Constant Consumption. Your only purpose as far as the US Gov is concerned is to consume. You must be certified at birth. You must be given a certificate when you die. And in between those two certificates they track every CENT you spend and earn and attach it to YOUR NUMBER - Social Security. As the saying goes: If you think no one knows you are alive try missing a mortgage payment. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #27 posted by Lehder on November 08, 2001 at 13:39:44 PT
thrift still a virtue
people who are out of work have more time to vote. and more reason. the stock market, as i write, is taking a sharp turnaround on high volume. we are are in a secular bear market that has just experienced a little bounce for about the last month. but people have not been investing - they've been buying lottery tickets called stocks, hoping for a fast buck. it doesn't work that way, not for long. the little bounce has been accompanied by hundreds of thousands of layoffs, no profits and an expanding price/earnings ratio. the european economies are stagnant, and the "asian tigers" - singapore, taiwan, malaysia, s korea are bankrupt. japan is in a hopeless funk, has been for years. do you know what it costs to borrow money in japan? nothing. that's right, 0%. rates were reduced to nothing in a vain attempt to stimulate consumer spending. the tactic failed. 
the u.s. federal reserve has reduced rates now to 2% and cannot go much lower without our starting to look a lot like japan. and rates here are already at 0% if you want to buy a car. my advice: don't.the point is that this is a great time to be thrifty. by not spending money and being as frugal as possible you can put people out of work, force people with big mortgages on 3000 sq ft homes to sell those houses and move into something less obnoxious. these are the bush-gore-television-drug-war-gas-guzzling sobs who never come to cannabisnews and need something to worry about besides the scourge of drugs. we can make them angry at the government by cutting off their money. these are the people who more than others need to assess their situation. they're going to get mad - likely for totally fatuous reasons, but so what, just as long as they're mad. and they are going to vote again in one year. we can be pretty sure too that, despite the doctored news here, the rest of the world is going to become more and more dismayed with bush's ugly war, especially as millions of afghans starve, starting about now. bush is evil and powerful but inept. there are bound to be international outcries and not all of them can be purged from mainstream television news. so much of the world is going to be angry at bush. better yet, they'll be laughing at him too. it's amazing some of the disgusted looks i see on foreign leaders' faces when they're talking to bush - like, what an idiot! and none of the economists expect any sort of recovery until the middle of next year. with any luck, the poor times will extend to next fall. it's a perfect time to be disobedient by becoming very poor consumers. two or three years ago, in a very strong economy, the virtue of thrift would have been utterly futile - what can a few of us do in the face of billions? but now - just look at the mainstream news - the government is begging us to spend spend spend. and if three or four million of us can manage to spend significantly less than ususal for 8 or 9 months, we can really make a difference. what difference? i've considered that this strategy of intensifying the economic recession by refusing to spend could backfire: that there will be more terrorist attacks, more job losses and people will demand strong leaders - more tyrants. i might be willing, nevertheless, be rid of a huge number of incumbents and just take a roll of the dice on their replacements. but, more likely than more tyrants, i think the 3rd parties will gain a lot by widespread dissatisfaction. i'd even be willing to switch from lib to green next year since the greens have a better chance. that's the idea, simple as it is, this is the ideal time for it.i like this strategy too because it doesn't cost me anything! what i don't spend today i can always spend tomorrow. and it does not interfere with or impede any of our other activist campaigns. it's legal, it's free, it's a virtue. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #26 posted by Silent_Observer on November 08, 2001 at 11:24:09 PT
freedom fighter..
I totally empathize with your frustrations. I know how futile it seems to try to use a vote to change policy - especially when legally obtained referenda are so viciosuly cast aside by the likes of Bob Barr, or Asa Hutchinson.But keep in mind that less than half the people voted this time. Keep in mind also that the majority of Americans believe that they have a choice between only two parties. It is the "two party" scam that keeps them both in power.I'm suggesting that perhaps some of us can use creative ways to manage the incentive systems that drive our pols to execute inhumane policies to either change or get out.A good constructive start would be a discussion on how exactly we may do this. I remember some time back, Lehder suggested doing detailed research on independents and making contributions to their campaigns. I think this is the right course of action - we are, after all, a civilized group of people; even if our leaders are not. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #25 posted by dddd on November 08, 2001 at 11:19:51 PT
Right On FreedomFighter
...somethings gotta happen.......what's happening now is INSANE!.....I guess I would probably get picked up by homeland SSecurity,if I suggesting something like Revolution!!!....May JAH Shine on you FreedomFighter.....dddd
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #24 posted by freedom fighter on November 08, 2001 at 11:00:36 PT
Silent Observer
Sure, I will wait until the next fake election. In fact, I am hoping there would be another terroristic act couple days before the election so Bush can declare another National emergency. I would not be surprised if the goons down there would do this.I am not too sure if we can boot them out of the office by election. I am not claiming that violence would be productive but I do want to know what would be the constructive way to fight the drug war. We have tried by vote. We have tried to educate others. We tried just about every method except violence.Just too many dead bodies now.I am just being realistic. Sometime one has to fight a fire with a fire.ff
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #23 posted by Rambler on November 08, 2001 at 10:46:57 PT
WOW...We aint seen nothing yet!!!!!
,,,,take a gander at this SHOCKER!.....
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #22 posted by Rambler on November 08, 2001 at 07:42:18 PT
Are you concerned yet?
