Precise News Ticker

Monday, January 24, 2011

Can Someone be "Too Conservative" to Run for Public Office?

Can Someone be "Too Conservative" to Run for Public Office?


I've heard this statement far too often by too many people. I have to address this issue.
Every time I hear this from people I know, the lamestream media or strangers I bump into around Town I have to cringe and grit my teeth alittle bit. It bothers me and rubs me the wrong way big time!
The term "Too Conservative" doesn't make any sense to me at all.
How can anyone be considered or labeled "Too Conservative"?
I honestly believe that you're either Conservative or you're not.
Being called "Too Conservative" by someone is the same as being called "Too American" or "Too Patriotic".
If someone is claiming to be a Conservative and campaigning on Conservative Principles, what's the problem?
Why are some challenging this candidate?
If someone is campaigning as a Conservative and fights for Limited Government, Cutting Taxes and Free Market Solutions for the problems facing America today, What's the problem?
Why are some still challenging this candidate?
If someone is campaigning on Limited, Responsible and Constitutional Government, What's the problem?
Why are some still challenging this candidate?
I still hear some people say things like "Palin shouldn't run for President because she's Too Conservative" or "Christine O'Donnell didn't win her Senate seat because she was Too Conservative" I think these are very ignorant or naive statements to make. Especially if you identify yourself as a Conservative, a Tea Party Patriot a Republican or a right leaning independent. This is just unacceptable language out of an educated, informed and intelligent person to say. Those who know should know better than to allow such foolishness slip out of our mouths.
What makes people say such foolish things like this anyways?

These people in the media or around town in your personal life who say things like this expose themselves as the people who are not Conservative enough or Patriotic enough or American enough to boldly stand up and defend Conservative Principles as they know they should be. It's their guilty Conscience for their lack of articulation or crediable defense of Conservatism that makes them say things like this.

I think it stems from lack of a solid foundation of what a Conservative is, what Conservatism is and what the Tea Party Movement is about. There's no other excuse or reason one could express such nonsense without a strong grasp of what Conservatism is or who a Conservative is.

I know there are many of my so called FaceBook "Friends" on here that claim to be Conservative or challenge my view of Conservatism. That's fine but Conservatism wasn't born yesterday. It has a rich American Proud American History.

June 15, 2009
"Conservatives" Are Single-Largest Ideological Group
Percentage of "liberals" higher this decade than in early '90s
Thus far in 2009, 40% of Americans interviewed in national Gallup Poll surveys describe their political views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 21% as liberal. This represents a slight increase for conservatism in the U.S. since 2008, returning it to a level last seen in 2004. The 21% calling themselves liberal is in line with findings throughout this decade, but is up from the 1990s.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/conservatives-single-largest-ideological-group.aspx

Election 2010: Polls show that more voters consider themselves conservative
Exit polls showed a surge of voters identifying themselves as conservative. Nationally, the electorate was more conservative than in 2006 by nine percentage points and more so than in 2008 by seven points. Poll findings in swing states mirrored those numbers, with Ohio showing an 11-point rise in conservative voters and Wisconsin a 10-point increase.
Pollsters had been predicting stronger enthusiasm on the right than on the left for much of the year, and the conservative base did not disappoint.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/03/AR2010110305474.html

Just take a Quick Look at the 2010 Mid Term Election Results to See How Well Conservative Tea Party Candidates did on November 2nd 2010. It was "Historic"!
http://news.yahoo.com/page/2010electionsdashboard

Tea Party candidates win key races
NATIONAL RESULTS
November 03, 2010
By Nedra Pickler, Associated Press
Washington - — Voters embraced the Tea Party's conservative throw-the-bums-out anthem in key races across the country, with the movement's favored candidates taking more than a dozen House seats held by Democrats, three Senate races and the South Carolina governorship.

The movement did not make a complete sweep despite a strong anti-Democratic climate, with the most prominent losses coming from Tea Party stars Christine O'Donnell of Delaware and Sharron Angle of Nevada. Angle couldn't overcome Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and O'Donnell was soundly defeated after old videos emerged of her discussing witchcraft, masturbation and mice with human brains
http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-11-03/news/24810390_1_tea-party-key-races-democrat-chris-coons

'Tea party' candidates win GOP contests in Delaware, New York
In New Hampshire, an establishment-backed Republican appears to be fending off a challenge from the right.
September 15, 2010
By Kathleen Hennessey and Michael A. Memoli, Tribune Washington Bureau

The insurgent "tea party" movement vanquished the Republican Party establishment Tuesday as an underdog candidate for U.S. Senate in Delaware won a primary that had become a national proxy war for the heart of the GOP.

Conservative activist Christine O'Donnell, a perennial candidate with no experience in elective office, defeated longtime Rep. Michael N. Castle — a dramatic finale to a primary season dominated by the small-government movement's revolt against moderate elements of the GOP.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep/15/nation/la-na-primary-roundup-20100915

How did Sarah Palin's Candidates that she Endorsed do in the 2010 Mid Term Elections?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/palin_tracker/

My Main Point about Conservatives and Conservatism is Today's Conservatives are the MAJORITY and the Liberal Democrats are THE CULT MINORITY! That can Not be Stated Enough!

We Who Identify Ourselves as Conservatives or Tea Party Patriots or Conservative Independents or Whatever Need to Find Our backbones and Spines NOW!

We're the Loud, Proud, Vigilant & Resolute Patriots Who are Holding the Line in Defense of what Most of us grew up beleiving in Traditional All-American True Blue Conservative Principles. We have Nothing to be Afraid of or Ashamed of.

We're the Patrick Henrys, Paul Reveres and James Madisons of Our Generation Who are Standing Tall & Speaking Out Against the Big Government, Big Spending Tyrants of Our Time. This is Our Time to Protect Our Families, Friends, Neighbors, Co Workers and Customers by INFORMING & EDUCATING them about the Agenda to Steal Away their Rights, Freedom and Liberty that so Many Have Fought Bravely and Courageously & Died for. We owe it to Past Generations and Future Generations to be Good Stewarts of this Nation. We Owe Our Fore Fathers as Well as Our Future Kids, Grandkids and Great GrandKids to Stay Ever Resolute and Most Vigilant in Our Efforts to Thwart Our Radical Liberal Progressives Who Wish to Change America into something America was Never meant or Intended to become.

Look My Definition of Who a Conservative is:
A Conservative is a Person of Faith Who Believes as the Founding Fathers Believed as Written & Signed in the Declaration of Independence that "All Men are Created Equally, Endowed with Unalienable Rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Every Single Signer of the Declaration of Independence Believed in GOD and Creating a Civil Society of Liberty and Freedom of Religion NOT From Religion. The Constitution was Written to Limit Government's Power & Authority with 3 Branches for Checks & Balances. Conservatives are Originalists Who Believe in keeping Government's Power & Authority Enumerated as Defined by THE CONSTITUTION. To be a Conservative, You have to Believe in God, the Constitution and Keeping the Government's Power & Authority Enumerated. Less Government, the Better. Less Taxes, the Better. The Federal Government's Principled Responsibility is to the CITIZEN. Each and Every Single American Citizen should expect it's Government to Provide a Strong National Defense from attacks by both Foreign and Domestic. That is the Form of Government the Founding Fathers Instituted with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Conservatives Believe as they Believed.

You're either Conservative or You're Not. Forget being a "Constitutional Conservative" or "American Conservative" Those are two silly nonsense Made up Titles. You're either Conservative or You're Not. No Need to put further titles in front of the word Conservative. You either ARE a Conservative or You're Not. Just leave the Word the way it is. It's Fine just Perfect the way it is.

Adding qualifiers does not change who one is, nor should it be necessary. In fact, I tend to get a little suspicious when people feel the need to add qualifiers to their conservative title. Remember GW Bush's 2000 campaign when he adopted and popularized the term "Compassionate Conservative"? I cringed when I first heard that. True conservatives already know that conservatism is compassionate (at least as much as an ideology can be). I know he was trying to reach out to a broader bunch of folks, and maybe it worked. But I was left with feelings along the lines of "if I have to explain it to you, you wouldn't understand". As it turned out, Mr Bush was not the staunch conservative I had hoped he would be, and in fact may be partly responsible for the miserable state of the national GOP with their ongoing reluctance to abandon political moderation and move back to the solid right where they have previously succeeded.

If one is a staunch conservative, they ought to proudly proclaim they are conservative. Without qualifiers. And without apologies.

And then when they are elected, they should prove their conservative credentials every day, regardless of what protests their handlers and the middle-of-the-road GOP throw at them. Because if one is a true conservative, then they should also have the CAJONES to act like one. Do what is conservative, and do what is right (yes, that is redundant). And if they don't, then they don't get my vote again.

We Conservatives are battling a widespread image that to be conservative and to be republican are the same thing. I think the term "republican" is almost meaningless anymore. I don't think the same about the term "Conservative", except when it is viewed (all too often) as synonymous with republican. My answer to that is to make it clear to anyone who cares that I am a conservative but not a republican. That one can be a republican and not be a conservative (which is what comprises a majority of the GOP today).

President Ronald Reagan understood the Power of Words. He framed the debate on HIS Terms.
"How can Limited Government & Fiscal restraint be equated with lack of compassion for the poor? How can a tax break that puts a little more money in the weekly paychecks of working people be seen as an attack on the needy? Since when do we in America believe that our society is made up of two diametrically opposed classes--one rich, one poor--both in a permanent state of conflict & neither able to get ahead except at the expense of the other? Since when do we in America accept this alien & discredited theory of social & class warfare? Since when do we in America endorse the politics of envy & division?”

Reagan dissected the Statist's language & recast the morality of the message. Americans are Not at war with each other over money & class. And when Americans keep the fruits of their labor, it is a Good thing. This is both seminal & fundamental. The Statist's Vocabulary provides the Conservative with opportunities to highlight the Statist's duplicity & the bankruptcy of his ideas by stripping the rhetorical veneer from his message & contrasting it with the wisdom of the Conservative's Principles. The battle over language, like the battle over ideas, is one Conservatives should relish.

There's Probably Some Who are Reading this Note and May think Conservatives are More or Less than What I Described it to be. Some are probably Right and others Wrong. The Great Thing about being a Conservative is WE"RE ALL INDEPENDENT FREE THINKING INDIVIDUALS Who DO Disagree with each other on Many Occassions. That's to be expected with ANY LARGE GROUP of People. No Large Group is Perfect and Nobody can put a Perfect Definition on ANY Large Group. There are Differences but they SHOULD NOT Divide US or Pit one Conservative Against another over Our Differences.

I'm Not Looking for People to Agree with Everything I Say in this Note but to Understand that NOW is NOT the Time or Place in Our History to Bicker and Debate about Our Candidates Who Choose to put their Personal & Private Life on Hold to Campaign/Run as a Conservative for Public Office if We do in Fact Call Ourselves Conservative or Tea Party Patriots or Right Leaning Independents.

