Medical Marijuana Override Fails In Senate

Reefer (4.00 / 1)

sadness

---

by: FrankLloydMike @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 13:19:49 PM CDT

The Right Thing Was Also the Political Thing Too (0.00 / 0)

All polls show citizens in NH overwhelmingly support making this unique medicine available.
"Debilitating medical condition" was very clearly and tightly defined.
The fact is one Democrat voted against it: Betsi DeVries. Had she voted for it, Republican Ted Gatsas
also of Manchester, also running for city election next week, would have made the 16th vote.
A vote in favor of the override was the right thing to do for seriously ill people,
and it would have benefited her politically.

That she did not is most regrettable.  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 13:23:18 PM CDT

Backup? (0.00 / 0)

I have not seen anywhere anything saying that Ted Gatsas would have voted the way you wanted. Perhaps I have missed it - could you please provide a link?  Thank  you.

 

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 14:13:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

A Link? (0.00 / 0)

I talked to him today in his office,
does that count Kathy?

Imagine: a Democrat did something wrong.
And for the wrong reason: fear.

A poll was done of her district; it showed nearly 60% in favor of the bill.
Her vote is most regrettable. I can't imagine she feels good about it.
Of course her vote is not nearly as bad as Lynch's shameful and outrageous veto, after refusing to meet with any patients.

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 14:33:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Gatsas - No Profile in Courage (4.00 / 1)

Did you ask Ted why he conditioned his vote on Betsi's?  It's hardly a profile in courage to vote against allowing this treatment only because a single member of the other party did the same.  

THAT is even more regrettable.  (Although, just a hunch, Gatsas may have been ******* with you, Burt.)

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 15:59:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

No, it does not (4.00 / 1)

It is very easy for someone to say, "I'll vote for X if Y votes for X", when he knows darn well that Y is not going to vote for X.  But he got what he wanted out of you - you are trashing Betsi, and blaming her for the override failure. Based on a comment made by Ted Gatsas. A few days before a city election.

By the way, your logic isn't working - if Betsi's constituents supported the measure, then fear would not have driven her to vote to support the override.  

Why attack her on a personal level when perhaps she just does not agree with you on the issue?  


"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 16:58:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Criticising a Vote Equals Personal Attack? (4.00 / 1)

Stop that nonsense Kathy.
Any time any one criticizes any Democrat, you use the same refrain: it's personal. Stop it.

I am certainly disappointed. Betsi would tell you herself that constituents who got in touch with her overwhelmingly supported the measure. That's the point. I believe her worry about  the effect her vote might have on Tuesday's aldermanic election was unfounded. I am of the opinion that courage pays off. I wish more legislators would try it more often.  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 17:54:35 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

This is bullshit, Burt. (4.00 / 1)

A vote in favor of the override was the right thing to do for seriously ill people, and it would have benefited her politically.

That she did not is most regrettable.

So, she deserves attack - I agree it is not personal - but Gatsas does not??

That's just completely, Bizarro world  stoopid.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 18:05:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes, The Bar is Higher For Democrats (0.00 / 0)

Republicans rarely disappoint me:
I expect they'll most often do the wrong thing.

I don't know about you, but I always,
ALWAYS have more faith and hope in Democrats.

That's why I vote Democrat!

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 18:16:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

So Gatsas' vote isn't regrettable? (4.00 / 1)

Baloney.

You mentioned it - you should have condemned it. Instead you blame DeVries for Gatsas' vote.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 18:23:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oh, Burt (4.00 / 1)

I don't say that whenever anyone criticizes a Democrat. I frequently say it when you criticize Democrats, because you always blame fear, cowardice, yada, yada, yada as the motivation behind anyone who holds a position other than yours. Criticizing someone on the facts is one thing; accusing people of voting because of fear or cowardice or some other personal defect is a personal attack.  

