An open letter to Pat Powers

By Bob Newland

War College—self-touted by moderator Pat Powers as “best political blog in South Dakota”—is consistent in one respect; it consistently mirrors the Republican Party in its inconsistency with its own philosophy. For instance, take the So. Dak. GOP website’s own statement of principles’ first two propositions:

“I BELIEVE the strength of our nation lies with the individual and that each person’s dignity, freedom, ability and responsibility must be honored.”

“I BELIEVE in equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, sex, age or disability.”

As is the case with a stopped clock being right twice a day, Powers occasionally takes positions in line with those statements. When it comes to the dignity of seriously ill people or equal rights for those with some disabilities, he seems to have a problem. Similar inconsistencies arise in comparing his positions to the GOP statements of principle regarding free enterprise, the proper role of government, and human rights. Powers manages to offend all of these principles in his “comments” latest post concerning the South Dakota Safe Access Act.

Cannabis, a God-given herb with near-miraculous (as only God can impart) preventive and healing qualities, has a several-centuries-old record of use in human medicine. Its record of safety is unequalled by any medicinal herb or manufactured drug. Its palliative effect for those with nausea, pain and spinal injury or disease-induced muscle spasms is undeniable, at least by anyone who has looked at the evidence. Pat Powers manages to maintain denial of the undeniable.

A blog is a very unsatisfying forum in which to attempt to have a serious debate. Powers consistently deletes my comments on his topic posts, which is probably not such a bad thing when one considers the barrage of drivel posted by largely anonymous commentors thereon. Even so, not even his usual crew of barking hounds can muster much support for his views about therapeutic cannabis.

If PP, or Lee Schoenbeck, or Bob Ellis (these three at least post their own names on War College comments) wants to have a discussion based on the science relevant to cannabis, I’ll confront them in front of whatever group they choose wherefore to make fools of themselves. For the time being, I’ll have to be content with the following excerpt from some 80 pages of a 1988 decision made by Drug Enforcement Agency administrative law judge Francis Young, which, like every single reputable study ever produced, was ignored by that most brutal and cruel (amid heavy competition) of all government agencies:

“The evidence in this record clearly shows that cannabis has been accepted as capable of relieving the distress from great numbers of very ill people, and doing so with safety under medical supervision. It would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious to continue to stand between those sufferers and the benefits of this substance in light of the evidence in this record.”