It's WRONG! It's Counter Productive and Destructive to the Conservative Movement to Take Back Our Country from the Radical Liberal Progressives Who Wish to Further make America into the Foreign Country it already has become! When it Should NOT have EVER been taken this Far as it is!

What We as Fellow Conservative Patriots Need to be doing and SHOULD be Doing is Supporting, Endorsing, Campaigning for and Donating Our Time and Money for these Candidates instead of Knee-Capping and NaySaying these Candidates Can't Win because they Champion Conservative Principles & Run as OutSpoken Conservatives ala Karl Rove, Chris Christie and National Websites Like NRO and The Weekly Standard. These Candidates Need Our Support, Encouragement, Time and Money More so than the Cookie Cutter GOP Establishment Moderate Types that the GOP Continues to support and back despite the Massive Defeats the GOP took Nationwide in the Mid Term Primaries of 2010.

What Good or Productive Outcome will be Produced from Knocking or Doubting these Conservative Candidates when they Run for Public Office?

I'm Not asking or Telling or Even Preaching to Blindly Follow Any Candidate that Claims to be Conservative when Running for Public Office on their Word but LOOK TO THEIR PRINCIPLES and See Where they Stand on THE ISSUES before Announcing Publicly what Your Concerns or Objections are to these Conservative Candidates. If and When they are found to be Phoney or Frauds, these Candidates Should be and MUST BE Exposed for Who and What they Really are.

I'm Not going to Stand in the way or Obstruct Anyone from saying the TRUTH and Presenting FACTS about Conservative Candidates Who aren't Really Conservatives. We Should be doing this on a Regular Basis and NOT Afraid or Ashamed to do it. Too Many RINO Republicans Like to Claim to be Conservative or Tea Party Candidates in Election Years when it's Fashionable to do so but THEIR PRINCIPLES and STANDS ON THE ISSUES Tell the REAL STORY! That should Remain the FOCUS!

My Final Plea to those Who Still Wish to Say these kinds of Harmful, Destructive and Counter-Productive Statements about Conservative Candidates Who May be Running for Public Office in 2012, Please bit Your Tongue with Your Skepitism about these Future Brave Conservative Candidates. Let's give them the Benefit of a Doubt before Casting Our naysaying Stones of Doubt if they can Win or Not.

America is Ready as Always to Elect Conservatives to Lead this Nation NO MATER WHERE YOU LIVE! I Must Remind You Again that President Ronald Wilson Reagan Lost At both the 1968 and 1974 Republican National Conventions before Beating President Jimmy Carter in 1980 and then Senator Walter Mondale Jimmy Carter's Vice President in 1984 in TWO MASSIVE LANDSLIDE VICTORIES in BLUE STATES, PURPLE STATES as Well as the Red States. Sure Reagan wasn't Perfect and made Mistakes. But Reagan was the Most Popular Modern Day Conservative President EVER Elected! Reagan Should Continue to be the Standard the Future Conservative Candidates Look to. Reagan Proved that America is a Conservative Nation as Long as We have a Strong, Passionate, Articulate and Resolute Conservative Leader Leading it.

Conservative Candidates have lost and Will Loss from time to time just as every other group or category has and does all of the time. Conservatives Can't Win Every Race or Battle but if they're True to their Conservative Principles, We Should be Supporting them with Our Voices, Time and Money. They are Representing YOU, Your Family, Friends, Neighborhoods and this Great Country.

My Point about the Reagan Comparison is that even Our best Example wasn't Successful at first but Stayed the Course & Eventually Won over the American People. That's how Victories are Achieved the Right way in America. Through Hard Work and Tons of Efforts. The Left isn't going to slow down, quit or hand over America to us. We Shouldn't Expect them to either. They Won't. They have a Right to be Wrong in this Country as We Do to be RIGHT but the Difference is We're on the Side of Justice, Freedom, Liberty, Personal Responsibility, Rule of Law and Private Property Rights. While they're Fighting for Bigger Government, More Regulations, More Taxes and Less Personal Responsibility.

We're on the RIGHT SIDE of History! We Will Win the War but We MUST Continue the Battles by Supporting the Solid Conservatives Who Choose to Stand up, Speak Out and Run to Represent Us in Public Office.

Let's Support these Candidates! Not Knock them! Undermine them! Redicule them! Or Underestimate their Effectiveness in the Marketplace of Ideas.

Why I'm Against "Medical Marijuana" or AZ's Prop 203


My Research and Homework about Prop 203 aka “Medical Marijuana”


Here is the Link to the Full Text of Prop 203: http://keepazdrugfree.com/index/read-203/

FAQ #1: Is Marijuana Medicine?
ANSWER : No. Marijuana is a Class I illegal substance under the Controlled Substance Act, because it has been found to have no acceptable medical use, is subject to abuse, and is not safe for use even under a physician’s care.

I acknowledge that there are people who truly believe they are helped by Marijuana. Contrary to the anecdotal evidence of a few people with compelling stories, however, the FDA and the Top Medical Associations of our country, including the American Medical Association, the American Cancer Society, the American Glaucoma Society, the American Academy of Ophthalmology and the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, the very medical societies that advocate for patients with serious illnesses like cancer, glaucoma and MS, all have rejected Marijuana as a medicine. They say Marijuana has too many negative effects and that real medicines, like "Marinol", work as well or better for the problems stated and are approved by the FDA, available for prescription by physicians, and could be reimbursable by insurance. The Marijuana Policy Project does not care about weighing benefits against negative effects. Their agenda is to legalize Marijuana. They want voters to ignore science and override health care standards that have protected the public for years.

Listen to doctor and experts, not the Marijuana Policy Project. The Marijuana Policy Project is not a Medical Association. It is a National Pro-Drug Lobby, whose mission statement to legalize Marijuana in this country can be read on their website at:

www.mpp.org/about/mission-statement.html

For seriously ill people, Marijuana can do more harm than good. There is not conclusive scientific research on Marijuana’s effectiveness or risks, dosages, interactions with other drugs, or impact on pre-existing conditions. Smoked Marijuana has been proven to damage the immune system, leaving immune-suppressed patients more vulnerable to infection. Specifically with respect to MS, the National MS Society expressed “concerns that coordination, cognition (thinking and memory) and other functions affected by MS could be worsened” by Marijuana!

"marijuana’s mood altering effects would prevent the patient who is using it from driving, operating heavy machinery, and functioning at maximum mental capacity. Marijuana cigarettes also contain hundreds of compounds that damage the lungs, and the deleterious effect of chronic, frequent use of marijuana upon the brain is also well established5.
Other means of administering the active ingredient of marijuana, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), include oral, sublingual, and eye drop instillation. The first two avoid the deleterious effect of marijuana smoke on the lungs, but are limited by the other systemic side effects. In one study in which doctors offered some of their patients with worsening glaucoma the option of pills containing tetrahydrocannabinol and/or smoking marijuana, 9 of 9 patients had discontinued use by either or both methods within 9 months due to side effects6. Given that glaucoma is a lifelong disease, commonly requiring treatment for decades, these results strongly suggest that systemic use of THC is not a reasonable treatment option for such patients. The use of eye drops containing THC, or related compounds, has been investigated, but it has not yet been possible to formulate an eye drop that is able to introduce the drug into the eye in sufficient concentrations due to the low water solubility of the active ingredients.
Although marijuana does lower the IOP temporarily, IOP lowering is only one consideration in slowing the optic nerve damage of glaucoma. For instance, there is a growing body of evidence that inadequate blood supply to the optic nerve may contribute to glaucoma damage. Since marijuana given systemically is known to lower blood pressure, it is possible that such an effect could be deleterious to the optic nerve in glaucoma, possibly reducing or eliminating whatever beneficial effect that conferred by lowering IOP. For this reason, marijuana, or its components administered systemically, cannot be recommended without a long term trial which evaluates the health of the optic nerve." That's NOT Positive! They are Not in FAVOR of Marijuana for TREATMENT OF GLAUCOMA!!

Another study highlighted the impact of cannabis on cognition. Since MS can impair thinking, and previous studies suggest that smoking cannabis also impairs thinking, investigators at the University of Toronto investigated how cannabis use influenced cognition specifically in people with MS. Their study, published in Neurology (2011;76:1153-1160), measured cognitive function in 25 people with MS who regularly smoked or ingested street cannabis, compared to 25 people with MS who did not use cannabis. The users were tested at least 12 hours after last using cannabis so that intoxication was minimized. By matching the groups and also controlling for differences in terms of disease course and duration, age, gender, education and other factors, the cannabis users were found to perform significantly worse on measures of information processing speed, working memory, executive functions and other cognitive functions, and were twice as likely as nonusers to be considered “cognitively impaired.” The study confirmed for the first time that cannabis can worsen cognitive problems in MS.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org/Symptoms-Diagnosis/MS-Symptoms/Cognitive-Dysfunction

http://www.neurology.org/content/76/13/1153.abstract?sid=f9a2b534-8d6f-4ad2-b2ac-22d714f227ce

American Academy of Ophthalmology Reiterates Position that Marijuana is Not Proven Treatment for Glaucoma
http://www.aao.org/newsroom/release/academy-reiterates-position-that-marijuana-not-proven-glaucoma-treatment.cfm

The FDA has not approved marijuana as a safe and effective drug for any indication.
http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/ucm401879.htm

QUESTION: Isn’t Marijuana harmless to the user?
ANSWER: No. Despite the Marijuana Policy Project’s claims that Marijuana is harmless, it’s harmful both physically and psychologically.

Marijuana causes the same heart and lung problems as cigarette smoking. Actually, worse, because pot-smokers inhale deeply and never use filters. The smoking-related diseases, lung cancer, heart attacks, emphysema, all can be caused by smoking Marijuana as well. That is why the country’s leading medical organizations do not approve or recommend any drug that is smoked—a fact the Marijuana Policy Project ignores.

Marijuana use decreases short-term memory, concentration, coordination, and ability to solve problems. It also causes loss of motivation. These problems hit adolescents the hardest, and teens who smoke Marijuana regularly get worse grades, are less likely to finish school and earn less money as adults.

Marijuana use often causes panic attacks and chronic anxiety, and can cause paranoia. These are serious psychiatric problems.

Marijuana use affects a driver’s concentration, perception, coordination, and reaction time, causing increased risk of accidents. Montana checks for Marijuana in the bloodstream of drivers involved in fatal accidents, and found that fatal accidents caused by pot-smoking drivers increased by 25 percent when their medical Marijuana law went into effect. So much for harmless!

The harmful effects of Marijuana are even greater for seriously ill people, the very people the Marijuana Policy Project claims need it! Smoking pot damages the immune system, leaving immune-suppressed patients more vulnerable to infection. This is particularly bad for AIDS and cancer patients. With respect to multiple sclerosis, the National MS Society stated that “coordination, cognition (thinking and memory) and other functions affected by MS could be worsened” by Marijuana.

The National Multiple Sclerosis Society, the American Cancer Society and the American Glaucoma Society do not support medical Marijuana, and they represent the very diseases medical Marijuana is supposed to help. It makes sense listen to the medical professionals who care about our health instead of the Marijuana Policy Project, whose real agenda is to legalize Marijuana.

