I served in the Army for a decade under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” — an immoral policy that forces American soldiers to lie about their sexual orientation. Worse, it forces others to tolerate deception. As I learned at West Point, deception and lies poison a unit and cripple a fighting force. That’s why I feel strongly that America can’t afford to allow this policy to continue one day longer.
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States, in a 5-4 decision, ruled that corporate contributions to political campaigns cannot be limited. They called it a violation of the First Amendment. I wasn’t even aware that the First Amendment applied to soulless money-making conglomerates, but that isn’t the point of this post, so I shall digress.
I wish to inform you of some of the repercussions this decision will have in the next few years. Enjoy!
You can kiss meaningful healthcare reform goodbye. With the legal right to spend unlimited amounts of cash on supporting candidates & legislation, coupled with the financial ability to do so, the big insurance companies will win this battle.
Say goodbye to Net Neutrality. The big telecom corporations want a bigger slice of the internet pie, and now they can legally influence politicians and voters alike. They have deep pockets.
Expect Social Security to be privatized sometime soon. See above.
Wall Street and big banks can now laugh all the way to the… er the bank. Getting the government to impose stricter restrictions on their activity is now all but impossible. (of course, we had those restrictions, but over the years they’ve been slowly stripping them away….)
Marijuana will now never be legalized.
Expect the number of US prisons that are “privatized” to increase dramatically. Now, crime really does pay.
These are just some examples off the top of my head of policies/legislation that greatly benefit big business, but cause great harm to the everyday American.
If something is not done about this, we will remember 2010 as the year we lost our Republic. Think I’m exaggerating? Get in touch with me in 10 years or so. Look me up in Canada.
“Left to my own devices, I never would have been raped. The rapist was really the key component to the whole thing. I was sober; I was wearing sweatpants and an oversized t-shirt; I was at home; my sexual history was, literally, nonexistent—I was a virgin; I struggled; I said no. There have been times since when I have been walking home, alone, after a few drinks, wearing something that might have shown a bit of leg or cleavage, and I wasn’t raped. The difference was not in what I was doing. The difference was the presence of a rapist.”—
The Jerusalem Post just characterized Israel’s prompt response to Haiti’s earthquake victims as the Israel’s “public relations knight in shining armor.” That couldn’t be further from the truth. Israelis and non-Israeli Jews have a long history of helping those in need. One of the beliefs rabbis teach young Jews and new Jews alike is tikkun olam, which means repairing the world. Another belief is tzedakah, which means charity. And a third and equally important belief is social justice. Unlike education in most Arab countries that focuses on hatred towards Jews and the West (Americans), the values Jews embrace are about giving, making life better and equality to all. To compartmentalize Israel’s response as a PR move is terribly misguided and discounts what the Jewish state stands for.
Let’s look at the facts. Israel sent more than 250 Israeli doctors, medical officers, nurses, paramedics, medics, lab and x-ray technicians and administrators soon after news outlets reported the extensive damage. The team arrived via an El Al Boeing 777 complete with a 90-bed field hospital that included a full surgical unit and the capability of treating 100 patients at a time. Within two days of arriving, the country’s delegation installed a field hospital, administered emergency care from the Port-au-Prince stadium and rescued more than a dozen living survivors beneath collapsed buildings. But there’s more. Israeli doctors with IsraAID-F.I.R.S.T (the Israel Forum for International Aid) delivered a healthy baby boy in an IDF field hospital. The baby’s mother, Gubilande Jean Michel, was so thrilled she named her son Israel in honor of the nation who helped her achieve this blessing.
This doesn’t sound like a PR campaign to me. And I should know. I have an MA in Public Relations. What it sounds like is a country that always gets the raw end of the deal no matter what noble acts it serves. While it’s great to see so many countries come together to aid Haiti, the ones who are noticeably absent are the 22 Arab League nations.
Bashing Israel for saving Haitians is a low blow. The world should be hailing the efforts by a tiny non-oil producing country that is 640 times smaller than its 22 Arab oil-producing neighbors. Yes, the world has spent the last year condemning Israel on human rights abuses over the Gaza war and the Goldstone Report. But it has conveniently turned a blind eye on the seven Arab nations that invaded Israel in 1948 and caused the refugee problem, which now is estimated at over 4 million. The world also looked the other way when it came to human rights abuses made by Israel’s Arab neighbors such as Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Iran and Iraq.
