Showing posts with label DEA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DEA. Show all posts

Saturday, March 9, 2013

SMOKING DOG JOKE






IN RESPONSE TO ALL THE RECENT E-MAILS ABOUT OUR DOG:
PLEASE BE ADVISED, WE ARE SICK AND TIRED OF ANSWERING
QUESTIONS ABOUT OUR DOG!
YES, HE MAULED SIX PEOPLE WEARING OBAMA T-SHIRTS,
FOUR PEOPLE WEARING PELOSI T-SHIRTS,
TWO OTHER DEMOCRATS,
NINE TEENAGERS WITH PANTS HANGING PAST THEIR CRACK ,
THREE FLAG BURNERS,
AND A PAKISTANI TAXI DRIVER.
FOR THE LAST TIME THE DOG IS NOT FOR SALE!!!

we don't approve of his smoking but he says it takes the taste out of his mouth.

Monday, January 28, 2013

75 Senators voted to let 30,000 drones shoot Americans...


The List OF 75 US Senators Who Voted To Let 30,000 Drones Shoot Americans In The Streets

February 13, 2012

Source: Senate.gov
Via:
Vid Rebel
The House and Senate voted for the passage of the FAA bill that funds 30,000 drones to surveil Americans knowing that the majority are to be armed initially with shotgun tasers. Two Americans a week die from tasers so these are lethal weapons. But these drones can easily be equipped with machine guns and rockets. I decided to only report the Senate vote because the bill included strong anti-union sections that forced House Democrats to vote against the overall bill. A quick glance of the Senate No votes revealed one staunch Zionist from a strong union state who probably would have voted for the bill if it were a stand alone measure without the union bashing.

Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
Kelly Ayotte (R-NH)
Max Baucus (D-MT)
Mark Begich (D-AK)
Michael Bennet (D-CO)
Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)
Roy Blunt (R-MO)
John Boozman (R-AR)
Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
Scott Brown (R-MA)
Richard Burr (R-NC)
Maria Cantwell (D-WA)
Tom Carper (D-DE)
Saxby Chambliss (R-GA)
Dan Coats (R-IN)
Tom Coburn (R-OK)
Thad Cochran (R-MS)
Susan Collins (R-ME)
Chris Coons (D-DE)
Bob Corker (R-TN)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Dick Durbin (D-IL)
Mike Enzi (R-WY)
Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
Charles Grassley (R-IA)
Kay Hagan (D-NC)
Dean Heller (R-NV)
John Hoeven (R-ND)
Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX)
Jim Inhofe (R-OK)
Dan Inouye (D-HI)
Johnny Isakson (R-GA)
Mike Johanns (R-NE)
Tim Johnson (D-SD)
Ron Johnson (R-WI)
John Kerry (D-MA)
Herbert Kohl (D-WI)
Jon Kyl (R-AZ)
Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Carl Levin (D-MI)
Joe Lieberman (ID-CT)
Dick Lugar (R-IN)
Joe Manchin (D-WV)
John McCain (R-AZ)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
Jerry Moran (R-KS)
Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)
Patty Murray (D-WA)
Bill Nelson (D-FL)
Ben Nelson (D-NE)
Rob Portman (R-OH)
Mark Pryor (D-AR)
John Reed (D-RI)
Harry Reid (D-NV)
Pat Roberts (R-KS)
Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)
Marco Rubio (R-FL)
Chuck Schumer (D-NY)
Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH)
Richard Shelby (R-AL)
Olympia Snowe (R-ME)
Jon Tester (D-MT)
John Thune (R-SD)
Pat Toomey (R-PA)
Mark Udall (D-CO)
Tom Udall (D-NM)
Mark Warner (D-VA)
Jim Webb (D-VA)
Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)
Roger Wicker (R-MS)
Ron Wyden (
D-OR)

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

Why does the government regulate use of certain plants?


Advocates of looser federal restrictions on marijuana suffered a significant legal setback Tuesday, as a panel of three judges found that the federal government acted properly in refusing to loosen restrictions on pot.

Pro-marijuana groups and a disabled veteran who said it improves his medical condition asked the Drug Enforcement Administration to put marijuana on a lower tier of federal restrictions. They said the agency was ignoring a growing body of scientific evidence that it has some medical benefits. When the DEA refused, they sued.
But by a 2-1 vote, a panel of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said Tuesday that the DEA did consider all the available information. "We find nothing in the record that could move us to conclude that the agency failed to prove by substantial evidence that such studies confirming marijuana's medical efficacy do not exist," the majority opinion said.

The ruling comes as a stark contrast to actions by a growing number of states that allow use of marijuana on the recommendation of a doctor. And voters in Colorado and Washington approved ballot measures in November that ease state restrictions against recreational use.

The DEA has long classified marijuana as a Schedule I drug, the most-restrictive category, finding it "has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States." The production, sale, and use of marijuana remain illegal under federal law as a result.

Judge Harry Edwards, who wrote Tuesday's opinion, took note of the controversy. "There is a serious debate in the United States over the efficacy of marijuana for medicinal uses," he said.

Live Poll

Q: Should marijuana be placed on a lower tier of federal restrictions?

But the issue for the court, he said, "is not whether marijuana could have some medical benefits." Instead, Edwards said, the court's job was to determine whether the DEA acted within the scope of its authority in declining to reclassify the drug, given claims in the lawsuit that peer-reviewed scientific studies found some evidence that it could be beneficial.
"We defer to the agency's interpretation of these regulations and find that substantial evidence supports its determination" that no studies exist that are "adequate and well-controlled" proving its effectiveness in medical treatments.
The dissenting judge, Karen LeCraft Henderson, expressed no view on whether marijuana has medical benefits. Instead, she said the court should have dismissed the case on the grounds that none of those filing the lawsuit had legal authority to bring the case to court in the first place.