Also, Marijuana is an addictive drug. About 6-10 percent of regular users get addicted. People addicted to pot have the same problems as people addicted to any other drug—relationship break-ups and divorce, trouble keeping jobs, and increased violence and aggression.

Marijuana is definitely not harmless.

“Medical” Marijuana is already available. "Marinol", a synthetic form of THC, is FDA Approved and available at any pharmacy with a doctor’s prescription. It is not smoked and is given under direction of a physician attending directly to the patient’s need.

To date, thirteen states have decriminalized Marijuana for medical purposes only.

◦No medicine is smoked. Marijuana is composed of more than 400 chemicals and contains more cancer-causing agents than tobacco smoke. The amount of THC in the Marijuana determines how strong its effects will be. The more potent, the greater risks to the user.

◦States that have “Medical” Marijuana Laws have higher than average incidences of teenage use of Marijuana. Marijuana is generally more available in Marijuana-friendly states.

◦In “Medical” Marijuana states, Marijuana dispensaries have brought increased crime to neighborhoods, including assaults, burglaries, robberies, drug trafficking, money laundering, murders and gang infiltration.

◦Law enforcement personnel are overwhelmingly against “Medical” Marijuana Laws as being contrary to public safety.

◦Many cities in “Medical” Marijuana states, frustrated with the increased crime and administrative problems caused by dispensaries, have passed local ordinances banning “Medical” Marijuana dispensaries within city limits. Cities banning dispensaries are being challenged in the courts by Marijuana advocates with deep pockets to force compliance with state Marijuana laws. Understanding the potential for cities and towns to “opt out” of the Marijuana business, Prop 203 requires local authorities to be “reasonable” in zoning ordinances concerning dispensaries, making legal challenges inevitable. At what economic cost to our cities and towns will Prop 203 be passed?

It is not a proper use of taxpayers’ money to have cities, counties and state governmental agencies dealing with this issue.

◦We all should take note of the “warning” from Alameda city officials, who imposed a temporary ban on dispensaries, concluding that the “potential impact of such facilities poses a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare” due to “reported increases in illegal drug activity, illegal drug sales, robbery of persons at or leaving dispensaries, loitering around dispensaries, falsely obtaining identification cards to qualify for Medical Marijuana and other increases in criminal activities “

These “grow houses” become blights in our neighborhoods, bringing down our already crippled property values, and dramatically increasing criminal activity.

◦The legalization of “Medical” Marijuana sends the message to our children that Marijuana Not Only is Acceptable, it’s Good for you! Marijuana use is on the rise partly because of the mixed message that is sent when adults tout Marijuana as a safe and effective medicine. In fact, Marijuana is a Dangerous and addictive drug with a High Potential for Abuse.

◦There will be No Regulation whatsoever of the “quality” of the Marijuana dispensed to “patients.” Prop 203 does not require State testing of the Marijuana. It could be full of pesticides, fungus or other harmful components or additives.

◦Prop 203 allows for Marijuana dispensaries to be located as close as 500-feet away from any school.

◦Schools may not refuse to enroll Marijuana cardholders except under limited circumstances.

Children under the age of 18 can get a Marijuana card if he or she has written permission from a parent or guardian and recommendations from two doctors. Given the large quantity that can be dispensed, what can we expect to happen to the “leftovers?”

◦Cardholders, which can include children, are allowed to purchase as much as 2.5 ounces of Marijuana every 14 days, which is enough to produce as many as 200 joints.

◦According to government estimates, 66,000 Arizonans could have Marijuana cards within the first few years if this proposition passes. This translates to over 10,300 lbs. of Marijuana coming into our neighborhoods every two weeks.

◦Prop 203 allows for any “Medical” Marijuana cardholder who is not within 25 miles of a dispensary to grow as many as 12 Marijuana plants in their home. A “medical” Marijuana caregiver (because he or she is allowed to have as many as five “patients”) would be allowed to grow as many as 60 Marijuana plants! What if two “caregivers” are married? What if “caregivers” form cooperatives (as they do in other states)? These “grow houses” become blights in our neighborhoods, bringing down our already crippled property values, and dramatically increasing criminal activity.

◦In “Medical” Marijuana states, unauthorized Marijuana dispensaries spring up all over and move from place to place. And, to get around regulations with respect to the location of dispensaries, some dispensary owners are running “cannabis caravans” and delivering to cardholders at their homes. Prop 203 specifically allows dispensaries to deliver!

Senator Jon Kyl, Senator John McCain, Congressman John Shadegg, Congressman Trent Franks, Maricopa County Attorney Rick Romley & Yavapai County Attorney Sheila Polk held a press conference to urge Arizonans to Vote "NO" on Prop 203. Governor Brewer & Attorney General Goddard finally Agreed on something & expressed their Strong Opposition to Prop 203 and, in so doing, joined ALL 15 County Sheriffs and ALL 15 County Attorneys, who already had released a joint statement expressing their unprecedented, United Opposition to a political issue.

The Association of Counties and the County Superintendents of Schools also oppose Prop 203.

The Arizona Republic Opposes Prop 203! After doing its research, The Arizona Republic came out swinging Against Prop 203, saying this “Medical” Marijuana initiative is a “sham.” “It is an expensive distraction as the state faces billion-dollar shortfalls for years to come. Prop 203 is a Trojan horse that will suck up scarce resources.” The Arizona Republic, October 14, 2010 (“Voters Should Reject Push for ‘Medical’ Pot”). The Marijuana industry will DRAIN State resources, yet Prop 203 specifically EXEMPTS Marijuana dispensaries from State income tax and the State legislature has NOT provided for a tax on sales of Marijuana!

Don't believe the propaganda! The Marijuana Policy Project (“MPP”), a National Pro-Drug Lobby out of Washington, D.C., is behind Medical Marijuana. The MPP has the stated mission of legalizing Marijuana across the country. The MPP spends millions of dollars nationally on advertising campaigns to persuade voters to falsely believe that “Medical” Marijuana initiatives will make small amounts of Marijuana available only for people with serious illnesses. By specifically allowing Marijuana recommendations for “severe and chronic pain,” Medical Marijuana provides the same loophole being abused in other “medical” Marijuana states. Unethical “pot docs” hand out Marijuana recommendations to anyone who pays their fee. In other states, as few as 2% of cardholders have a serious illness like cancer and most Marijuana recommendations are written for people between 17 and 35 who claim “chronic pain." Medical Marijuana actually is a "back door route to legalization without any consideration of the repercussions." The Arizona Republic, September 26, 2010 ("Just Say 'No' to Medical Marijuana")

Medical Marijuana will bring INCREASED CRIME, TEENAGE drug use, and Car Wrecks to Arizona!

In other states, dispensaries and “indoor grow houses" blight neighborhoods, Bring Down Property Values and dramatically Increase drug trafficking and other criminal activity, yet Medical Marijuana allows criminals to own and operate dispensaries and cultivate Marijuana!

Marijuana users will become a protected class in the workplace, renting homes or apartments, and in driving an automobile. Contrary to existing State law, Marijuana cardholders, including school bus drivers, will be allowed to drive with Marijuana metabolites in their bloodstream. “Medical” Marijuana states have far more fatal car wrecks caused by Marijuana-fueled drivers. Teens in “Medical” Marijuana states are far more likely to use Marijuana.

Impact on Businesses
http://keepazdrugfree.com/index/impact-on-businesses/

Impact on Public Safety
http://keepazdrugfree.com/index/impact-on-public-safety-2/

Impact on Our Communities
http://keepazdrugfree.com/index/impact-on-our-communities/

Barbara LaWall: "Prop 203 ‘bad medicine’ for Arizona"
by Admin on 27. Oct, 2010
http://keepazdrugfree.com/index/2010/10/27/barbara-lawall-prop-203-bad-medicine-for-arizona/

East Valley Tribune Urges “NO” Vote on Prop 203
by Admin on 27. Oct, 2010
http://keepazdrugfree.com/index/2010/10/27/east-valley-tribune-urges-no-vote-on-prop-203/

Arizona Chaptor of American Academy of Pediatrics Opposed to Proposition 203
by Admin on 27. Oct, 2010
http://keepazdrugfree.com/index/2010/10/27/arizona-chapter-of-american-academy-of-pediatrics-opposed-to-proposition-203/

Where did President Reagan Stand on Marijuana?
His Remarks at a business conference in Los Angeles (1977-03-02)
“The smoke from burning Marijuana contains many more cancer-causing substances than tobacco. And if that isn’t enough it leads to bronchitis and emphysema. If adults want to take such chances that is their business. But surely the communications media should let four million youngsters know what they are risking.

In a Taped statement (August 1979). Reagan is on record as opposing legalization of Marijuana:
"I also want to applaud you for helping the people of Oregon fight a misguided minority that would legalize Marijuana. That would be the worst possible message to send to our young people."

In 1984 Nancy Reagan's "Just Say No" Movement begins.

Nancy Reagan's "Just Say No" anti-drug campaign becomes a centerpiece of the Reagan administration's anti-drug campaign. The movement focuses on white, middle class children and is funded by corporate and private donations.

Just a Few More Things NOT to like about Prop 203 aka “Medical Marijuana”

Marijuana use affects a driver’s concentration, perception, coordination, and reaction time, causing increased risk of accidents.

Montana checks for Marijuana in the bloodstream of drivers involved in fatal accidents, and found that fatal accidents caused by pot-smoking drivers increased by 25 percent when their Medical Marijuana law went into effect. So much for harmless!

The harmful effects of Marijuana are even greater for seriously ill people, the very people the Marijuana Policy Project claims need it! Smoking pot damages the immune system, leaving immune-suppressed patients more vulnerable to infection. This is particularly bad for AIDS and cancer patients. With respect to multiple sclerosis, the National MS Society stated that “coordination, cognition (thinking and memory) and other functions affected by MS could be worsened” by Marijuana.

The National Multiple Sclerosis Society, the American Cancer Society and the American Glaucoma Society do not support medical Marijuana, and they represent the very diseases medical Marijuana is supposed to help. It makes sense listen to the medical professionals who care about our health instead of the Marijuana Policy Project, whose real agenda is to legalize Marijuana.

Also, Marijuana is an addictive drug. About 6-10 percent of regular users get addicted. People addicted to pot have the same problems as people addicted to any other drug—relationship break-ups and divorce, trouble keeping jobs, and increased violence and aggression.

Marijuana is definitely not harmless.

It’s harmful both physically and psychologically.

Marijuana causes the same heart and lung problems as cigarette smoking. Actually, worse, because pot-smokers inhale deeply and never use filters. The smoking-related diseases, lung cancer, heart attacks, emphysema, all can be caused by smoking Marijuana as well. That is why the country’s leading medical organizations do not approve or recommend any drug that is smoked—a fact the Marijuana Policy Project ignores.