I have a message for anyone talking smack about Israel. Review the history before you launch verbal grenades. “Palestinians” are Arabs that only began using the term when the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) came into power in 1964. The PLO has had numerous opportunities to build a future for the fast growing refugee population but repeatedly chose to leave them in poverty without education, electricity and opportunities with only one goal in mind: the destruction of Israel. So it started it’s propaganda campaign, even gaining money from gullible Westerners. Neighboring Arab countries have used the refugees as political pawns, refusing to help the same families they rejected so many years ago. Those that condemn Israel’s right to protect itself and its citizens need to reserve judgment and exert energy towards countries that have historically shown disregard toward human life. And guess what? They are the same countries that are noticeably absent in aiding Haiti.
Thank you. This needs to be broadcast. The antisemitism masquerading as anti-Israel politics needs to stop and education is critical.
In 1930’s Poland, the hate graffiti would read: “Jews, go back to Palestine.” Now, it reads: “Jews get out of Palestine.” Prior to the creation of the State of Israel, there were no “Palestinians.” These people are Syrians and Lebanese and Jordanians; there is no such thing as a “Palestinian.” It was a cynically made up word, created specifically to attack Israel’s right to exist.
These Arab refugees were created by their own leaders encouraging them to leave Israel, for a short time, just get out of harm’s way, while they killed off the Jews. But they failed, as they have failed in every other attempt to kill us off.
Remember, at the same time these refugees were created, more than 850K Jewish refugees were forcibly removed from their homes in Arab lands, just as soon as the State of Israel was born. They’re called “the forgotten refugees,” because nobody hears about them. Why? Because Israel just did the right thing and took them in, unlike how their Arab neighbors refused to do the same for the refugees they created, in order to use them as a wedge against Israel. ~ waif
I’m painfully ignorant about the Israel/Arab conflict and history, and I appreciate this bit of education. While there is much knowledge I’m lacking, one thing that’s certain is that I detest the persecution of the Jewish people that has existed throughout recorded history. ~whyinthehell
You don’t get bipartisanship by asking politely. Obama made the mistake of asking Republicans over for tea in his first year in office and thought he could charm them into voting his way. You don’t swing votes by asking politely, you swing them by implicit political threats. You do it with political force.
So, in financial reform Obama shouldn’t ask Republicans to vote with him, he should dare them not to. He should say:
“You want to vote with the bankers. Go ahead. I dare you. Every day I’m going to talk about how these bankers took hard-earned taxpayer money and turned it into record bonuses for themselves. I’m going to show pictures of their yachts and mansions. And then I’m going to say you want to protect them so you can hang out with them on their private jets and play with them in their vacation hideaways. I’m going to take a cut out of you and put it on a picture of their yacht. I’m going to name names. I’m going to make you famous. You still want to vote with the bankers. Make my fucking day.”
That’s how you get the opposition to vote with you. Who cares if their feelings are hurt, you’ll get their votes if, and only if, they think their seat is on the line. Politics is almost always a matter of naked self-interest. Make it politically perilous for them to vote against you and all of a sudden they’ll be in a lot more bipartisan mood.
Crisis pregnancy centers in Virginia, which provide anti-abortion counseling, are offering misleading advice to women, the National Abortion Rights Action League said today.
A year-long investigation by the NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia Foundation found that the centers are seeking to intimidate women into not choosing an abortion, sometimes at risk to their health…
According to the NARAL investigation, some women were told [lies] that 28 percent of women attempt suicide after an abortion and that a doctor performing an abortion could accidentally “suck out your bowels…”
The NARAL investigation said that many of the 52 crisis pregnancy centers are staffed by personnel who are not medically trained. Its investigation, which included 28 in-person visits, found that some of the centers offered factually erroneous information.
“America is pacifistic and cannibalistic. Outwardly it seems to be a beautiful honeycomb, with all the drones crawling over each other in a frenzy of work; inwardly it’s a slaughterhouse, each man killing off his neighbor and sucking the juice from his bones.”—Henry Miller, Tropic of Capricorn (via ratsandcandy666) (via adamquinn) (via adailyriot) (via recro)
Today’s Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case is a disaster for the American people. It will unleash unprecedented amounts of corporate “influence-seeking” money on our elections and create unprecedented opportunities for corporate “influence-buying” corruption.
