Politics Of Deception And Hypocrisy

[Ganjarden]

Hello Folks, this morning I was listening to a local radio show, the Frank Beckmann on WJR NEWS AM 760

Two individuals were on air discussing the Michigan Proposal 1 which is about legalizing Medical Marijuana in our state.

Dianne Byrum is an advocate for the passage of Proposal 1 and Bill Schuette is opposed to passage of Proposal 1

The Michigan Coalition for Compassionate Care (MCCC) is a grassroots organization devoted to passing Proposal 1, the medical marijuana initiative on the November 2008 ballot. Proposal 1 will protect seriously ill Michiganders suffering from illnesses like cancer, HIV/AIDS, and multiple sclerosis from the threat of arrest and jail for simply trying to alleviate their pain.

During the conversation, Bill Schuette made the age old claim that Marijuana use is a Gateway drug which leads to use of much harder drug use. Dianne Byrum, who has never smoked Marijuana asked Bill Schuette if he had ever smoked Marijuana. He responded YES, when he was in High School. He graduated in 1972 which places him in High School during 1968-1972, the height of the Youth movement in America.

She then commented that his previous use didn't appear to lead him to using hard drugs as he suggests with his argument that marijuana is a Gateway drug.

Bill Schuette became furious at the revealing of his obvious hypocrisy and said the conversation shouldn't be about him but, about what danger this Proposal 1 presents to the youth of Michigan.

We know that ridiculous claims have always been made by opponents of legalization of Marijuana. What bothers me is not that some people are opposed to this well-written Proposal but, that they can not conduct a discussion on the merits of their opposition. They feel they must spread falsehood and rumors in an effort to defeat this Proposal.

Before I continue, I would like to present the actual language which Michagan voters will be presented with. Please refer back to this as this conversation progresses.

STATE PROPOSAL - 08-1

A LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVE TO PERMIT THE USE AND CULTIVATION OF MARIJUANA FOR SPECIFIED MEDICAL CONDITIONS:

The proposed law would:

Permit physician approved use of marijuana by registered patients with debilitating medical conditions including cancer, glaucoma, HIV, AIDS, hepatitis C, MS and other conditions as may be approved by the Department of Community Health.

Permit registered individuals to grow limited amounts of marijuana for qualifying patients in an enclosed, locked facility.

Require Department of Community Health to establish an identification card system for patients qualified to use marijuana and individuals qualified to grow marijuana.

Permit registered and unregistered patients and primary caregivers to assert medical reasons for using marijuana as a defense to any prosecution involving marijuana.

Should this proposal be adopted? YES □ NO □

~@~

Medical Marijuana In The News

When Dr. George Wagoner, a retired obstetrician/gynecologist from Manistee, saw the suffering his wife of 51 years was enduring from her battle with ovarian cancer last year, he turned to marijuana to ease her pain. "During her chemotherapy she experienced intense nausea, and conventional anti-nausea drugs didn't help much. One drug cost $46.20 a pill and didn't help," said Dr. Wagoner. "Another made her hallucinate, so she refused to take it. Basically, pharmaceutical drugs were ineffective and the marijuana -- just a very small dose -- was most effective."

Dr. Wagoner and his wife are among many who have taken the path of using marijuana for medical purposes. However, in Michigan, they are breaking the law. On November 4, Ballot Proposal 1 will give Michigan voters the opportunity to legalize the use of marijuana for medical purposes. Currently, 12 other states have laws allowing the use of medical marijuana.

The above article goes on to describe the issues being brought up by the opposition.

One of the criticisms launched by those that oppose the legalization of medical marijuana is that it is simply just a step in the process for the outright legalization of marijuana.

Those in opposition also point to a pharmaceutical drug, Marinol, that accomplishes the same result. They point to the fact that Marinol is prescribed in doses, whereas smoking marijuana is not a controlled dose.

The Citizens Protecting Michigan's Kids point to their concerns if the proposal passes:

Allow use of marijuana without a doctor's prescription.

Allow a person arrested on any marijuana offense to use a "medical marijuana" defense in court.

Allow a flood of lawsuits over things such as whether doctors and hospitals must allow patients to smoke marijuana in a doctor's office or hospital room, despite every other law banning smoking.

Allow the opening of pot shops and smoking clubs in neighborhood strip malls, like has happened in California under a similar proposal.