Marijuana use decreases short-term memory, concentration, coordination, and ability to solve problems. It also causes loss of motivation. These problems hit adolescents the hardest, and teens who smoke Marijuana regularly get worse grades, are less likely to finish school and earn less money as adults.

Marijuana use often causes panic attacks and chronic anxiety, and can cause paranoia. These are serious psychiatric problems.

Marijuana legalization violates my constitutional right to due process.
http://thehive.modbee.com/node/20714


Legalizing Marijuana: Why Citizens Should Just Say No
Published on September 13, 2010 by Charles Stimson
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/09/legalizing-marijuana-why-citizens-should-just-say-no

1- The scientific literature is clear that marijuana is addictive and that its use significantly impairs bodily and mental functions. Marijuana use is associated with memory loss, cancer, immune system deficiencies, heart disease, and birth defects, among other conditions. Even where decriminalized, marijuana trafficking remains a source of violence, crime, and social disintegration.
Stuart M. Butler, The Marijuana Epidemic, Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 140 (May 4, 1981), available at
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/1981/05/The-Marijuana-Epidemic

2 - “Marijuana prohibition makes no more sense than alcohol prohibition did in the early 1900s.”
Nonetheless, this November, California voters will consider a ballot initiative, the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 (RCTCA),[2] that would legalize most marijuana distribution and use under state law. (These activities would remain federal crimes.) This vote is the culmination of an organized campaign by pro-marijuana activists stretching back decades.
The current campaign, like previous efforts, downplays the well-documented harms of marijuana trafficking and use while promising benefits ranging from reduced crime to additional tax revenue.
Letter from Attorney James Wheaton, to Neil Amos, Initiative Coordinator, Office of the Attorney General (July 27, 2009), available at
http://ag.ca.gov/cmsattachments/initiatives/pdfs/i821initiative09-0024amdt1-s.pdf

3 - “The government’s efforts to combat illegal drugs have been a total failure.”
For a preview of all potential arguments that the pro-legalization movement will make, one need go no further than the Web site of the Drug Policy Alliance.
The Drug Policy Alliance: Alternatives to Marijuana Prohibition and the Drug War, http://www.drugpolicy.org (last visited August 31, 2010).
The Web site contains a section titled “Myths and Facts About Marijuana.”
The Drug Policy Alliance: Myths and Facts About Marijuana, http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/ (last visited August 31, 2010). According to their Web site, the Drug Policy Alliance Network is the “nation’s leading orga­nization promoting policy alternatives to the drug war that are grounded in science, compassion, health and human rights.” George Soros is on the Board of the Drug Policy Alliance. The Drug Policy Alliance: Board of Directors, Drug Policy Alliance, http://www.drugpolicy.org/about/keystaff/boardofdirec/ (last visited August 31, 2010).


4 - “The money spent on government efforts to combat the illegal drug trade can be better spent on substance abuse and treatment for the allegedly few marijuana users who abuse the drug.”
The federal government shares these concerns. Gil Kerlikowske, Director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), recently stated, “Marijuana legalization, for any purpose, is a non-starter in the Obama Administration.”
R. Gil Kerlikowske, ONDCP Director, Remarks to the California Police Chiefs Conference: Why Marijuana Legalization Would Compromise Public Health and Public Safety (March 4, 2010), available at
http://www.ondcp.gov/news/speech10/030410_Chief.pdf

5 - “Tax revenue collected from marijuana sales would substantially outweigh the social costs of legalization.”
The Administration—widely viewed as more liberal than any other in recent memory and, for a time, as embodying the hopes of pro-legalization activists[5]—has weighed the costs and benefits and concluded that marijuana legalization would compromise public health and safety.
On October 19, 2009, the Justice Department issued a memorandum to selected United States Attorneys regarding inves­tigations and prosecutions in states authorizing the medical use of marijuana. See Memorandum from David W. Ogden, Deputy Attorney General, to Selected United States Attorneys (October 19, 2009), available at
http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/192


Marijuana: Facts Parents Need to Know - A Letter to Parents -
We at the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) are pleased to offer these two short booklets for parents and children to review the scientific facts about marijuana: (1) Marijuana: Facts Parents Need to Know and (2) Marijuana: Facts for Teens. Although it is best to talk about drugs when children are young—since that is when drug use often begins—it is never too late to start the conversation.

Marijuana remains the most abused illegal substance among youth. By the time they graduate high school, about 46 percent of U.S. teens will have tried marijuana at least once in their lifetime. Although use among teens dropped dramatically in the previous decade (to a prevalence of about 12.4 percent for past-month use in 2007), adolescent marijuana use is again on the upswing. In 2013, nearly 23 percent of high school seniors were current marijuana users, and 6.5 percent used marijuana daily. The annual Monitoring the Future survey, which has been tracking teen attitudes and drug use since 1975, shows that use of marijuana over time is directly related to how safe teens perceive the drug to be; currently the number of teens who think marijuana users risk harming themselves is declining. This, despite growing scientific evidence that marijuana use during the teen years can permanently lower a person’s IQ and interfere with other aspects of functioning and well-being.

Survey results show that we still have a long way to go in our efforts to prevent marijuana use and avoid the toll it can take on a young person’s life. NIDA recognizes that parents have an important role in this effort and can strongly influence their children’s attitudes and behaviors. However, the subject of marijuana use has become increasingly difficult to talk about—in part, because of the mixed messages being conveyed by the passage of medical marijuana laws and legalization of marijuana in some States. In addition, many parents of today’s teens may have used marijuana when they were younger, which could make talking openly and setting definitive rules about its use more difficult.

Talking to our children about drug use is not always easy, but it is crucial. You can also get involved in your community and seek out drug abuse prevention programs that you and your child can participate in together. Sometimes, just beginning the conversation is the hardest part. I hope these booklets can help.

Nora D. Volkow, M.D.
Director
National Institute on Drug Abuse
http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/marijuana-facts-parents-need-to-know/letter-to-parents

Marijuana: Facts for Teens
One serious risk is addiction. In 2011, nearly 4.2 million people 12 and older had a marijuana abuse or addiction problem.
http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/marijuana-facts-teens/letter-to-teens


Marijuana, America's Most Dangerous illegal drug
by James C. Backstrom June 21, 2010
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/06/21/backstrom/

Cop talk: Legal pot will Increase Crashes, Deaths, Arrests - Posted August 14, 2010 at 9:56 pm
http://www.redding.com/news/2010/aug/14/legal-pot-will-increase-crashes-deaths-arrests/

Problems With the Medicalization of Marijuana -
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1874073&resultClick=3

Marijuana, Tobacco Use Associated With Stillbirth Risk -
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1817774&resultClick=3

Synthetic Marijuana Sends Hundreds for Emergency Care in Colorado - http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1820445&resultClick=3

FAQ #6: Will Marijuana users be subject to DUI laws?
QUESTION: Someone told me that a Marijuana cardholder will be exempt from DUI laws. Is that right?
ANSWER: Yes. Prop 203 creates a protected class of drug users who will be exempt from the long-standing DUI laws of our State.

Marijuana cardholders will enjoy special treatment. If Prop 203 passes, Marijuana cardholders can’t be prosecuted for DUI unless Marijuana metabolites appear in “sufficient concentration to show impairment.” Unlike tests for blood/alcohol ratios establishing impairment, there is no test or standard for Marijuana impairment. Cardholders can claim their blood levels are too low even when they obviously are impaired. Expect this to play out in court for years.

FAQ #7: How does Prop 203 affect employers?
QUESTION: Will employers be able to fire a Marijuana cardholder for failing a drug test?
ANSWER: No. Prop 203 creates a protected class of drug users who will be exempt from workplace safety and compliance laws.

Protections similar to DUI exemptions are given to Marijuana cardholders in the workplace. Employers can’t ask cardholders about Marijuana use in an interview and can’t discriminate or terminate an employee who is a cardholder on the basis of a failed drug test. Again, there is a presumption that a Marijuana cardholder always is using Marijuana for medical purposes. Employers will have to prove that an employee is actually impaired due to Marijuana use. There is no definition of what constitutes actual impairment, so lawsuits will ensue. Employees who use Marijuana before work could pose threats to the safety of other employees and property, all at great liability to employers.

Imagine a workplace where employees show up for work after smoking Marijuana, putting other employees and the public at risk, and there is nothing you can do about it! Expect insurance rates to increase, productivity to decline and new, unwelcome challenges to be presented in workplace safety and compliance. We don’t want these issues in Arizona!

FAQ #12: Will Marijuana be taxed by the State?
QUESTION: Will Marijuana be taxed by the State?
ANSWER: No. The issue was considered by the legislature last Spring, but it did not pass. Prop 203 specifically provides that Marijuana is exempt from taxation.


Association Between Marijuana Exposure and Pulmonary Function Over 20 Years
Conclusion Occasional and low cumulative marijuana use was not associated with adverse effects on pulmonary function.

Exposure to tobacco smoke causes lung damage with clinical consequences that include respiratory symptoms, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and lung cancer.1,2 Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and lung cancer are leading causes of death,2,3 and smoking tobacco cigarettes is the most important preventable cause of death in the United States.4,5

Marijuana smoke contains many of the same constituents as tobacco smoke,6 but it is unclear whether smoking marijuana causes pulmonary damage similar to that caused by tobacco. Prior studies of marijuana smokers have demonstrated consistent evidence of airway mucosal injury and inflammation7- 9 as well as increased respiratory symptoms such as cough, phlegm production, and wheeze, similar to that seen in tobacco smokers.10- 12 However, analyses of pulmonary function and lung disease have failed to detect clear adverse effects of marijuana use on pulmonary function.10- 13 It is possible that cumulative damage to the lungs from years of marijuana use could be masked by short-term effects; prior analyses have not attempted to disentangle these factors. Smoking marijuana is increasingly common in the United States,14 and understanding whether it causes lasting damage to lung function has important implications for public health messaging and medical use of marijuana.15,16

The Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) study collected repeated measures of tobacco and marijuana smoking as well as pulmonary function over the course of 20 years (March 26, 1985-August 19, 2006) in more than 5000 study participants. We estimated both current intensity and lifetime cumulative exposure to tobacco and marijuana smoking and analyzed their associations with spirometric measures of pulmonary function over the 20 years of follow-up
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1104848&resultClick=3


Prevalence of Marijuana Use Disorders in the United States
1991-1992 and 2001-2002
Results Among the adult US population, the prevalence of marijuana use remained stable at about 4.0% over the past decade. In contrast, the prevalence of DSM-IV marijuana abuse or dependence significantly (P = .01) increased between 1991-1992 (1.2%) and 2001-2002 (1.5%), with the greatest increases observed among young black men and women (P<.001) and young Hispanic men (P = .006). Further, marijuana use disorders among marijuana users significantly increased (P = .002) in the absence of increased frequency and quantity of marijuana use, suggesting that the concomitant increase in potency of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) may have contributed to the rising rates.