Betsi voted for equal marriage. She also voted against the proposed spending cap in Manchester, and has been one of the few aldermen who consistently stands up to Gatsas, e.g. voting against his budget - which is why he is working to defeat her and elect her opponent in this election. Gatsas played you.

And your logic still is flawed. If the constituents who called her overwhelmingly supported the measure, and if "fear" was the motivating factor, then she would have voted the other way.  

We are talking about someone who went into burning buildings for a living - the first female firefigher in Manchester. I don't think lack of courage is a factor with Betsi.          

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 19:13:10 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Judd Gregg Bridge n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Tim C. @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 20:15:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Rep. Merrick: (4.00 / 2)

Audio of her remarks.

---

by: Dean Barker @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 19:36:27 PM CDT

A True Hero (0.00 / 0)

Thanks for putting that up on BH, Dean.

As for Kathy: talk about yada yada yada!

Rep Merrick is absolutely right: political expediency. Kathy, surely you don't believe DeVries voted against the bill because that's how she really felt. You can't possibly be that naive. You're fooling no one.

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 20:12:04 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

There you go again (4.00 / 1)

Because someone voted the way you did not want, it can't be because that is what they believe? Because I disagree with you, I must also be saying something I don't believe?  No, Burt, the fact someone disagrees with you does not mean they are lying or suffering from a character defect!


"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 20:22:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

There You Go Again (4.00 / 1)

Slow your mind a minute Kathy. Breathe.

Neither "lying nor suffering from a character defect." So silly. There are thousands of other options you left out.

Look, political expediency is no stranger to politics, left and right. No more no less.

I do feel badly for Betsi, I know she wrestled with this question. She can't be comfortable today. No question she's a good person. She'll have another chance to vote on this.  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 06:58:06 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Correction (4.00 / 2)

I did not mean to give you a 1, I was trying to hit reply.  

Burt, please stop misinterpreting what I write.  I said you think that when someone disagrees with you, you very frequently assert that it is a character defect of some sort, and not a good faith disagreement.  Go back and read your posts about Senator Shaheen, Governor Lynch, Katrina Swett, Hillary Clinton - and now Betsi.  There may be thousands of reasons why someone votes a particular way, but you rarely, if ever, opt for a good faith difference of opinion or any of the other thousands of reason - it is always fear, cowardice, yada yada yada.  

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 09:15:38 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I give Rep. Merrick (4.00 / 2)

all the credit in the world. I know how hard she worked on this, and I can imagine how vulnerable she must have felt, sharing the story of her illness with strangers.

I agree with her diagnosis: political expedience.

I'm awfully proud of my state Senator for co-sponsoring the bill, with Rep. Merrick. John Gallus went against his party to do this. I don't often agree with him, but he deserves to be recognized for standing up for the chronically and terminally ill.

---

by: susanthe @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 21:28:45 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

More audio links, please. (4.00 / 1)

Thank you, Dean, for providing the link to Rep. Merrick's speech.  She has been an inspiration throughout this process.  And I would love it if someone with the technical knowledge could post the other speeches in favor of the bill as well--they all deserve our thanks.  

Although I have fantasies of delivering a good swift kick to ALL those who voted the other way, I got a good lesson in keeping the doors open and not making assumptions yesterday.  One Rep, with whom I have never agreed on anything, rose to speak.  I assumed we would be treated to a law-and-order, bill-is-flawed diatribe.  Instead, she gave a very moving statement about her work with cancer patients and the horrible dilemma for those who must choose between pain and nausea and breaking the law.    

Let us take some time to give thanks to all who worked hard on this long-overdue bill, and who are already preparing to put their shoulders to the boulder and push it up the long, steep hill again.  And let us not make it more difficult for those who need more persuasion by boxing them in with our own assumptions about their motives.

---

by: Lucy Weber @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 07:56:04 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just A "Pause" Before Getting To "YES." (4.00 / 1)

I have great respect for Burt's passion on this issue, which I think I share every bit as much.  But I do think it doesn't help the eventual cause to be too overly critical of our friends.  Not yet, anyway -- because there IS a tomorrow on this issue, and it comes soon.  Other legislation is on its way.

