Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tony Bennett Gets One Right
Shout Bits Blog ^ | 3/5/2012 | Shout Bits

Posted on 03/05/2012 7:15:21 PM PST by Shout Bits

Michael Jackson, Amy Winehouse, Whitney Houston, Elvis Presley – dead. All from drugs, but not handshake black market drugs – the same prescription drugs found in many US bathroom cabinets. Upon Ms. Houston's death, singer Tony Bennett called for the legalization of all drugs. He did not explain himself very well, and he is known for some crackpot theories, so why does a death caused by prescription drugs argue for the legalization of all drugs? Ms. Houston's death proves that the government system of controlling street drugs' analogues does nothing to protect the public. The FDA and the DEA are a charade for drug users who need justification for their habits.

Nearly every street drug has a prescription analogue that if not chemically identical, is close enough for a hungry addict. Cough syrup has codeine, which on the street is called 'drank.' Oxycodone, recently repackaged to be less prone to abuse, was called 'hillbilly heroine.' Marinol has the same active ingredient as does cannabis. Adderall contains methamphetamine. The prescription world can provide the same high as the black market to those who prefer a reliable dose and a clean package. As many prescription drug tragedies demonstrate, however, the body does not care if the narcotic comes from Purdue Pharmaceuticals or the fields of Afghanistan.

The FDA and the DEA would argue that the prescription drug world is regulated; access is controlled to those in need. That may be the intent, but as with most things the government does, prescription drug control is a total failure. Anyone with moderate income can obtain multiple prescriptions as did Rush Limbaugh. Truly rich drug addicts like Mr. Jackson, Mr. Presley, or even Howard Hughes hire willing personal doctors at absurd salaries to provide whatever narcotics they desire. The government control of narcotics amounts to a class system where the well-off get their drugs from pharmacies and the poor get their drugs from the street corner.

The greater tragedy is that many patients, including Mr. Hughes, legitimately require huge doses of narcotics to tolerate their conditions. The DEA cracks down on these patients by harassing the doctors deemed to operate 'pill-mills.' As with any bureaucracy, the DEA is incapable of differentiating a compassionate doctor who rightly prescribes near-lethal doses of narcotics from a profiteering 'Dr. Robert.' The DEA keeps drugs from those who need them and fails to keep drugs from those who do not.

The FDA and DEA's failures are one example of the government's general intrusiveness. Once the government is tasked with knowing what is best for people, it knows no limits. Too much sugar, fat or salt in food, and the government is there. The government thinks pictures of cadavers on buses are appropriate to curb smoking. The government coerces people to drive its preferred style of automobile. Obamacare dictates both the lower and upper limits of health care consumption. Once bureaucrats become their brothers' keepers, there are no boundaries.

Before the FDA and DEA, heroin, cocaine, and many other drugs were sold in retail packages. If Mr. Bennett had his way, this would return, taking such drugs off the street corners and into pharmacies. They would still be dangerous and people would still hurt themselves through abuse, but allowing people to make their own choices has always proven to be better than putting an uncaring government in charge. If the only practical value of regulating drugs through prescriptions is to sanitize the stigma of either appropriate or harmful drug use, the price of these programs is far too high.


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: blogpimp; dea; fda; vanity

1 posted on 03/05/2012 7:15:28 PM PST by Shout Bits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

What is the part about tony Bennett?


2 posted on 03/05/2012 7:31:38 PM PST by ansel12 (Santorum-Catholic and "I was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress" he said))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

he;s pimping another useless blog...skip


3 posted on 03/05/2012 7:34:52 PM PST by max americana (Buttcrack Obama is an idiot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Presciption drugs are completely out of control. Every week it sems they come up with a new one for the most ridiculous of reasons. Last week I heard an ad for one that grows eyelashes on women who have “thinning eyelashes”. Say whaaat? And of course then they listed the 10,000 side effects afterwards.


4 posted on 03/05/2012 7:35:06 PM PST by GrandJediMasterYoda (How ironic that Ann Coulter should write a book called Treason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

I think they gave him a heart transplant but it didn’t go too well and he had to leave it in San Francisco.


5 posted on 03/05/2012 7:41:13 PM PST by GrandJediMasterYoda (How ironic that Ann Coulter should write a book called Treason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

The only upside to legalization of most or all drugs is that there would be fewer Leftists.


