.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Bully Pulpit

The term "bully pulpit" stems from President Theodore Roosevelt's reference to the White House as a "bully pulpit," meaning a terrific platform from which to persuasively advocate an agenda. Roosevelt often used the word "bully" as an adjective meaning superb/wonderful. The Bully Pulpit features news, reasoned discourse, opinion and some humor.

Monday, December 29, 2008

Grassroots Effort to Shape Obama Administration Policy

Going to Pot?

(Fox News) - In an effort to keep a finger on the pulse of the American public, the Obama transition team asked those logging onto its Web site to provide a list of the top policy questions facing the nation. Change.gov reports that participation "outpaced our expectations."

So you may ask, what is the No. 1 issue facing America on the Web site? The legalization of marijuana. The Hill newspaper reports more than a dozen of the top 50 questions pertained to the drug.

The No. 1 question asked was: "Will you consider legalizing marijuana so that the government can regulate it, tax it, put age limits on it and create millions of new jobs."

Another said: "13 states have compassionate use programs for medical marijuana, yet the federal government continues to prosecute sick and dying people."

And another asked: "Will there be any chance of decriminalizing marijuana?"

There is no word yet on how the president-elect plans to tackle the issue.

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is a hoot. All of these poor dimwits who voted for Obama on the basis of his being some kind of civil libertarian are in for a nasty surprise. Democrats and Republicans are virtually issue twins on this subject. In fact, I read somewhere recently that over all, Democrats have a far worse record than Republicans when it comes to decriminalizing anything.

This is simple folks, the more things that are illegal, the more control the government can assert. And because people will still do these things, it creates yet another faux crisis for the government to step in and manage. It's a self-sustaining game. And since the incoming administration has already demonstrated that it is about more government control, not less, anyone who believes that drug policy or drug laws are going to change at the federal level is, ironically enough, smoking crack.

Of course the government has no business whatsoever regulating what you do or do not put into your own body. Claims that drugs lead to crime are specious and circular. If drugs weren't illegal, or even regulated, there would be no point to any crime associated with them. No more so anyway than diamond earrings or luxury cars. Pot is no more likely to lead to crime than a Rolex is. Apparently the answer is to make watches a controlled substance.

And of course, the federal government has no charter for regulating drugs at all. They do so under the catch-all commerce clause argument, but even that is a thin veneer. When a DEA agent tracks down a drug dealer who hasn't crossed any state lines, grows pot in his back yard, and sells it to his friends and neighbours, the Constitution screams in agony.

Monday, December 29, 2008 9:32:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home