E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
URBANDALE, Iowa -- GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain said he supports the ability of states to make medical marijuana available as a treatment for patients.
"If states want to legalize medical marijuana, I think that's a state's right," Cain said while campaigning in Iowa. "Because one of my overriding approaches to looking at all of these issues -- most of them belong at the state, because when you do something federally ... you try to force one-size-fits-all."
That sentiment wouldn't necessarily make Cain the only Republican candidate who's sympathetic to marijuana rights. Texas Rep. Ron Paul supports the avialability of medical marijuana, and former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson supports the drug's overall legalization.
When it comes to medical pot, an April 2010 poll by the Pew Research Center found that 61 percent of Republicans favored legalization, while 37 percent of Republicans opposed that. Self-described conservatives even split in favor of legalizing medical marijuana, 54-44 percent.
Cain made the declaration while shaking hands with voters in Urbandale, Iowa. He also answered questions about recent campaign stumbles, including his awkward, stumbling answer about his opinions on President Obama's handling of the situation in Libya. (Cain's staff attributed it to a lack of sleep.)
"I try to remember," Cain said. "I can't remember some things instantaneously, like Libya ... I try to gather my thoughts."
It wasn't the only issue where Cain's campaign was forced to clarify his position. In the same interview as his Libya gaffe, Cain said he supported collective bargaining rights (but only to an extent, saying he opposes "collective hijacking.").
"Mr. Cain was consistent in his Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel editorial board meeting yesterday and has always supported Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s legislation to balance his state budget and give his state’s government the tools it needs during the ongoing economic crisis," Cain spokesman J.D. Gordon said in a statement.
Leave a Comment:
Okay... now I get it...
You see Hermie wants to allow for the legalization of pot, so that when the 'munchies' set in, you might actually consider ordering one of crappy pizza's!
One would have to be stoned in to comtemplate eating that garbage!
Cain/Cheech Marin 2012!
@ Feisty:
He is just trying to get us stoned, so we vote for him. -He knows it's the only way that he can win the election-
While we may enjoy the high - there is NO way anyone with an ounce of grey matter can vote for this clown! ;o)
Kinda though he was stoned during the interview yesterday. Does Milwaukee allow medical marijuana? California allows medical marijuana. And after these Republican debates, the despair that sets in is so overwhelming, one needs to be heavily medicated . . .
I thought he was just making a play for what's left of the Ron Paul support. He's gotta have something after all this work before he bows out.....
That's a silly post, Feisty - akin to the stuff for which we make fun of Republicans. Saying states should have the right (as does the Constitution) to make these determinations is hardly equivalent to wanting people to get stoned.
Democrats should be a little careful with this one. The marijuana prohibition has been so illogical for so long, that pendulum is starting to swing. The fact that you see Republican GOP candidates (beyond eternal libertarian Ron Paul) talking about it is a pretty good clue that they've got cover to address this issue.
Like I said, the reasons behind the prohibition are illogical, as the prohibition itself is counterproductive to its own desires. It doesn't limit marijuana use; it actually promotes it, albeit indirectly. And of course by outlawing an industry that isn't going away, we can't collect tax revenue from that industry. And when you further water it down to medical marijuana, the public in any sort of majority form is never going to accept that policy makers know more than doctors.
The public has been solidly for medical marijuana for a long time, and is now shifting on the general prohibition as well. This issue is now open for either party to safely use to portray the other as silly, illogical, etc.
Lets legalize it all the way, and then tax the hell out of it, just like we do for tobacco (a legal product) or alcohol.....that would go a long way to solving our worries about taxation....And while we are at it, lets license hookers (collecting annual fees for those licenses and requiring medical clearance to get those licenses) and create designated business districts, so that the madames and the johns can pay taxes on what they earn by the labors of their "employees" and so that the employees can unionize and demand benefits and a retirement parachute, which in turn can be taxed......Yes, I really think this is workable for all.
Finally, a policy I can agree with, but of course he just lost the right wing conservative voters, you know the ones who want limited government involvement except when it comes to abortion and pot smoking; then they want jail time.