Conclusions Despite the stability in the overall prevalence of marijuana use, more adults in the United States had a marijuana use disorder in 2001-2002 than in 1991-1992. Increases in the prevalence of marijuana use disorders were most notable among young black men and women and young Hispanic men. Although rates of marijuana abuse and dependence did not increase among young white men and women, their rates have remained high. The results of this study underscore the need to develop and implement new prevention and intervention programs targeted at youth, particularly minority youth.

Marijuana has been the most common illicit substance used in the United States for several decades.1,2 Understanding changes in the use of marijuana over time is important for a number of reasons. Marijuana use is associated with impaired educational attainment,3 reduced workplace productivity,4 and increased risk of use of other substances.5 Marijuana use plays a major role in motor vehicle crashes6 and has adverse effects on the respiratory and cardiovascular systems.7- 10

Marijuana use also is a necessary, although not a sufficient, condition for developing marijuana abuse and dependence as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV), which are clear indicators of problems in and of themselves.11Marijuana abuse is defined in the DSM-IV as repeated instances of use under hazardous conditions; repeated, clinically meaningful impairment in social/occupational/educational functioning, or legal problems related to marijuana use. Marijuana dependence is defined in the DSM-IV as increased tolerance, compulsive use, impaired control, and continued use despite physical and psychological problems caused or exacerbated by use. Beyond the seriousness of these disorders in their own right, marijuana abuse and dependence increase the risk of other serious consequences, most significantly, major mood, anxiety, and personality psychopathology.
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=198686&resultClick=3


Marijuana Arrests and Increase in Marijuana Use Disorders
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=199260&resultClick=3

Marijuana Use Starting in Youth Linked to IQ Loss
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1362021&resultClick=3

Early Exposure to Marijuana and Risk of Later Drug UseEarly Exposure to Marijuana and Risk of Later Drug Use
Peter Cummings, MD, MPH
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=196937&resultClick=3

Early Exposure to Marijuana and Risk of Later Drug UseEarly Exposure to Marijuana and Risk of Later Drug Use
K. J. S. Anand, MBBS, DPhil
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=196939&resultClick=3

Long-term Marijuana Use and Pulmonary Function
Rita B. Patel, MD, MPH; Nayer Khazeni, MD, MS
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1150084&resultClick=3

Long-term Marijuana Use and Pulmonary Function—Reply
Mark J. Pletcher, MD, MPH; Stefan G. Kertesz, MD, Msc
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1150085&resultClick=3

Teen Marijuana Use on the Rise
Bridget M. Kuehn
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=645158&resultClick=3

Cognitive Functioning of Long-term Heavy Cannabis Users Seeking Treatment
Nadia Solowij, PhD; Robert S. Stephens, PhD; Roger A. Roffman, DSW; Thomas Babor, PhD, MPH; Ronald Kadden, PhD; Michael Miller, PhD; Kenneth Christiansen, PsyD; Bonnie McRee, MPH; Janice Vendetti, MPH; for the Marijuana Treatment Project Research Group
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=194703&resultClick=3

Marijuana: Marihuana: The Forbidden Medicine
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1834207&resultClick=3

'Decent Research and Closure' Needed on Medical Marijuana, Says Head of NIH Panel
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=418109&resultClick=3

NIH Panel Says More Study Is Needed to Assess Marijuana's Medicinal Use
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=414634&resultClick=3

Cognitive Effects of Marijuana
PDF
L. M. Scheier, PhD; Gilbert J. Botvin, PhD
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=402738&resultClick=3

Marijuana as Medicine
PDF
R. William Bennetts, MD
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=392884&resultClick=3

You mentioned Glaucoma. Here's what The American Glaucoma Society says about Marijuana 'Officially': American Glaucoma Society
POSITION STATEMENT ON MARIJUANA AND THE TREATMENT OF GLAUCOMA
Prepared by Henry Jampel, M.D., M.H.S.

August 10, 2009
Glaucoma is a disease of the optic nerve that can result in vision loss and blindness. Although many factors, some only partially understood, contribute to the optic nerve damage in glaucoma patients, it has been definitively established that the level of intraocular pressure (IOP) is related to the presence of damage1, and that treatments that lower IOP reduce the risk of developing initial damage2, and slow the progression of preexisting damage3. Therefore, the mainstay of treatment for glaucoma patients is lowering the IOP.
There are three modalities in widespread use for the lowering of IOP: medications, laser treatment, and operating room surgery. Although historically, systemic medications in the form of oral carbonic anhydrase inhibitors had an important long term role in lowering the IOP, their side effects have resulted in their almost total replacement by many classes of effective eye drops with many fewer side effects.
Despite the treatments available for lowering the IOP, there are some individuals for whom these treatments are either not tolerated due to side effects or in whom the IOP is not sufficiently lowered. In these situations, both glaucoma patient and physician look for alternative therapies.
One of the commonly discussed alternatives for the treatment of glaucoma by lowering IOP is the smoking of marijuana. It has been definitively demonstrated, and widely appreciated, that smoking marijuana lowers IOP in both normal individuals and in those with glaucoma, and therefore might be a treatment for glaucoma4,5. Less often appreciated is marijuana’s short duration of action (only 3-4 hours), meaning that to lower the IOP around the clock it would have to be smoked every three hours. Furthermore, marijuana’s mood altering effects would prevent the patient who is using it from driving, operating heavy machinery, and functioning at maximum mental capacity. Marijuana cigarettes also contain hundreds of compounds that damage the lungs, and the deleterious effect of chronic, frequent use of marijuana upon the brain is also well established5.
Other means of administering the active ingredient of marijuana, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), include oral, sublingual, and eye drop instillation. The first two avoid the deleterious effect of marijuana smoke on the lungs, but are limited by the other systemic side effects. In one study in which doctors offered some of their patients with worsening glaucoma the option of pills containing tetrahydrocannabinol and/or smoking marijuana, 9 of 9 patients had discontinued use by either or both methods within 9 months due to side effects6. Given that glaucoma is a lifelong disease, commonly requiring treatment for decades, these results strongly suggest that systemic use of THC is not a reasonable treatment option for such patients. The use of eye drops containing THC, or related compounds, has been investigated, but it has not yet been possible to formulate an eye drop that is able to introduce the drug into the eye in sufficient concentrations due to the low water solubility of the active ingredients.
Although marijuana does lower the IOP temporarily, IOP lowering is only one consideration in slowing the optic nerve damage of glaucoma. For instance, there is a growing body of evidence that inadequate blood supply to the optic nerve may contribute to glaucoma damage. Since marijuana given systemically is known to lower blood pressure, it is possible that such an effect could be deleterious to the optic nerve in glaucoma, possibly reducing or eliminating whatever beneficial effect that conferred by lowering IOP. For this reason, marijuana, or its components administered systemically, cannot be recommended without a long term trial which evaluates the health of the optic nerve.ADDIN RW.CITE7
An exciting finding in the past decade is the discovery of receptors for the active components of marijuana in the tissues of the eye itself, suggesting that local administration has the possibility of being effective8. Furthermore, there is evidence from research in the brain that there may be properties of the cannabinoid components of marijuana that protect nerve cells like those in the optic nerve9. This raises the hope that marijuana or related compounds could protect the optic nerve not only through IOP lowering but also through a neuroprotective mechanism. However, unless a well tolerated formulation of a marijuana-related compound with a much longer duration of action is shown in rigorous clinical testing to reduce damage to the optic nerve and preserve vision, there is no scientific basis for use of these agents in the treatment of glaucoma.
Summary: Although marijuana can lower the intraocular pressure (IOP), its side effects and short duration of action, coupled with a lack of evidence that it use alters the course of glaucoma, preclude recommending this drug in any form for the treatment of glaucoma at the present time.
References
1. Coleman AL, Miglior S. Risk factors for glaucoma onset and progression. Surv Ophthalmol. 2008;53 Suppl1:S3-10.
2. Kass MA, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, et al. The ocular hypertension treatment study: A randomized trial determines that topical ocular hypotensive medication delays or prevents the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:701-13; discussion 829-30.
3. Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, et al. Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: Results from the early manifest glaucoma trial. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:1268-1279.
4. Merritt JC, Crawford WJ, Alexander PC, Anduze AL, Gelbart SS. Effect of marihuana on intraocular and blood pressure in glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1980;87:222-228.
5. Green K. Marijuana smoking vs cannabinoids for glaucoma therapy. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116:1433-1437.
6. Flach AJ. Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in the treatment of end-stage open-angle glaucoma. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2002;100:215-22; discussion 222-4.
7. Kaufman PL. Marijuana and glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116:1512-1513.
8. Jarvinen T, Pate DW, Laine K. Cannabinoids in the treatment of glaucoma. Pharmacol Ther. 2002;95:203-220.
9. Nucci C, Bari M, Spano A, et al. Potential roles of (endo)cannabinoids in the treatment of glaucoma: From intraocular pressure control to neuroprotection. Prog Brain Res. 2008;173:451-464.
AMERICAN GLAUCOMA SOCIETY
BOD APPROVED – 10.23.2009
http://www.americanglaucomasociety.net/patients/position_statements/marijuana_glaucoma


The Harmful effects of Marijuana on the Brain and Central Nervous System are:

Impaired thinking, mood, memory, and coordination

Marijuana (THC) is an extremely powerful and pleasurable intoxicant. Its affects alter and damage brain cells that control thinking, emotion, pleasure, coordination, mood, and memory. The pituitary gland is also damaged which regulates hunger, thirst, blood pressure, sexual behavior, and the release of sex hormones.

Clogged synapses, brain damage, and addiction

Marijuana accumulates in the microscopic spaces between nerve cells in the brain called "synapses." This clogging interferes by slowing and impairing the transfer of critical information.

Long term use causes the brain to stop production of brain chemicals necessary to "feel good" - a negative feedback condition. This causes the user to become chemically addicted to Marijuana.

The harmful effects of Marijuana on the Heart

Speeds up heartbeat as much as 50%, increases blood pressure, and poses great risk to those with hypertension and heart disease.

The Harmful effects of Marijuana on the Endocrine System

Marijuana damages the network of glands, organs, and hormones involved in growth and development, energy levels, and reproduction.

Organs and Glands Affected:
pituitary gland
thyroid gland
stomach
duodenum
pancreas
adrenal glands
testis

The Harmful effects of Marijuana on the Reproductive System for males and females

Marijuana use can decrease and degenerate sperm, sperm count, movement, and cause lowered sex drive. Females can have egg damage, suppression of ovulation, disrupt menstrual cycles, and cause alteration of hormone levels.

Regular use during pregnancy can lower birth weight and cause abnormalities similar to Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (small head, irritability, poor growth and development).

Can destroy the number of chromosomes, resulting in cell abnormalities and impaired function.

Other affects on the central nervous system:
Distortions of perceptions, thinking, and reality
Difficulty in forming concepts and thoughts
Poor concentration
Mental confusion
Loss of motivation
Wide mood swings
Aggression and hostility
Depression, anxiety, and paranoia

The Harmful effects of Marijuana on the Eyes:

Sleepy looking, bloodshot eyes with dilated pupils.

The Harmful effects of Marijuana on the Throat:

Irritates membranes of the esophagus and increases chance of developing cancer of larynx and esophagus.

The Harmful effects of Marijuana on the Lungs:

Significant damage and destruction of the air sacs of the lungs, reducing the lungs ability to bring oxygen and remove carbon dioxide - Emphysema.

Causes bronchial tubes to be inflamed, thickened, and to produce more mucus which results in narrowing of the air passages - Chronic Bronchitis.

Marijuana smoke has Twice as much "Tar" as cigarette smoke and significantly increases chance of lung cancer, inflammation, and infection.

My Source: http://www.usnodrugs.com/marijuana-harmful.htm

How Does Marijuana Affect the Brain? - http://drugabuse.gov/infofacts/marijuana.html

Marijuana and Mental Health

A number of studies have shown an association between chronic Marijuana use and increased rates of anxiety, depression, and schizophrenia. Some of these studies have shown age at first use to be an important risk factor, where early use is a marker of increased vulnerability to later problems. However, at this time, it is not clear whether Marijuana use causes mental problems, exacerbates them, or reflects an attempt to self-medicate symptoms already in existence.

Chronic Marijuana use, especially in a very young person, may also be a marker of risk for mental illnesses - including addiction - stemming from genetic or environmental vulnerabilities, such as early exposure to stress or violence. Currently, the strongest evidence links Marijuana use and schizophrenia and/or related disorders.4 High doses of Marijuana can produce an acute psychotic reaction; in addition, use of the drug may trigger the onset or relapse of schizophrenia in vulnerable individuals.

Effects on the Heart

Marijuana increases heart rate by 20-100 percent shortly after smoking; this effect can last up to 3 hours. In one study, it was estimated that Marijuana users have a 4.8-fold increase in the risk of heart attack in the first hour after smoking the drug.5 This may be due to increased heart rate as well as the effects of Marijuana on heart rhythms, causing palpitations and arrhythmias. This risk may be greater in aging populations or in those with cardiac vulnerabilities.


Effects on the Lungs

Numerous studies have shown marijuana smoke to contain carcinogens and to be an irritant to the lungs. In fact, Marijuana smoke contains 50-70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke. Marijuana users usually inhale more deeply and hold their breath longer than tobacco smokers do, which further increase the lungs' exposure to carcinogenic smoke. Marijuana smokers show dysregulated growth of epithelial cells in their lung tissue, which could lead to cancer;6 however, a recent case-controlled study found no positive associations between Marijuana use and lung, upper respiratory, or upper digestive tract cancers.7 Thus, the link between Marijuana smoking and these cancers remains unsubstantiated at this time.

Nonetheless, Marijuana smokers can have many of the same respiratory problems as tobacco smokers, such as daily cough and phlegm production, more frequent acute chest illness, and a heightened risk of lung infections. A study of 450 individuals found that people who smoke Marijuana frequently but do not smoke tobacco have more health problems and miss more days of work than nonsmokers.8 Many of the extra sick days among the Marijuana smokers in the study were for respiratory illnesses.


Effects on Daily Life

Research clearly demonstrates that Marijuana has the potential to cause problems in daily life or make a person's existing problems worse. In one study, heavy Marijuana abusers reported that the drug impaired several important measures of life achievement, including physical and mental health, cognitive abilities, social life, and career status. Several studies associate workers' Marijuana smoking with increased absences, tardiness, accidents, workers' compensation claims, and job turnover.

I Think that just about covers My Research and Homework on Prop 203 aka “Medical Marijuana”

Please “Tweet” this Note and “Share” it with others on Facebook Who May have Questions, Concerns or Worse Like Prop 203 and Voted FOR IT!

Information and Education is the Best Way to get America Healthy & Strong Again.

Please Help Me get this Info to the Masses! Thank You again.

Sunday, January 23, 2011

ObamaCare Is A BAD Bill And Wrong For America

I'm taking the time to write this note on Obamacare due to the fact that some self-described Liberals, Independents and Moderates I know who still believe that Obamacare "Isn't ALL Bad" and "Can be Fixed".  No it can't.  I will prove without a shadow of a doubt that a bad bill is a bad bill. It needs to be defunded, repealed and replaced with free market solutions instead of this disaster called Obamacare.

UPDATED INFORMATION REGARDING OBAMACARE:

Fri Aug 12, 2011 6:26pm  - Appeals Court Rules AgainstObama Healthcare Mandate
The U.S. Appeals Court for the 11th Circuit, based in Atlanta, ruled 2 to 1 that Congress exceeded its authority by requiring Americans to buy coverage, but it unanimously reversed a lower court decision that threw out the entire law.

August 12, 2011 - U.S. Appeals Court Declares"Individual Mandate" Unconstitutional
The 11th Circuit U.s. Court of Appeals in Atlanta, Georgia has declared the "individual mandate" provision of President Obama's health care bill unconstitutional, calling it an "unprecedented exercise of congressional power," Reuters reports.

The section of the bill in question made it illegal for an individual not to have health insurance, and is one of the most contested parts of the law passed in March 2010. The attorneys-general of 26 states filed suit in the 11th Circuit to have the law overturned.

Mark Levin's Landmark Files First Brief in
Florida Obamacare Case.
May 11, 2011
One of the law firms representing a lead party in the Florida litigation launched by 26 states challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare invited Mark Levin's Landmark Legal Foundation to file an amicus curiae ("Friend of the Court") brief in support of the federal district court's decision that Obamacare was unconstitutional. Landmark was asked to address the Commerce Clause and tax issues relating to the legislation.
Landmark's amicus brief is here: /uploads/Brief_Filed.pdf  - It is 40 Pages long.

Let's Not Ever Forget How ObamaCare was Passed with cheers and applause of Liberal Democrats and ONLY ONE Republican Who Voted for it. Hardly BiPartisan. Very UnPopular! In a victory for President Barack Obama, the Democratic-controlled House narrowly passed landmark health care legislation Saturday night. The final vote was 220-215 with only one Republican voting with the Democrats.

There is Hope and a Way to Defund it and Mark Levin Sees DeFunding ObamaCare like this: http://www.facebook.com/notes/mark-levin/how-to-defund-obamacare/449971410945


How to defund Obamacare. You read it here first.
Set forth in this article:
http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMp1011213

ObamaCare's Incentive to Drop Insurance.

Alert readers will remember the White House summer of 2009 invitation to all Americans to send in their horror stories describing health insurance industry abuses. Although the complaints were many, the vast majority were about pre-existing condition limitations. Then, on the eve of the ObamaCare vote, every member of Congress who appeared on television to defend the legislation was able to cite by name an individual or family in his or her state or Congressional district with a heart wrenching story.

Out of 310 million Americans, only 8,000 people have pre-existing condition limitations as the principal reason for spending almost $1 trillion, creating more than 150 regulatory agencies and causing perhaps 150 million or more people to change the coverage they now have.

Gone was any interest in “universal coverage” or “insuring the uninsured” or “helping poor people get health care.” The case for change was focused almost exclusively on protecting the middle class from miserly insurance companies.

If Obamacare was so good and so constitutional.....Why are 1,000 businesses, groups and organizations seeking waivers from it?

03/06/11 03:38 PM ET  - By Jason Millman
The Obama administrations has now issued 1,000 "get out of ObamaCare free cards" the 1,000 also includes four state governments!
Number of healthcare reform law waivers climbs above 1,000

But Let's Forget about Who is Exempt and Who gets Waivers to Focus and Concentrate on the Elderly.
The Elderly Must Really Love this ObamaCare Idea. Right?
Not the Elderly Who Dropped AARP for Supporting ObamaCare.

The Some 60,000 Elderly People Quit AARP after finding out AARP was Endorsing ObamaCare.

I Wonder Why that is? How can that be?

The News just gets Worse for the Elderly with this News:

Obamacare spurs AARP to raise premiums

AAPS files Amended Complaint on 8/23/2010 asking court to vacate HHS regulations requiring non-Medicare providers to enroll with Medicare, to appear in PECOS, or to obtain a National Provider Identifier (“NPI”)
READ COMPLAINT
http://www.aapsonline.org/hhslawsuit/

Government Budgets to Hire 1,054 Physicians to Implement Initial Phase of Obamacareby Michelle Malkin on Tuesday, February 15, 2011 at 8:46pm
http://www.facebook.com/posted.php?id=1035391191&start=120#!/note.php?note_id=499587705676&id=269123710083

Obama and the Dems had to Protect Medicare through all of this ObamaCare Process Right?

I'm afraid Not.

They Thought it'd be a Better Idea to cut $500 Billion Dollars out of Medicare.

The Congressional majority wants to pay for its $1 trillion to $1.6 trillion health bills with new taxes and a $500 billion cut to Medicare. This cut will come just as baby boomers turn 65 and increase Medicare enrollment by 30%. Less money and more patients will necessitate rationing. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that only 1% of Medicare cuts will come from eliminating fraud, waste and abuse.

The assault against seniors began with the stimulus package in February. Slipped into the bill was substantial funding for comparative effectiveness research, which is generally code for limiting care based on the patient’s age.

But what about Medicare Advantage?
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/09/17/massive-medicare-advantage-cuts/

Less Choices, Higher Premiums. Big Insurance, Big Medicine.

Where are the Jobs? Obamacare Resulting in Hundreds of Thousands of Jobs Being Lost.

CBO Director: ObamaCare will worsen the Economy. Even CBO Is Skeptical of Obamacare.

ObamaCare’s Report Card: It's Worse Than We Thought.

The Massive Costs on States’ Shoulders. Obamacare Mandates Send State Costs Skyrocketing.

ObamaCare’s False Promises. Obamacare Subsidies Are Not a Free Lunch.

Small Businesses Suffer under ObamaCare. Health Benefits Appear On Rise.

Top 10 Failures of ObamaCare After 6 Months Obama today is proudly touting the success of the biggest disaster of his presidency: ObamaCare

ObamaCare’s Day in Court. Obamacare’s Destiny: The Supreme Court. ObamaCare is NOT Constitutional!

Taxpayers Forced to Pay the Price. The cost of 'free' medical care.

Mandates Force Hospitals to Cut Jobs. Memorial Hospital Cites Obamacare on Hospital Layoffs.

Geographic Variation in the Quality of Prescribing Another O-care idea to defund!
Voters say, “NO!” to ObamaCare. Arizona, Oklahoma Voters Reject ObamaCare Insurance Requirement.

Democrats Defeated by their Own Ideas. How Health Care Mattered in the Midterm Elections.

Another doctor speaking out against the rationing of health care. This is chilling.

