Posted on 8 Comments

Senate to Push Marijuana Legalization – Despite Biden’s Stance

Comment Your Thoughts on Marijuana Legalization Below

The controversial marijuana legislation may see some movement with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announcing that the Democrats are ready to push forward.

He said in an interview, “He [Biden] said he’s studying the issue, so [I] obviously want to give him a little time to study it. I want to make my arguments to him, as many other advocates will. But at some point, we’re going to move forward, period.”

It is hinted that during the Presidential campaign, Biden didn’t support the legalization of marijuana, and soon after holding office, he apparently disqualified staffers because of drug consumption.

Unbelievable, right? LOL

However, many seem to oppose Schumer’s statements arguing that the drug’s legalizations have led to several problems such as a spurt in crime rates and worsening in medical conditions of their parents.

Emergency room doctors in Colorado discussed the negative impact of marijuana on their patients.  The medical experts told about an increase in all drug use, encompassing marijuana with Methamphetamine use rising by 143 percent, opiates, and cannabis up by 10 percent and 57 percent respectively. Data from the ER drug screens over the past seven years supported this argument.

Dr. Karen Randall told: “If you pump a community full of drugs, you’re going to have to expect everything that’s associated with them. You’re going to have to expect the crime, addiction.”

He further said: “We’re the canary in the coal mine. Our kids are failing. Our kids are using drugs more. I can’t find health care for them. I can’t find rehab. I can’t find places to put the kids in foster care.”

THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) is considered the main psychoactive ingredient in today’s marijuana products and is now being extracted to achieve a potency of more than 80 percent. In the 1990s, the average potency of a joint was around 4 percent THC.

Grab Your “Teach Your Kids to Shoot and They Won’t Have Money for Drugs” T-Shirt

 

 

 

Posted on Leave a comment

Federal Judge: “Democrats Controlling the Press Against Republicans”

In a controversial dissent stemming from a libel case, a Federal Judge has admitted that the Democrat Party is controlling the press in what he described as a “shocking bias against Republicans.”

“The increased power of the press is so dangerous today because we are very close to one-party control of these institutions,” the judge declared. “Although the bias against the Republican Party—not just controversial individuals—is rather shocking today, this is not new; it is a long-term, secular trend going back at least to the ’70s….One-party control of the press and media is a threat to a viable democracy.”

The judge – who is a Reagan appointee – has observed that the ruling is a “threat to American Democracy” and called for it to be overturned.

He made the following comments:

“The increased power of the press is dangerously entrenched in today’s times since we are very close to one-party control of these institutions. A time was there when our court was about the institutional consolidation of the press leading to a ‘bland and homogenous’ marketplace of ideas. However, it has turned out that the ideological consolidation of the press (helped along by economic consolidation) is the far greater threat,” he continued.

Silberman slammed the New York Times and the Washington Post as “virtually Democratic Party broadsheets.” He added: “Nearly all television — network and cable — is a Democratic Party trumpet. Even the government-supported National Public Radio follows along.”

Silberman also specifically decried Twitter’s decision prior to last fall’s election to ban links to a New York Post story relaying allegations about the contents of a computer that once belonged to Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden. The judge cited that as an example of how Silicon Valley “filters news delivery in ways favorable to the Democratic Party.”

The judge also took sides in the ongoing public debate about the duties of social media companies, arguing that they are morally obligated to allow free expression and a diversity of views. Arguments that the platforms are private businesses and not legally obliged to follow First Amendment standards may be right, the judge said, but don’t absolve social media outlets from engaging in what he termed “censorship.”

“Repression of political speech by large institutions with market power…is—I say this advisedly—fundamentally un-American,” Silberman wrote. “As one who lived through the McCarthy era, it is hard to fathom how honorable men and women can support such actions.”