In a stark choice between the right of American citizens to a government free from influence-buying corruption and the economic and political interests of American corporations, five justices came down in favor of corporations. Chief Justice Roberts has abandoned the illusory public commitments he made to “judicial modesty” and “respect for precedent” to cast the deciding vote for a radical decision that profoundly undermines our democracy.
The constitutionality of the corporate spending ban was never even raised by the plaintiffs in the lower court consideration of this case. Instead, the justices, on their own, opened up the case to the broader constitutional question, when they could have decided the case on narrower grounds without eliminating more than 100 years of national policy.
“The Mormon church wanted its members to support the 2008 effort to ban same-sex marriage in California, but urged they do it through an outside organization to give the leadership “plausible deniability,” according to documents released today in the Proposition 8 trial in San Francisco. The Catholic church also helped bankroll the operation, an executive says in one email, while the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints provided “financial, organizational and management contributions.”—
““With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans. … We are going to talk with bipartisan congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision.”
— President Barack Obama
“There is clear reason for ordinary citizens to be concerned that this divisive ruling will, in reality, allow powerful corporations to drown out the voices of everyday Americans in future campaigns. This ruling is no doubt yet another victory for Wall Street at the expense of Main Street America.” — Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.
“We will open the floodgate, if left unchecked and unchallenged, to more and more special interest money, big corporation money. … This takes us in the exact opposite direction from where America wants to go.”
— Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md.
“Presented with a relatively narrow legal issue, the Supreme Court chose to roll back laws that have limited the role of corporate money in federal elections since Teddy Roosevelt was president. Ignoring important principles of judicial restraint and respect for precedent, the court has given corporate money a breathtaking new role in federal campaigns.”
— Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis.
“This decision allows Wall Street to tap its vast corporate profits to drown out the voice of the public in our democracy.”
— Bob Edgar, president of government watchdog group Common Cause.
“The Supreme Court in essence has ruled that corporations can buy elections. If that happens, democracy in America is over. We cannot put the law up for sale and award government to the highest bidder.”
— Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla.
“We cannot support the Senate [health care “reform”] bill — period,” is the message that liberals delivered to the Speaker, Dem Rep Raul Grijalva told me in an interview just now…
House liberals also urged Pelosi to consider passing individual pieces of reform through the House as individual bills, and sending them to the Senate to challenge the upper chamber to reject them, Grijalva tells me. Liberals said this approach would be preferable to passing the Senate bill.
For instance, Grijalva said, why not send the Senate individual bills that would, among other things, nix the “Cadillac” tax or close the donut hole, pressuring the Senate to deal with each provision separately?
“If the Senate chooses not to close the donut hole, that’s their damn problem,” Grijalva said. “They’ve had it too easy. One vote controls everything. Collectively, we’re tired of that.””
“Once again, the judicial right shows itself to be unrepentant activists, contemptuous of both precedent and the actions of our elected representatives.
Anyway, the first thought that leapt to my mind was this quote from the 18th-Century British Jurist, Lord Chancellor Thurlow, who asked “[d]id you ever expect a corporation to have a conscience, when it has no soul to be damned and no body to be kicked.” Well, according to the Supreme Court, a corporation may have neither soul nor body, but evidently possesses a mouth that cannot be shut.
This strikes me as a decision that is monumental in its implications and staggering in terms of its fundamental badness.”
How does a professional disparager honor a nondisparagement clause? Conan O’Brien is about to find out.
Mr. O’Brien and his team are walking away from NBC with a whopping $45 million settlement, but there’s a condition: “The Tonight Show” host can’t bad-mouth the Peacock Network and its top brass.
Being tactful has never been part of Mr. O’Brien’s comedic repertoire. While nondisparagement clauses aren’t unusual in top-dollar settlements, this one raises obvious questions about how a comedian can go about his work when he is gagged from doing gags.