Thanks to Judge Roger Vinson, of the Northern District of Florida, in Pensacola, ruled that it's unconstitutional to require people to purchase health insurance on Jan 21st 2011, He FINALLY Forced Obama to have to APPEAL His Ruling on ObamaCare!
http://www.medpagetoday.com/Washington-Watch/Reform/25258

Posted March 3rd, 2011 at 3:22pm
Judge Vinson Clarifies His Ruling and makes the Obama Defense Team Speed up their Case in the Process. Judge Vinson to Obama: Speed up the Appeal or Stop Implementing Obamacare
The Obama administration got a well-deserved rebuke today from Judge Roger Vinson in the Florida lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare (aka the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act). Judge Vinson issued a new order in response to a bizarre and obtuse “motion to clarify” that the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed on February 17.
Vinson’s original order on January 31 could not have been clearer: He declared the entire law unconstitutional and specifically said that, because he presumed that officials of the executive branch would adhere to the law as declared by a court, his declaratory judgment striking the law down was the functional equivalent of an injunction. Judge Vinson wrote then that he presumed that the executive branch would follow his order, which any lawyer (including a lawyer President) would know requires them to cease implementing Obamacare with respect to the 26 states that are plaintiffs and the National Federation of Independent Business. That turned out to be a faulty presumption, indeed.
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/03/03/judge-vinson-to-obama-speed-up-the-appeal-or-stop-implementing-obamacare/

Here are All of the Links I Could Find Showing Jude Vinson's Ruling Against Obamacare:
 
1. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/01/senates-47-gop-members-agree-to-back-health-care-repeal-bill--/1

2. http://freedomtorch.com/forums/topic/4063/breaking-fed-judge-rules-entir

3. http://www.facebook.com/posted.php?id=1035391191&start=480#!/video/video.php?v=191422777554176&comments

4. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703439504576116361022463224.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories

5. http://weaselzippers.us/2011/01/31/breaking-federal-judge-in-florida-rules-obamacare-individual-mandate-is-unconstitutional/

6. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/31/us-usa-healthcare-ruling-idUSTRE70U6RY20110131?feedType=RSS&feedName=healthNews

7. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/48517.html#ixzz1CeEZzD00

I Was able to find SEVEN Links to Credible News Media ALL Reporting on Judge Vinson's Ruling.

Then January 31, 2011
47 GOP Senators agree to back health care repeal
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/01/senates-47-gop-members-agree-to-back-health-care-repeal-bill--/1

01/31/11 04:20 PM ET - By Michael O'Brien
ALL 47 Senators to be United in their Resolve to Repeal Obamacare!
Senate GOP unanimous in support for repealing healthcare reform
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/141309-senate-gop-now-unanimous-in-support-for-repealing-health-reform

Here's a List of the 47 Patriots Who Love Freedom and Liberty and the 51 Senators Who'd be Happier living under Tyranny. See where Your Senator's Loyalty is!
http://www.redstate.com/dan_perrin/2010/03/25/the-roll-call-vote-in-the-senate-on-the-repeal-of-obamacare/

January 31, 2011 47
GOP Senators Agree to back Health Care Repeal
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/01/senates-47-gop-members-agree-to-back-health-care-repeal-bill--/1

January 31, 2011
The Judge on Fox News GETS IT!
Judge Andrew Napolitano: FL Judge Rules Health Care Law Unconstitutional
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3OphNrF8apc

Sen. Orrin Hatch Calls Obamacare ‘Dumb-Ass’, ‘Awful Piece of Crap’
http://www.breitbart.tv/sen-orrin-hatch-calls-obamacare-dumb-ass-piece-of-crap/

I Definitely Agree with Sen. Rubio: Obamacare Can't Be Repaired, Must Be Repealed!
http://www.facebook.com/posted.php?id=1035391191&start=300#!/video/video.php?v=192390937457360&comments

Bachmann: Obamacare Is The "Crown Jewel Of Socialism”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/01/19/bachmann_obamacare_is_the_crown_jewel_of_socialism.html

Everyone Seems to be "Getting it" Except for the Stubborn Tyranical Obama Administration.  This is Lawlessness and Tyranny!
 
Even Govenor Mitch Daniels "Gets it"

FEBRUARY 7, 2011
An ObamaCare Appeal From the States by Mitch Daniels
Twenty-one governors representing more than 115 million Americans have written to Kathleen Sebelius asking for more flexibility on health-care reform.
Unless you're in favor of a fully nationalized health-care system, the president's health-care reform law is a massive mistake. It will amplify all the big drivers of overconsumption and excessive pricing: "Why not, it's free?" reimbursement; "The more I do, the more I get" provider payment; and all the defensive medicine the trial bar's ingenuity can generate.

All claims made for it were false. It will add trillions to the federal deficit. It will lead to a de facto government takeover of health care faster than most people realize, and as millions of Americans are added to the Medicaid rolls and millions more employees (including, watch for this, workers of bankrupt state governments) are dumped into the new exchanges.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703652104576122172835584158.html?mod=wsj_share_facebook

Yet Even after all of the Exposure and Everyone "Getting it" Here's how the White House Responds to the Federal Court Ruling.

Barack Obama will ignore the court ruling on Obamacare and will implement the law despite its unconstitutionality
February 7, 2011 by Steve Dennis
Unless you only get your news from the mainstream media you know that Obamacare was ruled unconstitutional in its entirety by a federal judge in Florida in a case that was brought against the federal government by a majority of the fifty states. While the internet has been abuzz by this ruling the mainstream media has all but ignored the fact that Barack Obama’s signature legislation was ruled unconstitutional.

And speaking of ignoring the Florida court ruling–the media isn’t the only one who has decided to pretend that this ruling doesn’t exist because the federal government still plans on implementing the unconstitutional law.

When Judge Roger Vinson handed down his ruling I was thrilled, yet at the same time I was dismayed by the fact that he did not issue an injunction to stop the Obama regime from implementing the unconstitutional law. But it turned out that Judge Vinson did not feel–rightfully so–that an injunction was necessary because his ruling was an injunction in and of itself:
http://americaswatchtower.com/2011/02/07/barack-obama-will-ignore-the-court-ruling-on-obamacare-and-will-implement-the-law-despite-its-unconstitutionality/

Obama Invites Crisis If He Ignores Ruling
By BILL WILSON Posted 02/02/2011 06:12 PM ET
The decision by federal judge Roger Vinson striking down President Obama's signature health care law effectively ends ObamaCare unless some higher court overturns it.

In spite of this overwhelming rebuke of the law, some Birkenstock-wearing legal analysts are trying to argue that Vinson's ruling could be ignored by the administration.

That's why this week's action by Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen is so significant. Van Hollen has taken the proper step of following the law, which now says that ObamaCare is unconstitutional in its entirety, relieving Wisconsin of any obligation to follow it.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/561796/201102021812/Obama-Invites-Crisis-If-He-Ignores-Ruling.aspx

White House Says It Will Implement ObamaCare Despite Judge's Declaration that His Ruling Against It Is 'Equivalent of Injunction'
Monday, February 07, 2011 By Fred Lucas
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/administration-implement-obamacare-despi

Despite the World "Getting it" Obama and His Administration Still Choose to Implement and Secure as Much of Obamacare into Our System as He can.  What a Jerk!  What a Punk!  What a Tyrant!
 
First off. Congress Would've Exempted Themselves from ObamaCare if they Could. I Wonder why that is? I Think We ALL Know why that is. It's Not as close as Good as What they already have now. They Didn't Want to be Forced to have what everyone is BEING FORCED TO HAVE?

The Coburn Amendment to HELP bill would require Congress to use Public Plan. http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20090714/REG/307149981#

Second. Obama and the Democrats Couldn't have recieved Support from the Government employees and Major Labor Unions without Exempting them from having to give up their "Cadiallac Plans" for the ObamaCare BEING FORCED ON US.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Obama_-Dems-cut-deal-to-exempt-union-health-care-from-taxes-8764740-81590182.html#ixzz14Nab4DSu

28 States NOW Want to Block ObamaCare from their States. 20 0f those states involved in this lawsuit are: (Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Indiana, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Washington) along with the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) Va and OK have filed Seperate Cases for their own reasons. A Federal Court Judge has allowed the 20-state challenge to Obamacare to go forward ruling against the Obama Justice Department challenge in a motion to dismiss.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=39429

There are 28 States Fighting Implementation of Obamacare in their States NOT because they believe it's unfair or a bad bill which it is but that's NOT their Point. They're Fighting this Obamacare Bill because it is ABSOLUTELY 100% UnConstitutional and Should NOT be Forced on the Good People of the United States.

Federal Judges in VA and FL have already Ruled Against Obamacare claiming it was Unconstitutional to force Americans to Purchase Health Care or face penatlies. That's UnAmerican. It is something Foriegn to this Country and Should NOT be Permitted.
Utah Attorney General considers Obamacare UNENFORCEABLE!

February 3rd, 2011 10:19 am MT
SALT LAKE CITY - Following a ruling Monday by a Florida judge that deemed the Obama administration’s healthcare reform program unconstitutional, Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff has decided the ruling is the “functional equivalent” of an injunction, making the policy unenforceable.

US District Court Judge Roger Vinson’s decision was in favor of 26 states who filed suit against the federal government over the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The ruling said Congress could not force individuals over the age of 18 to purchase health insurance. Because the mandate is central to the law, the judge declared the entire act unconstitutional. Utah’s Shurtleff was among the first to file after the President signed the bill into law last spring.

Utah Deputy Attorney General John Swallow declared, “It is our legal opinion that we are no longer bound by the act.” The Attorney General’s office has told Governor Gary Herbert of their decision and he is weighing his options.
http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-salt-lake-city/utah-attorney-general-considers-obamacare-unenforceable#ixzz1FfasDmsE

Idaho "Gets it" also
In the last 6 months, various laws with the objective of “nullifying” Obamacare have been introduced in thirteen states: Arizona, Idaho, Indiana, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming. To date, the farthest along had been Idaho, where a nullification bill declaring Obamacare “void and of no effect” and stopping its enforcement had passed the House and the governor was itching to sign it in to law. But in a victory for common sense and constitutional government, the legislation has been defeated in the Idaho Senate’s State Affairs Committee.

“I find no constitutional justification for the things that we are talking about here today,” said Senate President Pro Tempore Brent Hill. “I commend you for your goals, for the passion with which you pursue those. I cannot pursue them in the manner that some of you are prescribing.”
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/03/02/rejecting-nullification-idaho-draws-the-constitutional-line/


There are 50 States and 28 of them are Rejecting Obamacare and Don't want it enforced, meanwhile 1,000 Businesses, Groups and Organizations Want Waivers from it. You Really think Obamacare is Good or Constitutional?

I Hope Not. Please Reconsider Your thoughts on Obamacare. It is NOT Constitutional or Good for America. We Need Free Market Solutions that are Good and Equal for ALL Americans.