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #21 posted by Silent_Observer on November 08, 2001 at 07:21:02 PT
freedom fighter..
I'm going to have to agree with Jose in that threatening violence is counter-productive.The trouble is that the actions taken by Uncle Sam so far have been incredibly provocative, and almost an invitation to violence. But that is the Tim McVeigh approach - not a particularly good thing.Our best bet is to wait for the elections and boot them out.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #20 posted by Lehder on November 08, 2001 at 03:52:24 PT
noam chomsky on terrorism
here's another article in counter punch. too bad that web site won't let one click,drag and copy paragraphs. uses the history of nicaragua as an example of how u.s. terrorism is conducted. it tells how the u.s. used control of nicaraguan air space and radio communications to ground squads to avoid the nicaraguan army and attack civilian targets like hospitals and farms. nicaragua responded by taking its case to the world court, where the u.s. was condemned and ordered to cease and desist and to pay a huge sum ( not in the article, but i've read that the amount was $14 billion). the u.s. rejected this ruling with contempt and declared that it would no longer be subject to the world court. nicaragua responded by taking the case to the un security council and holding a vote on the declaration, without naming names, that "countries would be subject to international law" - that simple. the u.s. vetoed this statement. nicaragua then took the issue to the general assembly for a vote (no vetoes there). only the u.s., israel and el salvadore voted against the statement that countries would be subject to international law. a year later the vote was repeated and only the u.s. and israel then were may think this is off-topic. but chomsky's conclusion is that the federal government operates only by force - all else is propaganda. what the the fed is going to do, it's going to do, and while there may be some kind and noble words associated with its actions, it will proceed by force no matter what. he concludes too that this policy is always successful: force and violence have always prevailed. and that's how the government deals ultimately with afghanistan, the drug war, medical marijuana, oregon's assisted suicide law, you and me. good luck. a friend of mine - actually, she was a lover, too - kept an F14 parked in her front yard with a big sign on it: Eternal Vigilance is the Price of Freedom. At least that was her plan. keep flying, girl.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #19 posted by freedom fighter on November 08, 2001 at 01:19:13 PT
constructive to fight?
Jose, I hope I am not jumpin on you but pray tell me what would be the constructive way to fight the drug war?Jews at Warsaw back in 1940 said the same thing. There were 350 thousands jews and majority did not think violence was the answer to the "Jew problem" with the Nazis. 300 thousands had to die before the 50 thousands decided it was enough.Maybe you think "Drug war" is not anything the same as the "Jew problem". I do beg you to think this out. There are real danger of pretending there is a constructive way out. I really do not know how to have a rational and constructive discussion with AssCroft or Asa much less with Bush Dynasty. I have been waiting for 40 years and I am 41 years old.Do you? Please tell us what would be the constructive way to fight this insanity? We waited weeks before few main media started to discuss about what happened down at L.A. We waited for months now and nary a word about the Rainbow Farm in the main mediastream.ff
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #18 posted by goneposthole on November 07, 2001 at 21:47:16 PT
Belladonna, Jimson weed are the same plant. Used to help asthma patients was also used by the Hopi indians to cure meanness. A member of the nightshade family, it is an extremely hardy plant that grows just about anywhere. The potato and tobacco plants are included here.Very dangerous to use and take no more than the size of a radish; you are in for a 10 hour ride. You will find out that a one time use will probably be enough and know why the Hopi used it to cure meanness. Filled to the brim with alkaloids. You will die if you take too much. I would guess the Hopi medicine men knew how much to administer to an out of whack Hopi brave. It could be used by the terminally ill.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #17 posted by Rambler on November 07, 2001 at 20:21:25 PT
Ayatollah Asscroft
here's an excellent article
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #16 posted by MikeEEEEE on November 07, 2001 at 19:18:37 PT
Me thinks
This is more about power and control, call it conspiracy if you like. The government will not give freedom to control our own bodies. If we're suffering they won't allow us the choice to die in peace, if we have an illness they control what we put in our bodies for relief, and if we need a peaceful herb like Cannabis they say NO!I hope it's not too late to save this country.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #15 posted by Tim Stone on November 07, 2001 at 18:29:42 PT
I wonder if the DEA could be so kind as to precisely state the chapter and verse of Fed law that gives them warrant, namely Atty Gen Ashcroft and Director Asa Hutchison ("Excuse me, but what medical school did you graduate from, exactly?") to make overt medical policy for the entire nation. And this clearly ideological power play from Ashcroft, who swore a mighty oath during his confirmation hearings that he would emphatically _not_ allow his personal, ideological views to influence national policy apart from previous law...unless he really, really wanted to...after he were confirmed...which he has now done...and will do again....and again. With such as he, we reformers are doomed. Ashcroft controls the deck of cards, the machine that deals the cards, the order in which the cards are to be dealt, even if in apparent defiance of previous court rulings. And he controls what the media will report about how the hand was dealt, or if the hand was even dealt at all. And in case any disgruntled gamblers question why the House wins as always, we may as a nation look assuredly to A.G. Ashcroft as a model of a dispassionate civil servant just doing, duty, which duty in his case happily coincides perfectly with his ideological views. Imagine that. Haaaaawwwwk...spit. (Requires MP3 or Real Player)
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #14 posted by mayan on November 07, 2001 at 17:42:38 PT
this should work...
Sorry,try this one -
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #13 posted by mayan on November 07, 2001 at 17:39:50 PT
Oregon Sues
Oregon is already suing the U.S. Government.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by Sam Adams on November 07, 2001 at 16:35:50 PT

Yes Conspiracy
I want to echo what Kappy said about conspiracy. I couldn't agree more that "conspiracy" is one of our core values.Take a look back at human history. Time after time, governments seek to exploit the masses of people. The very nature of Western Civilization is to improve your life by exploiting others. You somehow get into a situation where some fraction of the total production or output of a man's working day goes to you instead of him.The time between when a govt takes power and starts moving to exploit can be measured in seconds. Now, there are many ways to do this. The most dramatic way is with an iron fist, a la Hitler or Stalin. Do exactly what I say or you die.Now here in America, the very nature of this country was supposed to be freedom, and everyone getting to do what they want. So you can't just come in and start shooting people that don't obey. You've got to somehow cajole and convince them to do it voluntarily. Without direct violence, you resort to the tools you can use: conformism, indoctrination, fomenting ethnic and class hatred, propaganda, secrecy, and increasingly, leveraging narcissism, personal greed, and ignorance.Take for example, racism. Now, if the Democratic Party is supposed to be the working man's party, the party of the people, whey the hell don't they win in a popular vote every time? Well, one way for the Republicans to get votes is to turn one subset of the population against another - i.e., if you hate minorities and want to screw them over, maybe you'll be dumb enough to vote for a Republican, even though they're helping their corporate buddies rob you blind. I am particularly interested in what's happened in the US since WWII. The whole country converted to this huge military machine for 4-5 years - the military's power and influence over the govt became huge - as it needed to be, since they were winning the war. But they didn't just want to give it up at the end. What could they do? People wouldn't stand for paying huge tax money to fund a peacetime military. Fortunately, over in Russia the same thing was occurring to their military establishment, and the resulting 30 years of Cold War is now history. The military-industrial complex of each country was dependent on the other for it's very reason for existence. Look today, we still have huge spying infrastructures in place even though Russia is now our ally! Just recently we got busted building a huge tunnel under the Russian embassy in Washington - I can' imagine what secret the Russians wouldn't give up if we just paid them the equivalent cash that it cost to build that tunnel! They're flat broke over there.You know, maybe it's the word conspiracy that's a problem. One man's "conspiracy" is another man's glaring fact. Guiliani and the governor of NY get up on a podium and say that the terrorists went after NY because it's the freest city in the world. But meanwhile, Giuliani's been arresting 70,000 people per year for cannabis, a plant, shaking down, killing, and torturing unarmed, regular working-man civilians, and confiscating property on the slightest infraction.  Now, is it a "conspiracy" that he's really out to increase the power of the government over the people?   Only if you're wearing blinders.I recently read an article by a child psychologist, he believes that too much TV and videogames during childhood can actually prevent areas of the brain from developing - the parts of the cerebral cortex that promote creativity,  and initiative. Now, who does that benefit? Who benefits from a generation that is physiologically unable to think for themselves, to think "outside the box" of what they're being told, the commercials they're seeing, the nightly news they're watching? Or is it obvious that the government and a tiny fraction of the US population is gradually assuming more and more control over everyone else?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by Silent_Observer on November 07, 2001 at 15:45:32 PT

Greetings, everyone. I decided I had nothing to add to this scintillating debate, and went back to observng silently.I'm not sure what to think any more. These federal strong arm tactics are getting more and more egregious each day - they're not even making an effort to hide it any more. I'm resigning myself to a dictatorship here in the US of A very soon. I doubt we can stop it. I see little difference between the Taliban executing people in a soccer field and our jackbooted thugs executing cancer patients.I had a thought about "patriotism" this afternoon as I was driving back from lunch. This woman drives by me - all alone in a HUGE SUV, with a flag prominently displayed in the rear right window. Patriotic? Seems to me, she's part of the problem - does one woman REALLY need a guzzler like that? Thereby forcing us to import 40% of our oil from Saudi Arabia and, in turn, going to war over it?I think a genuine form of patriotism would be for every American to trade in his/her SUV, minivan, or gas guzzling V8s for an econobox. How much oil do you think we can save that way - if everybody did that now? Then, immediately after, we jump start our efforts to find alternative energy sources. Even if ecological concerns are not primary drivers of most people, the dependence on Arab oil should be.FWIW... 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by mayan on November 07, 2001 at 15:07:34 PT

Or a presidency.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by MikeEEEEE on November 07, 2001 at 14:29:30 PT

Compassionate Conservatism???
Yes, if you're a corporation or need a tax break. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by observer on November 07, 2001 at 13:43:30 PT

Unjust Powers
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. -- U.S. Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776QED: This unelected bureaucrat's attempts to go against the people of Oregon's wishes are unjust.No man is good enough to govern another man without that other's consent. - Abraham Lincoln
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by kaptinemo on November 07, 2001 at 13:26:43 PT:

Something you all might be interested in
Ashcroft Attacks Oregon's Suicide Law of assisted suicide, including anti-abortion organizations and some religious groups, hailed Ashcroft's action. Some said it would protect the elderly and infirm in Oregon from pressure to take their own lives. "This is a carefully crafted ruling that reassures doctors about their ability to prescribe federally controlled drugs to relieve pain while ensuring that the federal government does not facilitate assisted suicide," said Burke Balch, director of medical ethics at the National Right to Life Committee. Balch said the only doctors who will face increased scrutiny are those who fill out state paperwork admitting that they have participated in an assisted suicide. "It's not like the DEA is going in anywhere, trying to second-guess doctors," (Emphasis mine - k.) Balch said. Interesting choice of words...seeing that that is exactly what the DEA is doing in regards to the MMJ issue: inserting itself into the doctor/patient relationship as if it were a fully qualified medical ptactioner. And informing the original doctor that he is less qualified than the DEA in how to utilize medications.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by null on November 07, 2001 at 13:21:31 PT

