We've moved!

Social Icons

twitterfacebooklinkedinrss feed

Tuesday, May 4, 2010

D.C. on the Missouri: Notes on Pot and Other Vermillion Mayor Issues

Pot-smoking Vermillion mayoral candidate Nick Severson may want to check on D.C. politics. The city council of our nation's capital will vote today on legalizing medical marijuana. If it's good enough for Washington, it's good enough for Vermillion, right?

I followed up on yesterday's blog post by reading the USD Volante's coverage of Severson's arrest and other issues in his mayoral campaign. The guy actually sounds like a good candidate for the Teabaggers. Severson declines to identify with a political party, saying he wants to get "beyond the bickering of party politics." He wants to get everyone involved in city government. He wants to clean up the city—literally!—by tackling litter. And hey, when Severson advocates legalizing marijuana, he obviously advocates overthrowing the power of the federal government. Forget states' rights; Severson wants cities' rights. That's totally the Tea Party agenda... right?


  1. Christine Nelson5/04/2010 12:10 PM

    I was always sympathetic to medical use of marijuana, although I believed most people pushing it just wanted to get high. That changed after talking to a friend who is a pharmacist. They didn't understand what the big deal was since Dronabinol was already available. That's a synthetic marijuana. While it probably costs more, I have to imagine it is easier to control dosage. So are people just trying to get high? And if so why not just try and get it legalized?

  2. Hi, Christine! I wonder if there isn't some market pressure here... or more accurately, some anti-free-market pressure. Marijuana is apparently pretty easy to make. The pharmaceutical industry probably takes a dim view of any drug that people can make themselves.

  3. There is concern that legalization will open government to litigation over contra-indications. Somebody will want to sue somebody else about something until Sol goes nova; I believe that's the focus of the entire cannabis issue.

    Montana is plowing the road (literally this morning in some areas of the state) as it experiments with states' rights activism.

    It's a simple civil rights case to me.

  4. States rights, civil rights -- conservatives ought to be all about protecting rights. All the more reason for them to get fired up about this particular local race.

  5. The Tea party movement is about "individual rights" and equal justice under the law. If I want to grow a particular plant in my back yard for personal consumption the Feds should have no right to tell me not too.

  6. I'm not exactly a huge advocate for so-called "states' rights" but I do think there's a good argument to be made that the feds are overstepping their bounds when they try to regulate marijuana grown and sold within a state. I don't think Nick is going to win this particular battle, but he's a really good guy and I believe he has a future in SD progressive politics. Don't count him out! :)

    P.S. My captcha is 'potingic'. Is that a drug term? ;)


Comments are closed, as this portion of the Madville Times is in archive mode. You can join the discussion of current issues at MadvilleTimes.com.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.