Third. Since So Many are getting these Exemptions and waivers...Why Not give out a Few waivers to McDonalds and 29 Other Companies like Jack in the Box Inc. and the United Federation of Teachers, won't be required to raise the minimum annual benefit included in low- cost health plans covering seasonal, part-time or low-wage employees. The Department of Health and Human Services said it granted waivers in late September so workers with minimum plans would keep coverage without major premium increases.
http://business.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978583237

http://lonelyconservative.com/2010/10/obama-admin-gives-mcdonalds-waiver-on-obamacare/

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10283/1094023-114.stm#ixzz1266XaWX7


Medicare actuary: Reform will cost some seniors
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43529.html

How ObamaCare Guts Medicare The president's pledge that 'If you like your health plan, you will be able to keep it' clearly does not apply to America's seniors http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703649004575437311393854940.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion#

Call Me Crazy but I Think it could be from All of the Regulations Agencies that are coming our way through ObamaCare. Watch this Video which Shows just How Many there will be!
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=163536966991584&ref=share

Or Maybe it's What else is Hidden inside Obamacare that has them and Everyone Freaking out. And Rightfully so!
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=159991024030685

When the Federal Government Calls for 16,500 MORE IRS Agents that are Needed to Enforce ObamaCare, I Think that is a BIG Problem and a Huge RED Flag!
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/16500-more-IRS-agents-needed-to-enforce-Obamacare-88458137.html#ixzz14ZXLWUki

But What do the Many Different Polls Say about American's Approval is of ObamaCare? I'm Glad You Asked! :)

Here are ALL of the Polls Showing How Poorly ObamaCare is Percieved Across America:

1. http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/can-republicans-read-polls-obamacare    - CBS Nightly News - On March 22, Americans opposed ObamaCare by 11 points (48 to 37 percent). Now they oppose it by 21 points (53 to 32 percent).

2. http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/how-does-obamacare-poll   -   CNN conducted a poll in the fateful days leading up to, and including, the day of the House vote. It showed that Americans oppose the bill by a whopping 20 percentage points, 59 percent to 39 percent. It also showed why they oppose it: By a margin of 62 percent to 16 percent, Americans think it would raise (rather than lower) their health costs. By a margin of 70 percent to 12 percent, they think it would raise (rather than lower) the deficit. And by a margin of 56 to 16, they think it would result in too much (rather than too little) “government involvement” in health care. These are colossal margins that won’t disappear, or likely even seriously diminish, simply because the text of the bill has now been graced by President Obama’s pen.

3. http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2010/09/16/what-the-negative-polls-on-obamacare-really-tell-us/  - FORBES CBS/NYT Reports - The Affordable Care Act continues to get the big thumbs down from the American public. According to the latest Pollster.com poll of polls, the country lines up solidly against health care reform with 49.3 percent against while only 41 percent favor the legislation.

4. http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/22/new-cnn-poll-59-oppose-obamacare/  - CNN Poll - A new CNN Opinion Research poll, conducted over the weekend as the House debated Obamacare, finds that 59 percent of Americans now stand opposed to the health care legislation in Congress. Just 39 percent of the poll’s 1,030 respondents said they favored the bill.

5. http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/57588  - Exit Polls Show 48% Want Congress to Repeal ObamaCare.

ObamaCare Doesn't Look Very Good for ANY American. No Wonder 48% of those Registered Voters Wanted Congress to Repeal ObamaCare.

Notice I Said Repeal it! NOT Tweak it! Or Adjust it or Fix it! It Needs to be Defunded, Repealed and Replaced with Free Market Solutions that Benefit Everyone INCLUDING TORT REFORM! Forget about the Trial Lawyers!

There is Hope and a Way to Defund it and Mark Levin Sees DeFunding ObamaCare like this: http://www.facebook.com/notes/mark-levin/how-to-defund-obamacare/449971410945

How to defund Obamacare. You read it here first.
Set forth in this article:
http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMp1011213

Which is supportive of Obamacare, is the strategy for defunding Obamcare.
The relevant part:
Repeal of the ACA before 2013 is unlikely. Both houses of Congress would have to enact repeal legislation, which President Barack Obama would surely veto. Then,two thirds of both houses would have to vote to override that veto. After 2012, however, repeal could occur if Republicans win the White House and both houses of Congress and stick by their pledge.

Here's More Proof/Evidence of how Obama is Willing to be sneaky and bend the Rules as long as it Advances His Agenda.  This article points out how Obama tried to look like he was heading in the RIGHT Direction FINALLY on Health Care Reform aka ObamaCare but instead it's just an attempt to implement ObamaCare through the back door administratively and adding Single Payer Plans in the process.

Jennifer Haberkorn reports that President Obama's move to allow states flexibility in spending health care funds is the "most significant change" since the law was enacted, and a potential gesture toward critics.

But a source on a White House conference call with liberal allies this morning says the Administration is presenting it to Democrats as an opportunity to offer more expansive health care plans than the one Congress passed.

Health care advisers Nancy-Ann DeParle and Stephanie Cutter stressed on the off-record call that the rule change would allow states to implement single-payer health care plans -- as Vermont seeks to -- and true government-run plans, like Connecticut's Sustinet.

The source on the call summarizes the officials' point -- which is not one the Administration has sought to make publically -- as casting the new "flexibility" language as an opportunity to try more progressive, not less expansive, approaches on the state level.

"They are trying to split the baby here: on one hand tell supporters this is good for their pet issues, versus a message for the general public that the POTUS is responding to what he is hearing and that he is being sensible," the source emails. (This CNN story reflects the public presentation.)

Much of the debate now focuses on the federal government's power, and perhaps health care legislation's critics wouldn't object to single payer -- in Vermont. But the prospect of a backdoor to a single-payer plan anywhere may also sharpen opposition.

UPDATE: An Administration official emails, “Administration official discussed how this legislation would help give states the opportunity to innovate. States have the flexibility to design plans in the way that works for them, so long as they meet the shared goals of reform. That could be any number of proposals from exchanges like the Utah model to other innovations that increase choice and competition.”
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0211/On_call_officials_stress_publi...c_options_in_health_care_shift.html

Britain's Problems with Socialized Health Care with Their HNS System or National Health Service....Some Related Front Page News Articles Written in Various UK Newpapers AGAINST the HNS

Canada's Problems with Socialized Health Care and the Canada Health Act of 1984 which Canada's Parliament unanimously passed and Established a single-payer, publicly-financed health care system...Related Front Page Newpaper Headlines AGAINST Socialized Health Care in Canada.

Let’s Not forget about Barbara Wagner, who is covered through the state of Oregon's government health care plan, was denied an important cancer drug she requested and instead was offered a drug for assisted suicide.

This Really Happened and is the TRUTH! Fact NOT Fiction!

Oregon Health Plan Denies Chemo Medicine- Assisted Suicide Offered Instead
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6ojBgTyA7I&feature=youtube

Obama and the Bureaucratization of Health Care by Sarah Palinby Sarah Palin on Tuesday, September 8, 2009 at 6:34pm
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/note.php?note_id=130481448434&id=24718773587

Sen. Jim DeMint (SC) proposes health-care vouchersby Jim DeMint on Thursday, June 25, 2009 at 7:33am
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/note.php?note_id=96351398402&id=19787180818

I Still Remember when the Republicans did have Alternative Free Market Solutions to Obamacare but were Completely ignored and shut out by Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Majority in Congress.

SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE JOHN BOEHNER'S ADDRESS ON THE REPUBLICAN PLAN
The American people have spoken. They oppose government-run health care. Republicans are on the side of the American people.

I Still Remember when the Republicans did have Alternative Free Market Solutions to Obamacare but were Completely ignored and shut out by Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Majority in Congress.

What Americans want are common-sense, responsible solutions that address the rising cost of health care and other major problems. In the national Republican address on Saturday, October 31, 2009, House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) discussed Republicans’ plan for common-sense health care reform our nation can afford. Boehner’s address emphasized four common-sense reforms that will lower health care costs and expand access to quality care without a government takeover of our nation’s health care system that kills jobs, raises taxes on small businesses, or cuts Medicare for seniors:

■Number one: let families and businesses buy health insurance across state lines.
■Number two: allow individuals, small businesses, and trade associations to pool together and acquire health insurance at lower prices, the same way large corporations and labor unions do.
■Number three: give states the tools to create their own innovative reforms that lower health care costs.
■Number four: end junk lawsuits that contribute to higher health care costs by increasing the number of tests and procedures that physicians sometimes order not because they think it's good medicine, but because they are afraid of being sued.

ADDITIONAL COMMON-SENSE REPUBLICAN REFORM PROPOSALS
For more information about some of the other common-sense health care reforms proposed by Republicans, please visit the links below:
■Empowering Patients First Act (Republican Study Committee Health Care Reform Bill, introduced July 30, 2009)
■Improving Health Care for All Americans Act (Shadegg Health Care Reform Bill, introduced July 14, 2009)
■Medical Rights & Reform Act (Kirk-Dent Health Care Reform Bill, introduced June 16, 2009)
■Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare (HEALTH) Act (Gingrey medical liability reform bill, introduced June 6, 2009)
■Small Business Health Fairness Act of 2009 (Johnson small business health plans bill, introduced May 21, 2009)
■Promoting Health and Preventing Chronic Disease through Prevention and Wellness Programs for Employees, Communities, and Individuals Act of 2009 (Castle Wellness & Prevention Bill, introduced July 31, 2009)
■Improved Employee Access to Health Insurance Act of 2009 (Deal auto-enrollment bill, introduced October 15, 2009)
■Health Insurance Access for Young Workers and College Students Act of 2009 (Blunt bill to improve health insurance coverage of dependents, introduced October 21, 2009)

All of these Alternative Free Market Solutions were Ignored by Pelosi and the Democratic Majority Dominating Congress during Obama’s First TWO YEARS.
Just because they were IGNORED doesn’t mean they did NOT Exist! This is Proof they DID Offer Great Free Market Solutions!
http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare

My point on my next link is proving that most top ten medical breakthroughs come from the United States.  America has the Best Environment to do Research and Development. Our Scientist and Medical Experts are Second to None! Why Damage/Harm that by Changing an unbroken System for one that Historically around the world is SO FLAWED?!
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1855948_1863993,00.html

Study Shows Gov't Health Care More Expensive Than Private
Research by The Heartland Institute
(April 12, 2009) in Health / Health Care
By Greg Scandlen, Heartland Institute Health Care Expert
I have been remiss in not reporting earlier on an important study by the actuarial form Milliman, issued in December 2008. This study tries to balance the hysteria about cost-shifting from the uninsured to people with private coverage with an analysis of how much cost-shifting is the result of underpayment by Medicare and Medicaid.
The answer, it turns out, is that underpayment by those two public programs dwarfs any problems created by the uninsured.
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/study-shows-gov-t-health-care-more-expensive-than-private

Bottomline is Health Care Reform aka ObamaCare is a Bad Bill and Wrong for America.  It's Always been a Bad Idea and Wrong for America, Still IS and Always Will be.  It's UnAmerican! Also UnConstitutional!
Need I say More or Show even MORE Proof?  I'm Sure I Can and Will keep Adding to and updating this Blog.  (As Needed)
Thank You for taking the time to Read this Blog.  Please Share it with Your Friends, Family, Co-Workers, Neighbors and Customers.  This is NOT a Right vs Left Problem or Republican vs Democrat Problem.  It's an American Problem.  A BIG Problem that Needs to be dealtt with IMMEDIATELY or AS SOON AS POSSIBLE! 
Please Help Me Spread the Word about this.  It really IS that Important.