6 posted on 03/05/2012 7:44:47 PM PST by grumpygresh (Democrats delenda est; zero sera dans l'enfer bientot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

“What is the part about tony Bennett?

The day Whitney Houston died, Tony Bennett used the news to call for drug legalization. He didn’t explain why, though, as he is not a terribly bright man.


7 posted on 03/05/2012 7:47:19 PM PST by Shout Bits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits
When I broke my shoulder, I was given a Rx for Vicodin. I didn't have it filled...took Advil and did just fine.

I don't like drugs!

8 posted on 03/05/2012 7:51:40 PM PST by lonestar (It takes a village of idiots to elect a village idiot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

That guy never varies his song, he is always pushing liberalism. Now he want legal dope.


9 posted on 03/05/2012 7:56:03 PM PST by ansel12 (Santorum-Catholic and "I was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress" he said))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Michael Jackson and Whitney Houston would be alive if drugs were legalized?


10 posted on 03/05/2012 8:27:40 PM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits
>"the government system of controlling street drugs' analogues does nothing to protect the public"

They'd have to arrest most of our founding fathers today.

What has become of freedom when they'd put TJ and GW in prison?

11 posted on 03/05/2012 8:44:00 PM PST by rawcatslyentist (BO Stinks! Like Mitts magic underwear!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
He is pushing libertarianism/true conservatism. Liberalism is what we have now in our drug laws, the intrusion by the federal government into your body to regulate what you are permitted and not permitted to ingest.


12 posted on 03/05/2012 9:30:14 PM PST by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

Oh, the old, ‘It isn’t the hard left if you call it “libertarian” theme.


13 posted on 03/05/2012 9:38:42 PM PST by ansel12 (Santorum-Catholic and "I was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress" he said))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2855110/posts?page=23#23


14 posted on 03/05/2012 9:58:01 PM PST by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Oh, the old, ‘It isn’t the hard left if you call it “libertarian” theme

If the hard right you tell you what drugs, legal or illegal, that you may ingest on pain of criminal sanctions, the hard left can and will tell you what your child may ingest with his school lunch.


15 posted on 03/05/2012 10:06:12 PM PST by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford
Neither side of the drug argument is chock-full of merit. But it's worth questioning the totality of the consequences of enforcement.

To name one account:
Seventy-One Rounds in Tuscon: The Swat Shooting of Jose Guerena

16 posted on 03/05/2012 10:13:31 PM PST by Gene Eric (Newt/Sarah 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

With reasoning like that, it is no wonder that the left and libertarians have driven this nation into the ground.


17 posted on 03/05/2012 10:15:07 PM PST by ansel12 (Santorum-Catholic and "I was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress" he said))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric
How many miscarriages like that of Jose Guerena have occurred as a result of our misguided and counterproductive laws criminalizing drug use?

Without relitigating the issue reciting all of the unintended consequences, I would like to make clear that there is nothing "conservative" about invoking the federal government to control what we ingest into our bodies unless we as conservatives have departed from fidelity to the Constitution and to federalism and to the primacy of the individual as defined in the Declaration of Independence.


18 posted on 03/05/2012 10:23:42 PM PST by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
With reasoning like that, it is no wonder that the left and libertarians have driven this nation into the grou

Uhhh . . tell me, please, which cities, which states do the libertarians have control of that they could drive the nation into the ground?

Seems to me, and most other freedom-lovers, that what has driven this country away from constitutional government and toward a police state is more laws and regulations on such things as drugs, food, toys and clothing -- exactly the opposite of the principle tenets of the libertarian philosophy, which presumes that individuals are capable of making decisions for themselves about their own well-being.

When conservatives get into bed with leftists and progressives who want to dictate every detail of everyone's life we have reason to worry.

19 posted on 03/05/2012 10:29:12 PM PST by logician2u
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
You mean with reasoning that comes from the likes of Thomas Jefferson:

“A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have.”-Thomas Jefferson


20 posted on 03/05/2012 10:30:10 PM PST by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

Libertarians are deep like hard left intellectuals. They both live in childish fantasy worlds that they cherry-pick to create an delusional dream state, and they write out perfect worlds that dissolve in the face of reality.


