Given their past proclivites, I believe Sen. Kennedy should conduct the Chateau Mouton Rothschild tests, while Sen. Kerry volunteers for the medical marijuana study. Neither intoxicant could further impare their thinking any more than it is already compromised.

PJ,
But of course!

What I don't understand: since the police regularly confiscate and destroy lots of quality pot, why does anyone need to start a special government pot farm?

It doesn't have to be Rothschild but it shouldn't be vinegar. What I find terribly amusing is that total burnouts can grow better marijauna that government research labs. What is wrong with this picture?

PapayaSF;

In addition to quality, one would like consistency as well if one is really doing research. Seized marijauna is likely to vary strongly.

Yes, but 1) I suspect the variance within batches isn't much, as it's likely to have come from the same grower, and 2) they'll have to test the government pot to establish its potency anyway, so why not just test the confiscated stuff?

This, of course, only confirms my theory that the drug problem can be solved not by legalizing but by socializing it, thus driving private supplies out of the market while providing shortages of low-quality goods.

The good senators oppose the federal government's monopoly on growth and distribution of marijuana.

But, they support the states' government monopoly on educating your kids.

Mr. Coupal:

I listen to the local publicly funded radio station (WMNF 88.5) on occasion. Similar to your observation, I always wonder why they assail the big corporations as being the root of all evil, but embrace big government as the solution to all problems.

Buttercup --

Because they have a say in government.

David -- good point, but: by becoming an investor, employee, customer, or partner anyone can gain a say in what corporations do. Liberals jealously guard their influence over the institutions they reside in -- try to persuade a professor that academic freedom (i.e., control of universities by professors) or a journalist that independence of the press (i.e. control over editorial decisions by journalists) are mistakes! -- while asserting government control over the institutions others are part of. Meanwhile, liberals have had disproportionate influence upon government for at least three generations; under equality a liberal's voice would be diluted 300 million times, but under big government it may be much stronger. In short, it seems to me they want a disproportionate say, not a say, in what's done.