In recent shows, Mr. O’Brien has joked about getting around nondisparagement constraints. “Luckily, folks, they’re not saying I can’t sing anything negative about the network,” Mr. O’Brien said on his show this week, and then broke into an impromptu tune with the line: “Morons, incompetent morons, these people are morons…la de de de.” The next night, he repeated a similar sentiment, this time in Spanish.
"I would think that it would still be disparaging," said Scott J. Witlin, an employment-law attorney at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, when asked if a sing-song or Spanish trash-talking of NBC brass still counts as disparagement.
It’s about time this extreme-right-winger’s racism got some wide attention. Unfortunately, these all refer to his “joke” about Michelle Obama.
For those of you unfamiliar with the sickness and racism that Scott Baio is so fond of, this was not a joke any more than any of his other racially derogatory tweets.
The first time I became aware of his leanings was when a conservative fan decided to unfollow Baio because she didn’t like that he tweeted, “Wife calls Obama a “shitfuck” and I believe she’s right”. When the fan said Obama’s our President Baio replied, “yeah, and Michael Vick still plays football. What’s ur point? They both are losers.”
I asked him several times what in the world Obama could possibly have in common with Vick, for him to pair them this way. Needless to say, I never got an answer and his racial tweets became more frequent and more obvious.
This is not an issue of Baio making a joke about an unflattering photo of Michelle Obama - it’s about a history of racially-oriented tweets and photo comments.
More links which show his twitter stream over the past couple of days…reminds me of something about protesting too much.
Tomorrow, the Supreme Court has scheduled a special session at 10am. No one is quite sure what the court is going to announce, but it’s probably going to be something BIG. In fact, it’s probably going to be the decision in a court case that I’ve been watching for some time, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
This case will decide whether corporations will be allowed to spend all the money they want on political campaigns, something that has been illegal in the U.S. since 1907. Unlimited corporate spending on campaigns would mean that the government would be up for sale to the highest bidder, and that the law itself would be bought and sold. It would be political bribery on the largest scale imaginable.
I already have introduced five bills to deal with this problem, which you can read about here. The titles should give you a hint about what they do. Each one is less than four pages, and each one is something that you don’t have to be a lawyer to read and understand. Taken as a package, they fight back against corporate influence over our government.
The Business Should Mind Its Own Business Act
The Corporate Propaganda Sunshine Act
The End Political Kickbacks Act
Ending Corporate Collusion Act
Public Company Responsibility Act
I will be introducing more bills. For now, though, I have launched an emergency petition at www.savedemocracy.net. Please sign up. I will be delivering the names of the signers to the Supreme Court tomorrow.
I’ll tell you one thing, for sure. If this goes unchallenged, then you can kiss your country goodbye.
““There are no bookings after this Friday, and there are no bookings being made for when the show returns from the ‘hiatus,’ ” said the late-night television source. “In our circles, it’s understood that the show ends on Friday.”
Last week, there were bookings in place through Thursday. At the last minute, additional bookings were made. They include Martin Scorsese (he joined Colin Firth on Monday) Quentin Tarantino (who joined Paul Bettany and Spoon on Tuesday), Adam Sandler and Joel McHale (who joined Joss Stone Wednesday), and Robin Williams (who joins Barry Manilow Thursday).
The final guests planned for Friday, and perhaps O’Brien’s last “Tonight” guests ever, will be Tom Hanks and Will Ferrell. Ferrell was on O’Brien’s first “Tonight Show” in Los Angeles.”
…Mr. Newman also said that the campaign was hurt when Mr. Brown made the race into a referendum on health care, which allowed him to attract campaign donations from across the country and which put Ms. Coakley in the tricky position of defending a health care bill to voters in a state that already has near-universal coverage. “It’s not easy in a sound bite, not easy in a 30-second rebuttal in the debate,’’ he said.
In the end, when Mr. Brown surged and attracted national support, the Coakley campaign was able to raise about $4 million, more than twice what it had planned. But Mr. Newman estimated that based on press reports, they may have been outraised by as much as three to one by the Brown campaign. And although some vigorous finger-pointing has broken out in recent days, Mr. Newman had nothing put praise for the White House and national Democrats, repeating several times that they were “tremendously helpful.”
“One of the things we missed, and I guess you could call it a mistake, was the pent-up anger,’’ he said, likening the mood to 1990, when the state elected a Republican governor in the midst of a regional recession. “There was some very pent-up anger and people took it out at the ballot box, and I think we misjudged that and he tapped into it.’’
