GOP Leaders Press Ehrlich To Veto Medical Marijuana

Baltimore Sun ^ | April 4, 2003 | Tim Craig

[Lexington Green]

Sickening. Shall we post the National Guard at all cancer wards?

[vin-one]

will he or won't he,, that is the question....

this state is in so much debt, and the slot machine movement, got slammed by the dems.
he may take a cash bribe from the fed's
wait and see what's next.

[rb22982]

From the party that supports states rights.

[MrLeRoy]

"I have always taken pride in my independent streak," Ehrlich said. "I respect those guys. They have a legitimate point of view, but we have a point of view too. ... I can take some pressure."

Hang tough against the Lie Brigade, governor!

"We stand in the city that I believe has suffered more from drug abuse and addiction than any city in the United States," Walters said while attending a drug-prevention conference downtown. "It is an outrage that, in this state, the legalizers would come here to try to put additional people in harm's way."

Marijuana is less addictive than alcohol---or even caffeine.

If Maryland doesn't wait, Walters said, it could face lawsuits from those injured by marijuana, such as victims of car accidents caused by users of the drug.

Obvious rubbish---not even distillers have been successfully sued for DUI accidents, much less the makers of incapacitating medicines.

[Zevonismymuse]

GOP Leaders Press Ehrlich To Veto Medical Marijuana

Shame on them. This sort of thing is the reason I must hold my nose every time I pull the lever to vote Republican.

[bucephalus]

"Shame on them. This sort of thing is the reason I must hold my nose every time I pull the lever to vote Republican."

You're absolutely right. The anit-pot/pro-pain policy is a disgrace and so is the attack on states' rights.

[MrLeRoy]

What is this crap with republicans and cannabis?

On the cannabis issue, the GOP has been hijacked by extremists---much like the Dems have been hijacked by extremists on many issues. Political success does not lie that way.

[Dane]

Uh William you are not allowed to post whole articles from the Baltimore Sun, per the LA Times/Wash Post settlement.

Another paper is the Chicago Tribune.

[rhombus]

hat is this crap with republicans and cannabis? On the cannabis issue, the GOP has been hijacked by extremists---much like the Dems have been hijacked by extremists on many issues. Political success does not lie that way.

Agreed. The fear of cannabis bugs me to no end. But the Dems are no better. The one thing I thought we'd get from Bill Clinton he didn't bother to do. Good think I never voted for him.

[William Terrell]

Ok, if verified by deletion, noted. If so, I need a reference to a list of banned news sources.

[MrLeRoy]

the Dems are no better.

A letter to the editor I sent last October:

The ballot that voters will use in next month’s election will list only Republican and Democratic candidates for many public offices. Several other races, however, will offer voters the opportunity to choose a “third-party” candidate. These candidates, although sometimes propelled by nothing more than vanity, more typically campaign as the only genuine alternative to major-party contestants who have few meaningful differences between them.

Many voters agree about the deficiencies of the Republican and Democratic offerings, but nonetheless reject the idea of choosing a third-party candidate as “throwing away their vote.” A third-party vote, in this view, is wasted on a challenger who has no realistic chance of winning---while that vote is denied to the “lesser of two evils” major-party contender, thus making likelier the victory of the least-favored candidate. This view is seriously misguided.

In voting districts that, at their smallest, include tens of thousands of voters, statistics dictate that it is extremely unlikely for any race to be decided by a single vote (and for a statewide race, this possibility can be completely ignored). So each voter must realize that their vote will not by itself tip the scales.

A common response to this point is, “What if everybody voted that way?” The implication of that question is that third-party voting can, in the aggregate, swing the election to the least-favored candidate. However, the question has a straightforward, and obvious, answer. In these times of increasing dissatisfaction with political “business as usual,” if everybody voted for the candidate whose platform they most believed in, the stranglehold of the major parties would be broken and the victory of third-party challengers would become a real possibility---as it became reality in Minnesota when Jesse Ventura was elected governor.

Is this a likely outcome in the short term? Perhaps not. But until that day comes, the only practical significance of one’s vote is to send a message---to the eventual winner, to that candidate’s party, and to all those who may seek that office in the future. What message do you want to send?

[Dane]

Ok, if verified by deletion, noted. If so, I need a reference to a list of banned news sources.

Related Publications in the LAT/WP vs Free Republic Settlement Agreement

[Hodar]

...Republicans are heavily pressuring Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. to veto a proposal that would drastically reduce penalties for terminally ill patients who smoke marijuana to ease pain.

Damn straight. It's not enough that these people are dying, and are in pain. We need to incarcerate them, and take their money too. That will teach them. < /sarcasm>

Once again, never in the history of human civilization has the policy of prohibition been effective. In this case, it appears the reluctance to aid and assist with pain management is based in superstition, and obstination than any resembelance of fact. Using this same logic, let's remove Morphine and the entire family of Opiates from the MD's pain management arsinal, as these may also be addictive, and 'bad people' use them.

[MrLeRoy]

Using this same logic, let's remove Morphine and the entire family of Opiates from the MD's pain management arsinal, as these may also be addictive, and 'bad people' use them.

The only difference is that the opiates are a product of Big Pharmaceuticals, while marijuana is a plant. Hmmmm ....

[eno_]

There are three kinds of Republican Drug Warriors:

1. The True Believers. We have at least one on FR: a cop who also thinks oral sex is a crime against nature. Yup, a real live Taliban Republican.

2. Gravy Train Riders. People with jobs and grants paid for by the Drug War.

3. Bob Dole not-a-dime's-worth-of-difference Republicans who live only for the chance to run the same unconstitutional big-government boondoggles as the Democrats. They don't have a position, but neither will they rock the boat.

None of these types of pseudo-Conservatives believes in limited government. None will challenge the legitimacy of other big-government programs. None will ever suggest we have even one too many JBTs on the payroll.

Thankfully most of these guys are on the downhill side of the age curve. Most Republicans that are under 60, don't drive a Buick, don't wear Sanz-a-Belt slacks, etc. also don't buy into the Drug War.

[MrLeRoy]

a cop who also thinks oral sex is a crime against nature.

Even the straight kind?

[eno_]

Yeah. It's all sodomy to him.

That's just what you need, a heavily armed Bible-thumping cop who's never had a hummer.

[jmc813]

WOD Ping