cannabisnews.com: Tokin Up
Tokin Up
Posted by CN Staff on May 06, 2005 at 08:44:53 PT
By Mary Ann Akers, Roll Call Staff
Source: Roll Call
Washington, D.C. -- Capitol Police had to look the other way while Irvin Rosenfeld lit up a fat doobie outside the Cannon House Office Building on Wednesday. Rosenfeld is one of seven patients in the United States who is legally exempt from federal law prohibiting possession of controlled substances and, therefore, can toke up just about anytime, anywhere.Rosenfeld, who has a debilitating bone condition, joined television talk show host Montel Williams, who has multiple sclerosis, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) and other Members at a news conference to introduce the States Rights to Medical Marijuana Act.
The event was coordinated by the Marijuana Policy Project. Bruce Mirken, a spokesman for MPP, said none of the police officers bothered Rosenfeld while he smoked his joint. (Among other things, the proposed legislation would protect medical marijuana patients from arrest.) But Rohrabacher wasn't taking any chances. He didn't want any of his fingerprints on the pot. He even refused to hold a can of prescription marijuana cigarettes for a photo op. "I can't accept a gift that may be worth more than $50," he explained dryly to HOH. Source: Roll Call (DC) Author: Mary Ann Akers, Roll Call Staff Published: May 5, 2005Copyright: 2005 Roll Call Inc. Contact: letters rollcall.com Website: http://www.rollcall.com/ Related Articles & Web Site:Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/Marijuana Advocates Play It Straight in D.C.http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20629.shtmlMedical Pot Bill Shields 10 Stateshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20628.shtmlMedical Marijuana Advocates Implore Congress http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20627.shtmlTalk Show Host Pleads Medical Pot Casehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20626.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help
Comment #11 posted by FoM on May 07, 2005 at 22:55:04 PT
afterburner
Thanks!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #10 posted by afterburner on May 07, 2005 at 22:51:46 PT
FoM, Taylor121 & BGreen
I have no problem today loading MPP's website. Of course, I am communicating from the Great White North, on the legal medical cannabis side of the Medicine Line.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #9 posted by FoM on May 07, 2005 at 22:26:32 PT
afterburner
You have an isp and Taylor and BGreen are having trouble loading MPP's web site and they have an isp. Would you check for them since MPP loads for me but I have a satellite connection. Thanks.PS: I agree totally with Dr. Weil on herbs versus drugs.http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread20641.shtml#16
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #8 posted by afterburner on May 07, 2005 at 22:20:11 PT
cannabliss
"Legalize Ketchup! Outlaw Tomatoes!"Dr. Weil has the opposite viewpoint to this article too. He says that natural plants are preferable to distilled alkaloids because the former release active ingredients gradually whereas the latter overwhelm the body with a sudden massive dose that destabilizes the organic systems of the body.Andy Weil for Surgeon General (has a bad ring to it: biased toward surgery and against holistic solutions). Andy Weil for Drug Czar (another sour note, as previously discussed, a potentate named after a dead Russian monarch of the past and inheriting the mantle of leadership from Julius Caesar, the conqueror of free people and persecutor of Christians). How about Andy Weil for Secretary of Medicine or Secretary of Health?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #7 posted by cannabliss on May 07, 2005 at 11:40:39 PT
Public Policy Distilled
"The best public policy," he explains, "is to get the active ingredient out, have a good delivery method, and provide it as we do any other drug, with standardization and good quality control."Legalize Ketchup! Outlaw Tomatoes!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #6 posted by Max Flowers on May 07, 2005 at 10:07:41 PT
Blatant disinformation war
That's what it's coming down to now. Blatant lies, a war of disinformation. Prohibitionists have now resorted to shouting ridiculous lies loudly and often, in a futile effort to hold ground against the TSUNAMI OF TRUTH which they find themselves neck deep in, and it's rising.Peter Sprigg, Family Research Council's senior director of policy studies, notes that marijuana, even for medical purposes, creates health problems.Oh he "notes", does he? "Notes" must now be a synonym for "lies" or "fabricates". As harmful as tobacco, eh? Show me the bodies, you liar! I can show you the bodies of tobacco users, there are millions. You know the statistics. Deaths from cannabis yearly in the US: ZERO
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #5 posted by mayan on May 06, 2005 at 16:53:57 PT
The Other Side
They are making livings off of lies and other people's misery. What a sad bunch. If they were so moral they would be concerned with the truth.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #4 posted by Jose Melendez on May 06, 2005 at 14:22:58 PT
MacGinnis' choice of words in comment #1 . . .