Again, I ask you to refer to the Legislation above and compare it's language to the outragious claims being promoted by the opposition.

"I am not sure they have read the legislation, but everything they are suggesting has been addressed and they are taking half truths to scare the public,"

The use of medical marijuana under the proposed legislation would be only allowed for certain medical conditions and patients would have to receive authorization from their doctor to grow and smoke marijuana for their condition. The conditions covered, as well as some of the concerns from the opposition, are detailed in the legislation including the stiff penalties for violating marijuana laws.

Will pot be OK in workplace? ~ Foes say Prop 1 may allow use

LANSING - Newly organized opponents to Michigan's medical marijuana ballot proposal are raising red flags about the proposal, citing negative workplace implications if the measure passes.

A memo issued last week says the proposed law permits marijuana use in the workplace and warns of potential consequences such as increased employer liability and the inability to discipline employees who use marijuana in accordance with the act's medical treatment purposes.

But backers of Proposal 1 say the law clearly states that it does not require an employer to accommodate the ingestion of marijuana in the workplace or to accommodate any employee who is working under the influence of the drug.

"We don't believe it has any workplace impact," said Dianne Byrum, spokeswoman for the Michigan Coalition for Compassionate Care and partner at Byrum & Fisk Advocacy Communications in East Lansing.

PAID FOR WITH REGULATED FUNDS BY CITIZENS PROTECTING MICHIGAN'S KIDS

Police chief critical of marijuana measure

Howell Police Chief George Basar, president of the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police, said Proposal 1 would make it easy for people to grow and use marijuana, and the lack of regulations would lead to more people, including children, using the drug.

He said the message is, "If you feel bad, let's sit around and smoke marijuana and get high."

Basar said there are associations of doctors, law enforcement and prosecuting attorneys opposed to this ballot issue.

He also said this measure is really aimed at a more sweeping change.

"This is the nose under the tent to the general legalization of marijuana," Basar said.

Supporters of the measure said that's not true.

Former state lawmaker Dianne Byrum, spokeswoman for the Michigan Coalition for Compassionate Care, said a community-based effort pushed for the statewide referendum to provide an option for patients who are experiencing pain due to disease or illness.

She said legalization is not the goal. She said other states have approved similar measures allowing for medical use of marijuana, and those states have not legalized marijuana.

Byrum said she met with numerous law enforcement officials this year to explain the ballot question, and she said many called the proposal "well-written." She said these officials knew about the issue for seven months and questioned why they would suddenly organize a "campaign of misinformation and rhetoric" to oppose the proposal.

Pot bill would bring chaos to Michigan

California shows why medical marijuana is dangerous
By Bill Schuette and Daniel Michael - October 10, 2008

A decade ago, voters in California approved a proposal to legalize marijuana smoking for so-called "medical" purposes. Today, even the proposal's most vocal supporters admit the California law has resulted in "chaos," "pot dealers in storefronts" and millions of dollars being dumped "into the criminal black market."

Proposal 1 on the Nov. 4 ballot in Michigan is just like the California law. While its stated intent, to help people in serious pain, is well meaning, Proposal 1's vague language, careless loopholes and dangerous consequences place Michigan communities and kids at risk. Michigan voters should reject it.

For doctors and hospitals, those on the front lines of medical care, Proposal 1 is "bad medicine." For one thing, Proposal 1 doesn't require a prescription.

Judge Bill Schuette is a member of the Michigan Court of Appeals. Dr. Daniel Michael is a Detroit neurosurgeon and speaker of the Michigan State Medical Society's House of Delegates.

OK, I realize it's a lot of reading but, I hope you have taken the time to review all the misinformation and rhetoric, deception and hypocrisy being perpetrated by those opposed to passage of Proposal 1.

Now, my simply presenting this information might be useful to a few readers of this article but, my hope is that you will take the information presented here and spread it around to others who care about this issue. We must combat this effort, each one of us so that their lies do not take root and serve to defeat this noble and compassionate legislation. Please send this article to anyone and everyone you know who can have an impact upon getting the word out on these tactics.

Detroit Free Press, Detroit News, Lansing State Journal, Battle Creek Enquirer, Jackson City Patriot, and Detroit Metro Times Endorse Proposal 1

This is an issue of simple compassion and common sense, and is overwhelmingly supported by residents across the state - 67%, according to a September 2008 poll. And in each of five citywide medical marijuana votes - in Flint in 2007, Traverse City and Ferndale in 2005, and Ann Arbor and Detroit in 2004 - medical marijuana won in a landslide. To get involved today, please visit our Take Action page

Most importantly, please vote Yes on Proposal 1 on November 4, and encourage everyone you know to do the same!

~@~

In the spirit of full disclosure, I am a patient who will benefit from passage of Proposal 1. Yesterday I had to go to the Social Security office and take a number. I spent over 5 hours at the office and I had to make the decision not to take the synthetic morphine because I had to drive myself. That meant I spent over 8 hours in pain because I have no alternative. See I can't handle doing much of anything when I'm drugged up on the pain medication I'm given. When I do take the pain medication I'm given, the most I can do is sit in a chair and nod out off and on throughout the day. If I want to go grocery shopping, I have to skip taking my medication because I wouldn't be able to walk around the store.

Medical marijuana is not a miracle drug that is going to solve all our problems and, of course there are other drugs which patients will need to take but, mandating patients to taking only those drugs that are profitable to the Pharmacuticle Industry and the stock portfolio the doctors profit from isn't the answer.

This legislation is well-written and would allow me or, if needed, a caregiver I legally designate to grow my own Marijuana for my personal use. That means I won't be giving criminal enterprises money.

Please read the Legislation and do all you can to get the word out to vote YES on Proposal 1.


News Hawk- Ganjarden 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: Gather
Author: Richard Owl Mirror
Contact: Gather
Copyright: 2008 Gather Inc.
Website: Politics Of Deception And Hypocrisy Has Become A "Campaign Of Misinformation And Rhetoric"

 

[Keith Lake]

There appears to be a clear case of panic by the opposition.

They are throwing everything including the kitchen sink against the wall - hoping something will stick.

If only we had an informed electorate these tactics would be laughed at.

Regardless, the support for this proposition seems to be so far ahead that even panic stricted chicken littles won't be able to stop justice

 

[wordsworm]

You know, the fundamental good nature of the opponents of the initiative is overlooked too easily. We look at their reasons - flawed as they are - and believe that they're just doing it for inconceivable reasons or for selfish reasons. However, I don't feel that's the case. Those people got their jobs, for the most part, because they believed in something: rule of law. They also believe in the 'evils' of drugs and that America would be much better off without them, and to that end they are doing their part.

First off, a lot of the propaganda that they're spewing has been around for decades. Is it not possible that they believe what they say?

When that guy admitted to taking some MJ years back, and then was asked if he'd gotten into harder drugs, in his mind he could look at it as a close call to losing everything he's built up over his lifetime.

Laughing at these people, calling them liars and hypocrites isn't helping us. To be frank, the argument that the legalization of marijuana as medication as a first step towards complete legalization isn't so far fetched. Unless the entire participants of these 'debates,' or more likely catcalling, at the 420 forum are all people who are suffering from medical ailments which the blessed herb will help, then the rest of us are indeed hoping that full legalization for any adult is the next step. So, I agree with their argument that medical marijuana is just the first step in the right direction of complete legalization. What the proponents of this measure dare not say is, "What's wrong with that?"

Should their fear be realized, and 5-10 years from now we see full legalization efforts making their rounds state-by-state, these same people will say the next thing is the effort to legalize the harder drugs. Maybe I'm alone at 420 in saying this, but "What's wrong with that?" What is this notion of freedom really mean, after all?

Ok, the one thing I learned from the idiot American lit prof I had years ago was that freedom comes in two different flavors: there's freedom to ___, and freedom from ____. I believe that freedom from ____ is more important and should take precedence over freedom to ____. ie, we should be free from murderers rather than be free to murder. We should be free from bad drivers who are dangerous rather than be free to drive dangerously. In the case of drugs, we do have to examine which freedoms from need to be protected over those of the freedom to. However, I cannot help but think that some freedoms to do drugs - whatever drugs we wish to use (including medications - why should doctors be able to extort money from patients when the patients already know what drugs they need? Sure mistakes would be made, but doctors get away with making mistakes all the time.) Mind altering or not, my mind should be my own property to do with as I see fit - to expand it with L$D or shr00ms, or what have you. These rights, freedoms if you will, could be carefully constructed in laws in such a way as to give rights to those of use who are tired of persecution, while keeping the freedom from in tact.

A simplistic phrase like "Chicken littles won't be able to stop justice" serves no purpose, and seems to underestimate the complexity of the word 'justice.' Nonetheless, it is fear that these people have. Is it entirely selfish? Surely there are some that realize that the legalization of drugs - even if it were only the sacred herb alone itself - is a threat to employment. It's a threat to the employment of the justice workers. It's a threat to the guards and wardens. It's a threat to lawyers who make money from defending and prosecuting, not to mention the judges and all of the support staff. It threatens the jobs of police, CIA, and the profits of pharmaceuticals. On the other hand, it promises to alleviate the tax-load that western nations must bear to support this justice system. It promises to give back votes to millions of black and Latino Americans. It would allow them to use the sacred herb to help them fight the depression that they must face for being stuck in the injustice system without fear of persecution. Furthermore, it would decimate the profits that criminal organizations (including the CIA) reap from these laws which strip us of our freedom, resulting in a much, much safer America, giving back the right to many Americans the freedoms to in many other facets - the freedom to leave the door unlocked because drugs are easily got to without having to resort to crime to get the money. The freedom to walk down any street in Chicago because white color white men are no longer persecuting minorities for using a herb which eases their depression in part caused by being forced to become criminals to succeed in their lives.

Anyways, that's enough pointless ranting for now.

 

[Keith Lake]

A simplistic phrase like "Chicken littles won't be able to stop justice" serves no purpose, and seems to underestimate the complexity of the word 'justice.'

Brother Wordsworm, I agree we should be discussing and debating the issue on the merits of the argument. The term Chicken Little was meant to serve as an analogy albeit an intentionally disparaging one.

In my read of the article, the take away was that the opposition was spreading panic, by the stock false claims we are all so familiar with.

I believe their efforts will ultimately fail.

This was essentially the point of the Chicken Little fable. FYI - The Chicken Little Award, is a dubious achievement award given by the National Anxiety Center to people and organizations that they consider to be engaged in deliberately false, media-driven scare campaigns.

By justice, I of course mean halting the ongoing success that the prohibitionist has achieved in suppressing we plant loving people.

From my standpoint it's hard to argue that victimless crimes are truly crimes. If this is so, I also find it hard to argue that continuous infringement of our rights is just. [just/justice]

Nonetheless, it is fear that these people have. Is it entirely selfish? Surely there are some that realize that the legalization of drugs - even if it were only the sacred herb alone itself - is a threat to employment. It's a threat to the employment of the justice workers. It's a threat to the guards and wardens. It's a threat to lawyers who make money from defending and prosecuting, not to mention the judges and all of the support staff. It threatens the jobs of police, CIA, and the profits of pharmaceuticals.

From my stance [Libertarian] the motives of the prohibitionists are irrelevant to me - it's their actions that matter.

I do wish threatened employment for the ONDCP, Drug Czar, countless SWAT teams, and the portion of the population employed by the criminal justice system that persecutes us.

Don't you?

I of course know we need to understand the motives to ensure we select the best counter-measure strategy, but I don't feel that empathizing with those in the wrong is primarily appropriate.

First, they are wrong and we must fight back against them, second we can care how they feel about our resistance to them and the corresponding threat to their employment.

My point here is that the [insert your most despised profession i.e. Drug Czar] also have families to feed and wish to keep their jobs, but I'd sure support shutting them down if it were possible.

Wouldn't you?

With respect
Soniq420

 

[wordsworm]

"
In my read of the article, the take away was that the opposition was spreading panic, by the stock false claims we are all so familiar with.
"

Yes, that was what I understood as well. My emphasis was to view these people as human - that they have reasons for believing and acting as they do.

"
I do wish threatened employment for the ONDCP, Drug Czar, countless SWAT teams, and the portion of the population employed by the criminal justice system that persecutes us.
"

I would like nothing better than to see less police bent on ruining the lives of people like us. Nonetheless, in order to defeat them, we must avoid simplifying them as simply the criminality in the concepts of freedom.

You're right that we must fight against them. But, as the saying goes, know your enemy. Knowing the issues that they are dealing with, and keeping in mind what motivates them is important in effectively defeating them.

I think if the media and pro-MJ supporters were to attack them based on some of the issues I brought up would help people understand these folks in the law who are anti-MJ.