I think all of this right up through today's vote on the veto override is part of a process that just takes a while.    

Like on another issue dear to my heart and that of many others on BlueHampshire this past Spring, sometimes we just get to "pause," before we get to "YES."

I also don't think it helps too much to be critical of Burt, Kathy.  I welcome that passion, and he has worked hard on this issue.  This IS an issue which affects health and lives, so let's all give room to the intensity on all sides.

I don't think we can blame John Lynch for not being there yet.  He raised some objections he saw in the legislation.  He made some valid points, not enough to persuade me or most House and Senate Democrats not to support the bill, but he raised good points.

I also don't think we can blame Betsi DeVries, who I think it one heck of a good State Senator and an extraordinary Democrat.  I think she did vote her conscience.  Not everyone agreed with House Bill 648, no matter which "poll" one refers to.  

Another bill is on its way, and we can win this -- just as we won marriage equality and other good causes -- by keeping our focus on the goal, by being a bit patient (and I do well realize the pain and suffering some are experiencing as we make them wait), and by being politically smart.  

We can do this.  We can get to "Yes" on medical marijuana.  Let's keep involving people -- including those good people like John Lynch and Betsi DeVries whose hearts are in the right place but who have to be convinced of this approach.  Good people eventually do the right thing.  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Wed Oct 28, 2009 at 21:27:36 PM CDT

Agreed (Mostly) (4.00 / 2)

I also don't think it helps too much to be critical of Burt, Kathy.  I welcome that passion, and he has worked hard on this issue.  This IS an issue which affects health and lives, so let's all give room to the intensity on all sides.

If Burt did not imply that Democrats who disagree with him are all fickle political whores who enter public life as an alternative to stealing hubcaps, this would be a lot easier.

And if this was only the first time Burt attacked the integrity of his fellow Democrats -- and not the latest in a line of on-line assaults that goes from Clinton to Shaheen to Swett and many others -- his passion would be a far more effective tool.

I strongly side with Burt on the issue of medical marijuana.  But he needs to learn to disagree with some modicum of respect.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 07:36:12 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Clean Your Eyeglasses DD (0.00 / 0)

There are other ways of seeing this.

One can never disagree with fellow Democrats?
Is that verboten?

Political expediency is rarely a good reason to do anything. Certain votes were for political expediency. Am I not allowed to publicly recognize that fact?

Elected officials are always subject to praise and criticism. I praise Shaheen on standing firm for the public option and criticise her for other positions. Democracy works very well like that.  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 08:02:08 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

My eyeglasses are clean, Senator (4.00 / 2)

Imagine: a Democrat did something wrong.
And for the wrong reason: fear.

Kathy, surely you don't believe DeVries voted against the bill because that's how she really felt. You can't possibly be that naive. You're fooling no one.

How do you know the Sen. DeVries voted the wrong way because of "fear" or "naivete"?  Do you have some access to her psyche that you're not sharing with us?  And, if "fear" is Sen. DeVries' motivator, then why has she stood up for marriage equality in a district that is hardly one of NH's most socially progressive?

As I noted above, this is not about "disagreeing the fellow Democrats."  That happens all the time on this site.  It's about your pattern of attacks based on (a) false assumptions, or (b) some presumption about the motives of fellow Democrats that are not founded on anything approximating facts.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 08:31:33 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

You Are So Wrong Dave (0.00 / 0)

But then again, I understand you have no way of knowing how closely I worked with the senators.
As hard as it is for you to believe, I absolutely know what I'm talking about. I wish I was wrong.

The fact is you have no idea what the facts are. Sorry; you have not been, both physically and electronically, where I have been on this in recent weeks. If I'd based my words on beliefs, I would not say a word. I understand, the reality is not pretty. It's sad.