Pffffttt!! Now this dude is talking some sense. Cough! Cough! What did he say again?
He said... *puff* *puff* *pass*... lol
Anyone got any M&M's to go with my *popcorn*?
Here in NE Fla, dude, we, um, well, kinda dig Krystal burgers. Groovy.
Why is pot smoking and abortion equal weighted in your comment. Pot smoking is something that one chooses to do or not to do, but abortion is not something where all parties involved even get a choice.
Let's hope that the medical marijuana doesn't come from Mexico. How would each state regulate where the crop is grown, how it is acquired, and who does or does not qualify for it? Would each state's insurance division decide whether or not to cover medical marijuana? Wouldn't that get to be a problem across state lines?
thought he was singing a song. " Don't bogart that joint, my friends"
No wonder he says " Things are rattling around in my brain"
He would have to relyl on his advisors. I'm real sure Kissinger would be all for it.
About 20 years ago, my mother was having chemo. She asked my sister if she knew anyone that had some pot. Even then the benefits were known. Fortunately, mom is still alive and kicking it.
Funny thing about that phinephancy - I smoked a bowl with my Mother, who was over a 5 year cancer survivor and she died 3 days later... I will never forget watching the 3 Stooges with her and laughing our asses off while munching on my special blend of *popcorn* M & M'S with pretzels!
*Good Times*
What a great memory. I am sorry you lost your mom. But the memories can bring a smile. Fortunately I still have mine - and her gang! (I sometimes think the might be a puffin' that wacky tobacy)
Condolences. My mom was offered but was not interested. Nor was my wife, but she did radiation and not chemo.
Good to see a few politicians running for president who have heard of the 10th amendment.
Yes, when convenient, they are all for specific amendments, until they become inconvenient again. Right to privacy anyone? No? Thought not.
Hey! Maybe medical weed is the cause of Perry's gaffes. And Hermies.
Obama's are due to Cocaine though, eh?
Oh you dittoheads got your talking points again I see. Obama and cocaine is the order gone out for the wingnuts for the day. You folks do know how to march in step. How's that been working for you so far? Anyone smoking what your selling?
Sorry, Obama's white mustache is milk. Cain's brown one is from sucking up to big bidness.
Legalize it, or is there to much money to be made by keeping illegal?
The money saved by legalizing marijuana, and the money made by legalizing hemp production, could turn this country around. It's time to stop legislating private adult behaviors that harm no one. Remember, for every law you want, our taxes get raised to pay for it's enforcement.
Excellent point signalfire. We pay big bucks through taxation to limit our own freedoms. I'm in Canada where a new federal crime bill will soon be passed that gives new max sentences to people caught growing small amounts of marijuana, especially for renters and young offenders.
It costs money to put more people in prison for longer. Once in jail, these people are removed from the workforce, not paying taxes, costing us $100,000 + /yr - because they grew a few plants. And once they're out of jail, a criminal record makes it pretty difficult to find a job.
Anyone who calls themselves a fiscal conservative who supports this highly expensive and counter-productive criminalization of marijuana is lying to themselves.
Liberals who still support this crippling persecution of innocent people need to remember who they used to be.
And Libertarians - you're allright :)
An appeal to all Prohibitionists:
Most of us are aware by now that individuals who use illegal drugs are going to get high, 'no matter what.' So why do you not prefer they acquire them in stores that check IDs and pay taxes? Gifting the market in narcotics to ruthless criminals, foreign terrorists and corrupt law enforcement officials is seriously compromising our future. If you remotely believe that people will one day quit using any of these 'at present' illegal drugs, then you are exhibiting a degree of naivety parallel only with those poor wretches who voluntarily drank the poisoned Kool-Aid in Jonestown.
Even if you cannot stand the thought of people using drugs, there is absolutely nothing you, or any government, can do to stop them. We have spent 40 years and over a trillion dollars on this dangerous farce. Practically everybody is now aware that Prohibition will not suddenly and miraculously start showing different results. So why do you wish to continue with it? Do you actually think you may have something to lose If we were to start basing drug policy on science & logic instead of ignorance, hate and lies?