21 posted on 03/05/2012 10:45:30 PM PST by ansel12 (Santorum-Catholic and "I was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress" he said))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: logician2u

Libertarians fight for the same social destruction as the left.

America’s most libertarian Supreme Court? The widely described, and despised by conservatives, “Libertarian Earl Warren Court”.


22 posted on 03/05/2012 10:48:32 PM PST by ansel12 (Santorum-Catholic and "I was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress" he said))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

>> How many miscarriages?

Numerous. And they also kill canines with extreme prejudice.

>> I would like to make clear that there is nothing “conservative” about ...

The convergence of Conservatism and Statism is regrettably significant. I doubt the majority of self-described Conservatives would feel at home under the Liberty of original law.


23 posted on 03/05/2012 10:57:45 PM PST by Gene Eric (Newt/Sarah 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Ansell: I reacted to your post #9:

That guy never varies his song, he is always pushing liberalism. Now he want (sic) legal dope.

Because I wanted to stake out a position that "legal dope" is not necessarily a liberal position but a libertarian position and it should be a conservative position (at least on the federal level). In other words, I do not want to passively accede to definitions of liberalism, conservatism or libertarianism which I do not believe are true.

To that end, I try to draw our attention to the fundamental precepts which inspired conservatism rather than simply making ad hominem about how dreadful libertarians are.

In other words, name calling does not advance our understanding very far. One could as easily call the founding fathers libertarians as the Warren court.


24 posted on 03/05/2012 11:09:14 PM PST by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

God this childish game playing is boring, the left and libertarians are on the same team, destroy social conservatism, and they have ruined our nation with their successes of the last 60 years.

The difference is that the libertarian social liberals are so incredibly preachy and superior acting as they promote the same goals as the rest of the left, as though they are preaching the Holy word of the social conservative God himself while they promote dope and homosexuality and porn, open borders and the rest of it.

The open leftist says let’s legalize drugs and have homosexual marriage, and porn because it is fun and kinky. The libertarian says let’s legalize drugs and have homosexual marriage, and porn because the people who founded this nation would want us to, it was their Holy Writ.

The founding generations would lynch all you guys for your nonsense.


25 posted on 03/05/2012 11:19:58 PM PST by ansel12 (Santorum-Catholic and "I was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress" he said))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
By your logic modern conservatism must advocate for the restoration of prohibition. I deny you the power to so define conservatism.


26 posted on 03/05/2012 11:33:58 PM PST by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

LOL, no, you sound like my kid with that ridiculous prohibition argument.

The Middle East is cannabis based for thousands of years, they will be supporting the left and libertarians on the doper position as they keep immigrating here.


27 posted on 03/05/2012 11:38:59 PM PST by ansel12 (Santorum-Catholic and "I was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress" he said))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Ansell:

Here are quotes from your last four posts. Resort to the ad hominem betrays a weakness of argument:

you sound like my kid with that ridiculous prohibition argument.

The founding generations would lynch all you guys for your nonsense.

Libertarians are deep like hard left intellectuals. They both live in childish fantasy worlds that they cherry-pick to create an delusional dream state, and they write out perfect worlds that dissolve in the face of reality.

With reasoning like that, it is no wonder that the left and libertarians have driven this nation into the ground.

28 posted on 03/05/2012 11:53:27 PM PST by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

Lol, gee, I guess no one will pass me the joint now, or is it a needle.


29 posted on 03/05/2012 11:58:14 PM PST by ansel12 (Santorum-Catholic and "I was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress" he said))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
The difference is that the libertarian social liberals are so incredibly preachy and superior acting

… Ansell12


30 posted on 03/06/2012 12:06:08 AM PST by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

At least politicians realized the Constitutional limits placed on the federal government at one point in our history. They actually felt it necessary to pass the 18th Amendment to prohibit the sale of alcohol.

That day, when the Constitution was seen as a limiting power upon the federal government, is now, unfortunately, behind us and politicians can dictate what extra-Constitutional limits upon the freedoms of individuals they will.

“Social conservatives” fully support ignoring the Constitution when it suits their purpose, no different from Progressives. They also try to equate libertarians with the far left which shows an incredible lack of knowledge about either.


31 posted on 03/06/2012 5:57:34 AM PST by FerociousRabbit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson