Religions > Atheism > Coward Cheney Gets BITCHSLAPPED by True War Hero Tom Harkin
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Yang, AthD h.c" |
| Date: |
17 Aug 2004 01:39:14 AM |
| Object: |
Coward Cheney Gets BITCHSLAPPED by True War Hero Tom Harkin |
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/16/harkin.cheney.ap/
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Sorcery Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: -3 million jobs and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -942 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
.
|
|
| User: "torresB" |
|
| Title: For All You Liberal DemocRAT Dope Heads Out There... LIBERALS ACTUALLY HATE AMERICA!!!!!!!! |
17 Aug 2004 01:07:40 PM |
|
|
For All You Liberal DemocRAT Dope Heads Out There... LIBERALS
ACTUALLY HATE AMERICA!!!!!!!!
Stronger Pot May Make Reefer Madness Real, U.S. Fears
Mon Jul 19,12:36 PM ET
By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Correspondent
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Alarmed by reports that marijuana is becoming
more potent than ever and that children are trying it at younger and
younger ages, U.S. officials are changing their drug policies.
Pot is no longer the gentle weed of the 1960s and may pose a greater
threat than cocaine or even heroin because so many more people use it.
So officials at the National Institutes of Health (news - web sites)
and at the White House are hoping to shift some of the focus in
research and enforcement from "hard" drugs such as cocaine and heroin
to marijuana.
While drug use overall is falling among children and teens, the
officials worry that the children who are trying pot are doing so at
ever-younger ages, when their brains and bodies are vulnerable to
dangerous side effects.
"Most people have been led to believe that marijuana is a soft drug,
not a drug that causes serious problems," John Walters, head of the
White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, said in an
interview.
"(But) marijuana today is a much more serious problem than the vast
majority of Americans understand. If you told people that one in five
of 12- to 17-year-olds who ever used marijuana in their lives need
treatment, I don't think people would remotely understand it."
JUMP IN POT-RELATED DETOX
The number of children and teen-agers in treatment for marijuana
dependence and abuse has jumped 142 percent since 1992, the National
Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University
reported in April.
According to the report, children and teens are three times more
likely to be in treatment for marijuana abuse than for alcohol, and
six times likelier to be in treatment for marijuana than for all other
illegal drugs combined.
And it found the age of youths using marijuana is falling. The teens
aged 12 to 17 said on average they started trying marijuana at 13-1/2.
The same survey found that adults aged 18 to 25 had first tried it at
16.
For National Institute on Drug Abuse director Dr. Nora Volkow the
final straw was a report her institute published in May in the Journal
of the American Medical Association (news - web sites) showing the
steady growth in the potency of cannabis seized in raids.
According to the University of Mississippi's Marijuana Potency
Project, average levels of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana,
rose steadily from 3.5 percent in 1988 to more than 7 percent in 2003.
Volkow said many studies have shown the brain has its own so-called
endogenous cannabinoids. These molecules are similar in structure to
the active ingredients in marijuana and are involved in a range of
activities and emotions ranging from eye function to pain regulation
and anxiety.
GETTING INTO THE BRAIN
Brain cells have receptors -- molecular doorways - designed
specifically to interact with these cannabinoids.
The cannabinoids in marijuana may use these ready-made doorways into
brain cells and this is why they cause a high and reduce pain
sensations. But Volkow believes the effects may go beyond the general
feeling of well-being that most marijuana users seek.
"I would predict that stronger pot makes the brain less likely to
respond to endogenous cannabinoids," Volkow said in an interview. The
effects could be especially marked in young brains still growing and
learning how to respond to stimuli, she said.
While the research so far is inconclusive, Volkow believes that
cannabinoids affect the developing brain and that stronger pot,
combined with earlier use, could make children and teens anxious,
unmotivated or perhaps even psychotic.
As an analogy, Volkow said opiate addicts are more sensitive to pain,
as their overuse of drugs have raised the threshold at which the body
responds and their own bodies produce fewer natural opiates.
NIDA is seeking proposals from researchers who want to investigate
such possibilities for cannabis, she said.
Proponents of legalizing marijuana disagree with the official line.
Krissy Oechslin of the Marijuana Policy Project disputes the finding
that cannabis products are stronger.
"They make it sound like the THC levels in marijuana were almost
nonexistent, but no one would have smoked it then if that was true,"
she said.
"And there's evidence that the stronger the THC, the less of it a
person smokes. I don't want to say it's good for you, but I'll say
(more potent marijuana) is less bad for you."
While Walters stresses that drug abusers are patients and not
criminals, he hopes to crack down more on producers. And he says,
there is a way to go in getting cooperation from local law enforcement
officials. "For many in enforcement, marijuana is still 'kiddie
dope'," Walters said.
***
Yeah! Liberals try to legalize that ***** so our kids have an easier
task of fucking up their brain...
Liberals Hate America!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Marxist Moore" |
|
| Title: Kerry missing in action!! LIBERALS HATE AMERICA!!!!!!!! |
17 Aug 2004 11:16:29 AM |
|
|
Kerry missing in action!! LIBERALS HATE AMERICA!!!!!!!!
Washington Times Edotorial
Having missed 89 percent of Senate votes this year and having failed
to cast a single vote since March 25, Sen. John Kerry suddenly - and
with great fanfare -- showed up in late June to vote on behalf of
veterans' health care. The vote attracting Mr. Kerry to Washington was
delayed, although he remained at the Capitol long enough to cast
another of his countless votes against missile defense. Attributing
the delay in the health-care vote to scheduling conflicts, the
Republican Senate leadership effectively denied Mr. Kerry the photo-op
he was seeking. Indeed, it seems that Mr. Kerry has spent more than
three decades repeatedly showing up at the Capitol seeking
military-related photo-ops in an effort to jump-start his political
career.
Before returning to the campaign trail, Mr. Kerry declared: "What I'm
telling our veterans is that when you come home, your country will
take care of you because you took care of us." Coming from Mr. Kerry,
this statement elicits two observations about events that happen to
span his political career. The first relates to Mr. Kerry's views of
veterans upon his return from Vietnam more than 30 years ago. The
second relates to his treatment of U.S. armed forces serving today in
Iraq and Afghanistan.
Mr. Kerry first attempted to jump-started his political career in 1971
by staging one of the biggest photo-ops in Senate history. That
incident also involved veterans. But there was a big difference.
Instead of embracing Vietnam combat veterans during his dramatic April
1971 testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Mr.
Kerry issued a blanket indictment against them. He charged those
veterans with "war crimes committed in Southeast Asia -- not isolated
incidents -- but [war] crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the
full awareness of officers at all levels of command." Mr. Kerry used
his testimony to launch a bid for the U.S. House in 1972. But even the
coattails of George McGovern, whose only state victory in the
presidential campaign that year was Massachusetts, were inadequate to
the task of electing his fellow war protester.
Regarding the present, it is a shame Mr. Kerry apparently doesn't care
about the troops in the field as much as he claims to care about them
once they become veterans. Mr. Kerry successfully ran for the Senate
in 1984 promising to cancel the Apache helicopter, which has played an
indispensable role on the front lines of the war against terrorism in
Iraq. And, unlike his late June photo-op gambit on veterans' health
care, he refused to adjust his campaign schedule in early June to
return to the Senate in order to vote for the $25
billion in emergency funding bill for military operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
Mr. Kerry's no-show for the $25 billion spending measure contrasts
sharply with the role he played on the previous Iraq-Afghanistan
emergency spending measure last October. On Sept. 14, five weeks
before the Senate vote, Mr. Kerry was asked about the $87 billion
supplemental appropriation that would have funded military operations
in Iraq and Afghanistan and, incidentally, increased spending for
veterans' health care by $1.3 billion. "I don't think any United
States senator is going to abandon our troops and recklessly leave
Iraq to whatever follows as a result of simply cutting and running.
That's irresponsible," Mr. Kerry asserted, adding, "I don't
thinkanyone in Congress is going to not give our troops ammunition,
not give our troops the ability to defend themselves."
But that is precisely what Mr. Kerry did several weeks later. By the
time the vote was held Oct. 17, Mr. Kerry's presidential campaign was
on life-support; the front-running Howard Dean was relentlessly
pounding him for his 2002 vote to authorize the war against Iraq.
Indeed, two Zogby polls conducted within a week of the Oct. 17 vote
showed Mr. Kerry trailing Mr. Dean 21-9 in Iowa and 40-17 in New
Hampshire. After asserting in September that a "nay" vote would be
"irresponsible" and tantamount to "cutting and running," Mr. Kerry
interrupted his presidential campaign and returned to the Senate with
great fanfare in order to vote against the $87 billion
military-funding and reconstruction bill, which won bipartisan
approval in a 87-12 vote.
That was one of the final votes Mr. Kerry cast last year; but it was
typical of the votes that helped to establish him, according to an
authoritative analysis by the National Journal, as the most liberal
member of the Senate for the entire year. Far more disturbing than the
reality that Democrats will be nominating the most liberal member of
their Senate caucus as their presidential candidate (McGovern redux?)
is the fact that Mr. Kerry was willing to sacrifice the well-being of
the troops in harm's way in order to once again jump-start his
political career.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