Maybe you're a police officer, a prison guard or a local politician. Possibly you're scared of losing employment, overtime-pay, the many kick-backs and those regular fat bribes. But what good will any of that do you once our society has followed Mexico over the dystopian abyss of dismembered bodies, vats of acid and marauding thugs carrying gold-plated AK-47s with leopard-skinned gunstocks?
Kindly allow us to forgo the next level of your sycophantic prohibition-engendered mayhem.
Prohibition Prevents Regulation : Legalize, Regulate and Tax!
Mery Jane has always been a drug that should never have been prohibited, but then again neither should the US have ever banned alcohol, but it did back in the 1920's.
If you were to poll most Rethugican voters I think you'd find that few really like the ban on "wacky weed" and I don't know of any that are huge supporters of the medical ban. What you will find is that many do worry about it being a "gateway drug" that leads some people to more dangerous drugs like Crystal Meth. I also know that many people question the wisdom that you have to smoke pot to receive the supposed medical benefits. Many of the substances in pot that are supposed to be good medically can be given in pill form, but somehow there are always people who will claim that the pills don't work, but that smoking does.
And the truth is that if smoking filtered cigarettes can cause cancer, there is no medical reason that smoking unfilter pot won't eventually cause cancer as well, although admittedly the pot smokers could always claim that they wouldn't mind chemo since they are already taking a good medicine.
the ban does need to end, but as a community we need to have a very adult discussion about the potential consequences and about how to deal with people who abuse the new freedoms. Right now in too many cases we as a society are far too lenient until we are pushed past some invisible limit and then we are far too harsh.
It reminds me of something Robert Heinlein once wrote when talking about how as a soceity we were raising our children to be responsible. He wrote about how we treat children like a puppy that be bring home, and don't housebreak, so the puppy leaves little pyramids on the carpet. We don't take the puppy, shove his nose into the fresh poo and then smack him while telling him "NO!". Of course, the puppy never learns that its wrong to potty in the house. Then, when the puppy is an adult and it once again uses the carpet as a toilet, we get a gun and shoot the dog.
It wasn't the dogs fault, it was our fault for not setting the rules. With drugs, we have never set sensible rules and enforced them. Let's remove the outright ban, but when we do, let's also have a plan for how to deal with people who have trouble stopping.
The Netherlands tried legalising pot and has had lots of problems because they didn't set those boundaries.
"The Netherlands tried legalising pot and has had lots of problems because they didn't set those boundaries."
There have been no problems in countries that have decriminalized drugs. The statistics do not lie.
In the Netherlands 9.5% of young adults (aged 15–34) consume soft drugs once a month, comparable to the level of Finland (8%), Latvia (9,7%) and Norway (9.6%) and less than in the UK (13.8%), Germany (11,9%), Czech Republic (19,3%), Denmark (13,3%), Spain (18.8%), France (16,7%), Slovakia (14,7%) and Italy (20,9%) but higher than in Bulgaria (4,4%), Sweden (4,8%), Poland (5,3%) or Greece (3,2%).[25][26] The monthly prevalence of drugs other than cannabis among young people (15-24) was 4% in 2004, that was above the average (3%) of 15 compared countries in EU. However, seemingly few transcend to becoming problem drug users (0.30%), well below the average (0.52%) of the same compared countries.[26]
The reported number of deaths linked to the use of drugs in the Netherlands, as a proportion of the entire population, is together with Poland, France, Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic the lowest of the EU.[27] The Dutch government is able to support approximately 90% of help-seeking addicts with detoxification programs. Treatment demand is rising.
The only problem I see is that more addicts are seeking treatment, which is not a problem and is actually good for society.