comment #1
kaptinemo: interesting comments. Thanks for the EO numbers. I had not heard that before. It certainly warrants further reading. Reminds me of a book I once read. I think it was called 1984...Schmeff: "Ashcroft's views are such that the voters of his home state, Missouri, felt that they would be better represented by a dead man! " I also did not know this! I laughed an unamused chuckle of irony over this fact.Jose: I agree that violence won't help the cause. I can understand how frustrated people feel though. In light of the VOLUMES of scientific evidence proving marijuana an extremely benign substance (Evidence that goes back to the inception of the drug war by Nixon) one can not help but have conspiratorial suspicions from time to time. Any logical person that examines the FACTS arrives at the same conclusion: Marijuana should be legal. Period. Given the fact that it was first made illegal for political reasons and for the econimic benifit of DuPont (via familial nepotism) the word conspiracy certainly does apply. While use of the word may not aid the cause of legalisation, a conspiracy is exactly what the criminalization of marijuana was and is. Check out: 
FACTS about marijuana
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by kaptinemo on November 07, 2001 at 13:03:56 PT:

"Conspiracy" theories?
Then let me ask this: was it not a conspiracy to lie to the American people when the laws concerning cannabis were first drafted? Is it not now a conspiracy on the part of the Federal government to defraud the voters of California of their sovereign franchise as citizens by nullifying their vote with their latest actions? People acting in collusion for a shared goal is the most benign definition of conspiracy that I can think of; Ashcroft and Goons are definitely doing that.At the risk of going on a rant, we Americans hate the idea of conspiracy. Why? Because we like to think we are the masters of our own destiny. That 'rugged individualism' BS. When the sad fact is that things are indeed run from behind the scenes. And 9 times out of 10 negatively affecting our lives, without our knowledge or consent. Because if enough people did learn of it, we'd be inclined to stop it. Which puts a major crimp in the style of those who want those actions to yake our expense."Conspiracy"? I call it as I see it. And what I see is just that. Bush, Ashcroft, Souder, Ose, and all those allied with them are conspiring to strip the individual States of their last vestiges of sovereignty under the guise of "United We Stand!" and other patriotic bilge for the masses. Like pickpockets at a parade, they are singing the National Anthem while holding one hand over their hearts...while the other is lifting your wallet from behind. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by Jose Melendez on November 07, 2001 at 11:40:33 PT:

"friendly" fire?
I do not think it is constructive to fight the drug war by suggesting conspiracy theories or threatening violence. just my humble opinion...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by schmeff on November 07, 2001 at 11:04:03 PT

Brief background on Ashcroft
Ashcroft's views are such that the voters of his home state, Missouri, felt that they would be better represented by a dead man! Ashcroft's current job as head of the inJustice Department was obtained through appointment by King ("Ah cain't even pernounce 'newkewlar'" George, who himself was appointed to his post as Commander In Thief. Ashcroft, along with fellow classmates Bush and Republican congressman Bob Barr of Georgia, is a graduate of the Joseph Stalin Institute of Demokracy. Motto: Your Vote Counts!....Nyet!As Ashcroft attempts to educate us on the issue of state's rights, I would like to invite him to the friendly State of Oregon. I'm sure I speak fore many of my fellow citizens here when I remark that we would like to educate him on the subject of "friendly fire."
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by kaptinemo on November 07, 2001 at 10:58:29 PT:

End game
It's no accident that this is happening now, of all times.The Feds are finally moving to make all State government obsolete. They've been whittling away at it for years, piecemeal. But in some cases, such as California and Oregon, they've been able to roll back Federal encroachments into our lives with some, albeit small, successes. But the "Empire Strikes Back"; and (did anyone here honestly believe Ashcroft or Bush when they said they were 'supportive' of State's Rights"?) and these attacks upon the sick and dying are but a precursor to what's coming for the rest of us. Make no mistake, every American will be negatively affected by the decisions made by Ashcroft and Company.What Klinton failed to achieve with his Executive Order 13083 in 'peacetime' - effectively implementing EO 11490 and eliminating State government and the creation of 10 Federal 'Regions' to be administered by Federal bureaucrats - Bush is now striving to complete during 'war'. Classic tactics of the would-be tyrant; stir up trouble with our planetary neighbors, get them pissed enough to take a shot at you, and then grab power at home under the cloak of a 'national emergency'. Sadly, this works almost 100% of the time.
[ Post Comment ]

  Post Comment