Supreme Court/medical marijuana
 

What does everybody think? I think it should legal and up to the States. Nothing this heinous administration does suprises me anymore though. :distress:

Supreme Court allows prosecution of medical marijuana


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Supreme Court Monday ruled doctors can be blocked from prescribing marijuana for patients suffering from pain caused by cancer or other serious illnesses.

In a 6-3 vote, the justices ruled the Bush administration can block the backyard cultivation of pot for personal use, because such use has broader social and financial implications.

The rest is here.http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/06/sc...ana/index.html

With all due respect, the prior admin. was hardly a friend of medical MJ use? and few if any current D's are really for it in the sense that they will actually vote for it :shrug:

This seems cruel. Legalize it. What a waste of the DEA's time.

I concur. A little perspective, people? Ha, but why would I expect that? :rolleyes:

I will always say pot shoulf be legal for all uses. It is far safer from a medical perspective than alcohol, etc. One big prob. is people can grow it in their backyard and the Fed's and State would have a hard time taxing it. For example, if the various govt.'s did not have the various cig. and booze taxes, they could not operate at all. So, they are not about to cut into that by legalizing pot in any way. Moreover, the far right and for that matter most of the middle cannot stand the idea of people being stoned and not in church despite the fact that I think most of them do that anyway. Do as I say not as I do :rolleyes: Finally, the drug companies would NEVER allow it as they alone want to sell it or the drugs made to emulate it.

Yet another reason why I'll NEVER understand the liberal love out there for Clinton. It boggles my mind.

That is true. The D's need to get a backbone and soon. This Administration make me want to smoke a joint just to forget they are in office though. How about medical Marijuana for surviving the Bush Administration?

I know. I think Rove saw that he could label Clinton a liberal and then use the dislike of Clinton to put Clinton's rather to the right of centrist positions to redefine the word liberal to there, thus making the far far right seem just plain ole conservative.

Interestingly, Thomas and Renquist dissented from this opinion - I do not have a copy of it, but would love to hear what they say. My bet is some state's rights arguement, which is RANK hypocrisy coming from them.

He was in no way perfect and not one of my favorites. Our country was sure as hell a lot better off when he was in office though.

:laugh: now THAT's an idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

To be honest, I don't even think many liberals really like Clinton. I get the vibe that they say they do because they know how hated he is by the right and they like pissing them off by professing their love for him. His policies left a lot to be desired, especially in his second term where he essentially became a Republican (obviously not as loony, but conservative nonetheless.).

I agree. AND - I think people look at Clinton and then W and then think, Clinton was a comparative Godsend. Thus, politics :cool:

Tell that to the people on welfare during his administration's reign. Clinton was all charm, but when it came to action, he had people thinking that he delivered more than he did. Some of his policies were downright despicable.

Hillary won't get my vote if she runs and I'll happily warn people against her.

I Beg To Differ
 

I voted for it when it came up for a vote (BOTH TIMES!)...and Im a DEM :shrug: and the weird thing is, I dont even smoke it!

Too bad Clinton was so adamantly opposed to it. His administration wanted doctors who even recommended it, not prescribed it, to have their licenses revoked and possibly serve jail time.