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 13:15:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Facts (4.00 / 1)

Burt -

If you have reasons that explain why Sen. DeVries was motivated by "fear" and "naivete" to vote against medicinal marijuana, then you should share them with us.

If you do not, then you should confine yourself to criticizing her vote, not her integrity.  (You would have my full support in this.)  But saying simply that you "absolutely know what (you're) talking about" does not provide sufficient basis for calling Manchester's first woman firefighter a coward.  She deserves better.  So do all public officials.

All my best,
Dave

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 13:51:35 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I Was There I Did Not See You (0.00 / 1)

Man, you do get carried away!!

"Calling Manchester's first woman firefighter a coward" Where in hell did that preposterous accusation come from?

What the heck are YOU smoking? Whatever it is, give it up.

I was there, working my ass off, where,
DD, were you?

Did you talk with any of the senators? If not, please be quiet. I was there in the thick of it, do not doubt my veracity, you silly armchair judge.

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 16:09:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

PS (0.00 / 0)

Do yourself (and all of us) a favor:
Ask Betsi yourself why she didn't vote for the over ride!!

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 16:18:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes, Burt. You Accused Betsi DeVries of Cowardice. (4.00 / 1)

Imagine: a Democrat did something wrong.
And for the wrong reason: fear.

That is accusing Betsi DeVries of cowardice.

That's the point. I believe her worry about  the effect her vote might have on Tuesday's aldermanic election was unfounded. I am of the opinion that courage pays off. I wish more legislators would try it more often.  

That is accusing Betsi DeVries of cowardice.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 16:45:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

"Armchair Judge" (4.00 / 1)

Did you talk with any of the senators? If not, please be quiet. I was there in the thick of it, do not doubt my veracity, you silly armchair judge.

1.  I never claimed to "be there."

2.  I also never accused a respected leader of cowardice, and then claimed that my mere presence offered sufficient foundation to make this accusation.

3. I will NEVER "be quiet" when good people are slandered.  If you want to criticize Betsi DeVries of casting the wrong vote, you will have my support.  If you want to attack her integrity without the slightest basis in reality (other than she disagrees with you), then you will not.

One of these days, you will learn the extent to which your ridiculous, unwarranted, and personal assaults undermine the legitimacy of your arguments.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 16:51:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ahem (0.00 / 0)

"One of these days, you will learn the extent to which your ridiculous, unwarranted, and personal assaults undermine the legitimacy of your arguments."

She's a fine senator whom I like very much personally.

Nobody that I know ever accused her of cowardice. Are you truly that unaware of the significant difference?

Don't believe me DD, it matters not to me.
I repeat: ask Betsi. She voted as she did because of the aldermanic vote Tuesday. She did not, in fact, disagree with me on the issue. No one "slandered" anybody. You sound like a poor teabagger: so victimized. Very silly.

Senator Junie Blaisdell advised: When you're in a hole, stop digging.

While working yourself into a lather DD, you truly do not know what you are talking about. Now stop.  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 20:10:45 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Finally, an actual explanation (0.00 / 0)

I repeat: ask Betsi. She voted as she did because of the aldermanic vote Tuesday. She did not, in fact, disagree with me on the issue.

That was the first time in this entire diary that you justified your cowardice accusation (examples noted above -- and they're pretty obvious).  If Betsi acknowledged to you that she voted the way she did for the reason you cited, then your name-calling is not slander.

You might have noted that the first time I asked the question, instead of waiting for me to raise your repeated lack of a justification.  Instead, you blathered on about how "I know what I'm talking about," etc., without ever saying that you'd actually talked to the Senator and obtained this explanation from her.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 21:05:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Fear... is... (4.00 / 1)

Fear is what makes America Go....

No way about it... Fear... fanned by dolps of ignorance, rules the land.

And the band played on.....

---

by: TaxiManSteve @ Fri Oct 30, 2009 at 16:26:51 PM CDT