“Harry Reid took any remaining suspense off the table today, making clear that the Senate won’t try to rush a health care bill through the chamber before Scott Brown is seated. “We’re going to wait until the new senator arrives until we do anything more on health care,” said Reid, whose remarks are in sync with the wishes of President Obama.
Reid also said Democrats would consider using the controversial maneuver known as budget reconciliation to pass the bill with 51 votes, which Politico notes is a reversal from his previous stance. “I’ve said that reconciliation is one of the things we need to look at,” said Reid. “No decision has been made.””
Okay, Obama deliberately let Coakley lose so he could have an excuse to shift the Democratic party even further to the right. Expect substantial losses for the Democratic Party in the upcoming midterms (which suits Obama just fine, as it allows him to work that much more closely with the GOP). — Ryking
“It’s convenient for everyone to get mad at liberals for tanking health care reform because they “refuse” to pass the Senate bill as is, but the fact is that even if the liberals all voted for it they still wouldn’t have the votes.
This bill had a huge problem already because in one house you have a bunch of anti-abortion zealots who insist that this bill be used to advance their cause. In the other, even with the ostensible 60th vote, you had a couple of right wing Democrats and one narcissstic Independent who would have likely voted against a final bill that changed even a comma of the one they originally voted for. And you have a president who allowed Max Baucus to play Romeo with Olympia Snow for months in a misguided attempt to bring together the Democratic Capulets with the Republican Montegues and ended up souring the American public on the whole damned thing.
It is what it is and it is the same thing it was before yesterday. It’s a mess. You can blame Frank all you want, but the fact is that politically, the problem doesn’t lie with the liberals. It never has. Not that it will stop people from blaming them for everything from the failure of health care to global warming. They are the designated sin eaters of American politics.”
“…[Obama] railed against secret deals and lobbyist influence [but] negotiated this health care plan in secrecy with industry lobbyists, got caught entering into secret deals with the pharmaceutical industry, agreed to abandon his commitment to drug re-importation and bulk price negotiations in order to please the pharmaceutical lobby, and cavalierly refused to abide by his promise to conduct all negotiations out in the open.
Worse still, two of the most popular provisions — the public option and Medicare expansion — were jettisoned, leaving the insurance-industry-pleasing provisions as the bill’s dominant features.
When one adds to that the subservience of the administration’s top financial officials to Wall Street and the lack of programs designed to aid struggling Americans, the perception has arisen that Democrats are both guardians of the Washington status quo and loyal only to powerful interests. That has allowed the corporatist G.O.P. to masquerade as populists and monopolize populist anger.”
President Obama’s nominee to lead the Transportation Security Administration withdrew from consideration on Wednesday, saying his nomination was “obstructed by political ideology…”
“I was extremely excited about the opportunity to lead the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and fulfill Secretary [Janet] Napolitano’s objective to develop it into the best organization of its kind in the world,” Southers said in a statement released by the White House on Wednesday. “However, it is apparent that this path has been obstructed by political ideology. I have decided, after deep reflection and in consultation with my family and friends to respectfully withdraw my name from consideration for confirmation as the assistant secretary for the TSA.”
“It is clear that my nomination has become a lightning rod for those who have chosen to push a political agenda at the risk of the safety and security of the American people,” Southers said. “This partisan climate is unacceptable and I refuse to allow myself to remain part of their dialogue. The TSA has important work to be done and I regret I will not be part of their success.”
“The federal [health care reform] proposal is based on [Massachusetts’ Romneycare] model requiring people to obtain health insurance without the state doing anything to effectively control costs through an alternative to the private insurance corporations. Lacking a public option, the cost of health care in Massachusetts, already the highest in the nation at the time of the plan’s implementation, has spiraled upward. Services have been curtailed, and many, particularly younger people, feel they are being forced to sacrifice to pay for a system that doesn’t work.
Instead of blindly following the failed Massachusetts model, Obama should have insisted on an extension of the Medicare program to all who are willing to pay for it. He squandered the opportunity to bring about meaningful health care change that the public would have supported had it been kept simple and just. Instead, Obama gave away the store to medical profiteers. They, in turn, hopelessly muddied the waters with well-funded scare advertising tactics that principled leadership on Obama’s part could have thwarted.”
“The president got creamed in Massachusetts. No amount of blaming this disastrous outcome on the weaknesses of the local Democratic candidate or her Republican opponent’s strengths can gainsay that fact. Obama’s opportunistic search for win-win solutions to our health care concerns and our larger economic problems is leading to a lose-lose outcome for the president and the country.
The two issues that mattered on Election Day were the economy, which Obama has sold out to Wall Street—as quite a few disgruntled voters pointed out—and his plea to save health care reform, which the voters who had backed him for the presidency with a huge majority now spurned. It is significant that it was the voters of Massachusetts who have now derailed the Democrats’ efforts to revamp the country’s health care system by denying them the necessary 60th vote in the Senate, for these voters know the subject well.”
“The loss of Ted Kennedy’s seat — due to a lack of enthusiasm among Democrats and Independents — sends a clear message to Congress. The Senate health care bill is not the change we were promised in 2008, and it must be improved. The Senate must use ‘reconciliation’ to pass a better bill with a strong public option.”—Tell the Senate to use budget reconciliation to pass a better bill (via ryking)
“How ironic that smug Democrats in the Administration refused to allow the single payer, medicare-for-all option to even be considered as a possibility for America. They declared it off the table, pushing a “public option” plan that was quickly jettisoned by an Administration happy to cut deals with the drug and insurance lobbies. The result is a massive mess difficult to understand with shrinking public support. It was hung like an albatross around the neck of Martha Coakley, the loser in the Scott Brown race. If the Obama Administration had embraced the single payer option — some type of which is in place in every country that does have universal medical coverage — it could have ignited the Democratic grassroots and educated the public. Instead, the health care debacle has become a massive political train wreck, and Barack Obama’s Democratic Party is pinned in the wreckage.”
“Ok. Eight or nine months ago the villagers were all saying that the Republicans were eating at each other and that it wasn’t very smart. And the Republicans told them to go to hell, Fox News started the tea party movement and the right wing media in general launched what seemed like a lunatic campaign to demonize Barack Obama as a socialist. All that seems to be working pretty well for them at the moment, so Allen’s admonishment doesn’t make a lot of sense.
In fact, the only lesson to be learned is to not listen to anything the village media says. Ever. The Republicans learned that a long time ago. The Democrats need to learn it too.”
As Republican strategist Lee Atwater famously put it, “if you’re explaining, you’re losing” — in other words, the best defense is a good offensive. Since the rhetoric of the Right has always sounded appealing — for faith and flag, against big fat government — Democratic candidates need to change the narrative to future-past and up-down rather than stale left-right…
Here’s the better frame: “Do you really want to go back to a GOP that brought us economic collapse, Enron, Katrina and Iraq?” This is both rhetorical and empirical…since it’s true. The fact is that Bushonomics dug us into this hole and the growth rate under Democrat presidents since FDR has been more than double the growth rate of Republicans. And it’s pretty hard for Republican candidates to defend an administration that produced no net new jobs in their eight years. Zero.
While Democrats are a 21st Century party trying to fix health care, global warming and education, the Republican Party has some of the finest minds of the 19th Century. Recall how Bush 43 tried to have Social Security funds invested in the stock market…
Democrats need to remind voters that they — as Coakley in fact did as Attorney General but talked about too late as a candidate — are consumer advocates against insurance companies ripoffs, predatory lenders, and polluters ruining communities.”
Does the “left-right” narrative really seem boring right now? Here’s a simpler lesson: MOVE LEFT. The American people don’t want two Republican Parties. Move left, recapture your base and left-leaning Independents, hammer the Rethugs with their shit-tastic history, and you win. — Ryking
As you all know, I have been cleared for duty and will be reporting back shortly. I have been re-reading the NH Constitution carefully so that when I return I am well versed.
I have come to a conclusion in reading the document I am sworn to defend: It is unconstitutional for the state to take action against a sick person who decides to use Marijuana to treat a medical condition.
I will never arrest a person who possesses, uses, grows marijuana to treat a medical condition……. and neither should any other NH LEO who intends follow his or her oath. I won’t even take it from them.
Legal argument in support of my declaration (quite simple):