. . . sounded familiar:"allowing anyone to do anything they want"from: http://www.answers.com/freedom&r=67free·dom1. The condition of being free of restraints. 2. Liberty of the person from slavery, detention, or oppression.
3 a. Political independence. b. Exemption from the arbitrary exercise of authority in the performance of a specific action; civil liberty: "freedom of assembly."
4. Exemption from an unpleasant or onerous condition: "freedom from want."
5. The capacity to exercise choice; free will: "We have the freedom to do as we please all afternoon."
6. Ease or facility of movement: "loose sports clothing, giving the wearer freedom."
7. Frankness or boldness; lack of modesty or reserve: "the new freedom in movies and novels." 8 a. The right to unrestricted use; full access: "was given the freedom of their research facilities." b. The right of enjoying all of the privileges of membership or citizenship: "the freedom of the city."
9. A right or the power to engage in certain actions without control or interference: "the seductive freedoms and excesses of the picaresque form" (John W. Aldridge).[Middle English "fredom", from Old English {freŻodoŻm: (snipped)SYNONYMS: "freedom", "liberty, "license. " These nouns refer to the power to act, speak, or think without externally imposed restraints. "Freedom" is the most general term: "In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom to the free" (Abraham Lincoln). "Liberty" stresses the power of free choice: "liberty, perfect liberty, to think, feel, do just as one pleases" (William Hazlitt). "License" sometimes denotes deliberate deviation from normally applicable rules or practices to achieve a desired effect: "poetic license." Frequently, though, it denotes undue freedom: "the intolerable license with which the newspapers break . . . the rules of decorum" (Edmund Burke). - - -
Imagine "allowing anyone to do anything they want". Next thing ya know they'll be demanding democracy . . . and (God forbid) truth or even "justice" . . ..
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #3 posted by runderwo on May 06, 2005 at 14:02:38 PT
yawn
The "other side" is really good at preying on misconceptions. I recall at least four studies which show that smoked cannabis does not cause cancer, emphysema, COPD, etc. And THC does not have the deleterious effects on the circulatory system that nicotine does. Where are all the dead/dying pot smokers? And even if that were true, they are careful not to mention alternative delivery methods such as inhalers.The Christian Medical Ass. guy is clueless as well. There is no need for safety approval because no one has ever died due to marijuana use or even overdose. If people want a pure form of the "drug", they are welcome to buy it in the form of Sativex or whatever. But who are you protecting by putting people in jail for using the raw plant? Requiring regulatory approval is nothing more than a convenient excuse. The convenience comes from the history of obstruction when it comes to cannabis research - this guy knows full well that if a medical cannabis bill were subject to federal regulatory approval, that the regulatory approval would never arrive and the bill would be moot.And yeah, a Bush drug policy advisor is a great source of commentary on positive aspects of cannabis.I'm not too concerned about articles like this as long as all of us know how to thoroughly refute them if we are ever called on in a discussion. There is no substance and only groupthink here. They can pat themselves on the back and self-congratulate all they want, but the science and the common sense is with us.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #2 posted by JustGetNby on May 06, 2005 at 13:34:23 PT
The Pendulam/Tide
Yin/Yang, dark/light Yada Yada.......... The tide is coming in, they cannot stop it. They will rage, they will commit atrocities, they will do all that we allow them to do to us, but they cannot stop the tide.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #1 posted by FoM on May 06, 2005 at 13:27:17 PT
The Other Sides Opinion
Congressman Calls for Medicinal Pot LegalizationBy Bill Wilson, Washington, D.C. CorrespondentMay 6, 2005Marijuana legislation would exempt doctors who prescribe it.Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass. introduced legislation to protect doctors from federal prosecution if they recommend or prescribe marijuana. Peter Sprigg, Family Research Council's senior director of policy studies, notes that marijuana, even for medical purposes, creates health problems. "Smoking marijuana has all of the same negative health effects," he said, "as smoking tobacco and then some."Dr. David Stevens, executive director of the Christian Medical Association, says marijuana should go through the same safety approvals as any other drug."The best public policy," he explains, "is to get the active ingredient out, have a good delivery method, and provide it as we do any other drug, with standardization and good quality control."National drug policy expert Bob Maginnis called the marijuana legislation a "cloud of smoke" to cover up what Frank and others are really after: "Throwing the books out regarding illicit drugs and allowing anyone to do anything they want."Similar legislation has been introduced beforeand failed. This time around it has more than 40 sponsors, but will likely be voted down again. Copyright: 2005 Focus on the Familyhttp://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0036468.cfm
[ Post Comment ]
Post Comment