"And the truth is that if smoking filtered cigarettes can cause cancer, there is no medical reason that smoking unfilter pot won't eventually cause cancer as well"
Marijuana has the ability to kill cancerous cells, there is no association between cancer growth and cannabis use of any kind. Here is the national cancer institute's page on the active ingredients in marijuana, cannabinoids, cancer dot gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/healthprofessional/page4
"What you will find is that many do worry about it being a "gateway drug" that leads some people to more dangerous drugs like Crystal Meth"
The gateway theory was debunked by many people, including researchers at the University of Pittsburgh. dot org/article.aspx?articleID=97496
The summary is that the first drug anyone does is beer or wine or tobacco, after that it is a toss up and is correlated to availability. people who are first exposed to cocaine will do that first. marijuana is the most commonly available illicit drug because it is impossible to overdose on, so people are not as hesitant to use it as something that can poison you to death or cause brain damage, like alcohol or heroin, two drugs more addictive than marijuana.
There is no scientific or research based argument that supports prohibition. Please research something before commenting on it.
Concerned Citizen
"The Netherlands tried legalising pot and has had lots of problems because they didn't set those boundaries."
There have been no problems in countries that have decriminalized drugs. The statistics do not lie.
In the Netherlands 9.5% of young adults (aged 15–34) consume soft drugs once a month, comparable to the level of Finland (8%), Latvia (9,7%) and Norway (9.6%) and less than in the UK (13.8%), Germany (11,9%), Czech Republic (19,3%), Denmark (13,3%), Spain (18.8%), France (16,7%), Slovakia (14,7%) and Italy (20,9%) but higher than in Bulgaria (4,4%), Sweden (4,8%), Poland (5,3%) or Greece (3,2%).[25][26] The monthly prevalence of drugs other than cannabis among young people (15-24) was 4% in 2004, that was above the average (3%) of 15 compared countries in EU. However, seemingly few transcend to becoming problem drug users (0.30%), well below the average (0.52%) of the same compared countries.[26]
The reported number of deaths linked to the use of drugs in the Netherlands, as a proportion of the entire population, is together with Poland, France, Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic the lowest of the EU.[27] The Dutch government is able to support approximately 90% of help-seeking addicts with detoxification programs. Treatment demand is rising.
The only problem I see is that more addicts are seeking treatment, which is not a problem and is actually good for society.
"And the truth is that if smoking filtered cigarettes can cause cancer, there is no medical reason that smoking unfilter pot won't eventually cause cancer as well"
Marijuana has the ability to kill cancerous cells, there is no association between cancer growth and cannabis use of any kind. Here is the national cancer institute's page on the active ingredients in marijuana, cannabinoids, cancer dot gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/healthprofessional/page4
"What you will find is that many do worry about it being a "gateway drug" that leads some people to more dangerous drugs like Crystal Meth"
The gateway theory was debunked by many people, including researchers at the University of Pittsburgh. dot org/article.aspx?articleID=97496
The summary is that the first drug anyone does is beer or wine or tobacco, after that it is a toss up and is correlated to availability. people who are first exposed to cocaine will do that first. marijuana is the most commonly available illicit drug because it is impossible to overdose on, so people are not as hesitant to use it as something that can poison you to death or cause brain damage, like alcohol or heroin, two drugs more addictive than marijuana.
There is no scientific or research based argument that supports prohibition. Please research something before commenting on it.
Concerned Citizen
Marijuana should be legalized, for those who argue it’s got more tar and other chemicals, forget that if legal, a joint could be filtered like cigarettes. Another point people argue is it’s a gateway drug, yet they do not understand that pot smokers have to buy these drugs from drug dealers. So, when a drug dealer loses their supply of pot, the dealer then offers the pot smoker another option, and that is how someone who smokes pot might try another drug.
The financial reasons alone should get everyone on board. We waste billions fighting this drug, that is not addictive, and no one has ever gotten high and robbed, stole, or killed anyone after smoking marijuana. The tax revenue alone would contribute to fighting the deficet. With a focus on more dangerous and addictive drugs is what the country's drug war should be doing. Our country is going broke, so why not do what a business would do find ways to create more revenue instead of wasting money on an obvious lost cause.
If 50 percent of Americans support it, let’s legalize it. Prohibition on alcohol cost the government millions while making criminals filthy rich. When we ended that ridiculous law, the country began making money again, and it spawned a lot of new companies, and those companies produced jobs for American people. That is what we need today.