Hassan Confronted for Several Minutes on Cannabis Hypocrisy: VIDEO

Sad Maggie Hassan

Does she have a conscience?

This afternoon the hypocrite governor of New Hampshire spoke at Keene State College’s 2015 graduation ceremony.  Maggie Hassan, the boss of the state’s executive branch, is likely to veto the cannabis decrim bill if it makes it through the NH senate.  It already passed the NH house with a supermajority of votes.  It’s clear that decriminalization is what the people of New Hampshire want (it’s also the humane choice), but Hassan throws her loyalty into the camp of the police and cares not one bit about the lives that continue to be ruined because of her inhumane war on pot.

Oh, and to make her position even more outrageous, it turns out she herself has used cannabis in her college days.  That raging hypocrisy didn’t stop her from showing up at Keene State College and acting like she actually gives a damn about the very same students that her police regularly threaten and harass over victimless crimes like cannabis and alcohol possession.  Rich Paul and I went down to KSC today to confront her on these things and were accompanied by local education activist Ed Bryans who was upset with Hassan’s veto of the anti-common core bill. We found her at the end of the commencement and had plenty of time to give her a hard time while she was unable to leave, much to the dismay of a few of her sycophants. Here’s the video:

It’s not too late for cannabis decrim to pass, but Hassan and the NH senators need to hear from you. Please reach out to your senator here and ask them to support HB618, the cannabis decriminalization bill. Then please call Hassan’s office and encourage her to do the right thing and let decrim pass.

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


  1. WILL YOUR KID BE NEXT TO GO TO PRISON OVER A PLANT? The war on cannabis has already ruined more lives and broken more families than legal cannabis will ever cause. The incarceration model is not working. The US has a largest prison population in the world, more prisoners than North Korea, Russia, China, Iran and the list goes on.

  2. Great job guys, can’t believe that college girl thought that day should be about her. Round of applause for Free Keene! *clap*clap*clap*clap*clap*clap*

  3. The governor has the power to veto the bill. She is speaking for the people who voted for her.  Did you ever investigate her platform before she was elected?

    As you can see, Governor Hassan’s approval rating is going up all the time.


    As you can clearly see, her decisions about addiction and drug use is a very vocal issue with her. Even one death from illicit drugs  is appalling. 


  4. Haha Rich is a cool dude, got to hang with him in Michigan a few months back.
    But yeah love how they keep talking about respect. Oh, this lady cares about respect? Dignity? Yet she can sit in her chair and deny those things to others.
    Prohibition is not just a wonkish policy issue. It’s making decisions over other peoples’ lives and using coercion to enforce them.

  5. “Does she have a conscience?”
    I’d like to think so, but it looks like it might be gas.

  6. Jumping Jacks  I’m impressed that you care so much for just one life that you’ll support a program of violence that has led to the murder and the incarceration of millions more. But is it really the only reason you support such notions? I mean, drug users are an unpopular bunch aren’t they? They have poor hygiene. They use poor judgment. They are undisciplined. Their intellectual abilities are suspect. Such negative qualities makes it easy to not only wish, but actually demand harm upon them. So why not remove them from society? You have the tools to do so after all – the state. And by relying on the power of the state to do your dirty work, you’ve discovered an easy way to deal with them. It’s made all the easier still when the state has popular support. After all, approval ratings are still extremely important, even when the state is targeting unpopular groups. But it’s easiest by far if the state’s targets are peaceful to begin with and just want to spend their days getting high. So let’s get ’em!

    But let’s assume you truly do care about the plight of those addicted to drugs. Why do you believe incarceration is the solution? Having a criminal record is a huge disadvantage that can affect a person for his entire life. Misdemeanor and felony records can limit a person’s choices in educational and employment opportunities, and when those choices are severely restricted their future productivity and earning potential is affected drastically. Further, at least from a crime standpoint, drug use (recreational or otherwise) has no victim in itself and all laws governing their prohibition are merely statutory offenses. Yet the punishments violating such statutes are drastic, unnecessary, and made particularly odious because they’re inflicted upon those who never actually harmed anyone. Many of those convicted are never able to overcome the financial obstacles incurred, and turn back to drug use or even engage in truly criminal activity (with actual victims), having no other choice. So who was helped?

    You weren’t helped. Drug enforcement is costly, both to your wallet and your liberties. Taxes must be increased and collected to pay for enforcement, prosecution costs, incarceration, and often rehabilitation. Constitutional rights must be violated to locate and confiscate contraband, contraband made available through the inevitable black market economy that forms from the enacting of prohibition statutes. But of course you get that warm feeling inside that you’ve in some way played a role in stopping those filthy drug users from continuing to engage in their immoral activities. So I suppose there’s that.

    How about the state then? In what ways do they benefit? From a financial standpoint, the benefits to the state are enormous. In fact, with the increases in taxes and the asset confiscations that come with drug law enforcement and convictions, the state wins resoundingly in this matter. But this is a rigged contest, so there’s nothing new here.

    And the drug users? Well, as noted previously, they’re screwed. But only if they’re unlucky enough to get caught. Maggie Hassan was one of the lucky ones. Despite smugly admitting to past illegal drug use in her own life, she was never caught and criminally prosecuted for using them. I wonder if she would have had as much success in her life if she had?

  7. Drac Vermell Jumping Jacks Did you vote? I agree with the governor. You ideas of how drug dealers should be punished are yours. The illegal drugs used in New Hampshire are creating problems both socially and economically. The governor had illegal drugs in her sight when she was campaigning. Who cares if she smoked a joint thirty years ago. She isn’t smoking now. She isn’t using illicit drugs. She was voted into office by those who agreed with her platform.  She doesn’t want an out of control drug problem so she is going to veto the drug law and work more on social programs that can be far more beneficial.

  8. Jumping Jacks  No one has died from cannabis use.  Cannabis has a 58% approval rating and I don’t Think governor Hassan is even close.  I also feel her approval rating will drop very fast within the next few weeks.  All we are asking from the governor is that she re-evaluate her position just as the rest of the majority of Americans,  I don’t think that too much to ask for.  She is the only obstacle in the way of a better model for cannabis since we know the current model is a failure.  WIILL YOUR KID BE NEXT TO GO TO PRISON OVER A PLANT?.

  9. Drac Vermell Jumping Jacks  I don’t know about other drugs but cannabis is an herb considering it some kind of evil drug is far from reality. Cannabis is a pretty innocent plant with few side effects unlike the drugs made in lab.  The governor is in the pockets of pharmaceutical companies and maybe private prisons. It seems that every commercial on TV is about some kind of drug.  This is what leads people to think she has sold-out on the people of NH.

  10. I agree with exactly what you said: Kill all drug users!!!

  11. eloyman22 Jumping Jacks People who have used cannabis and climbed behind the wheel are driving DUI. Yes, they have crashed and killed themselves and others. What is this “58%” approval rating? I don’t believe her approval rating will drop. The majority elected her and she is doing a great job. My children are grown up enough to know taking illegal drugs or under aged drinking is not the right thing to do. I keep an open dialogue with my children. Prevention is the solution.

    Why do you want to get high? What is your purpose for smoking cannabis? How about cigarettes or alcohol?

  12. WKPAnCap I never said kill all drug users.

  13. eloyman22 Drac Vermell Jumping Jacks No cannabis is not some innocent plant. Years ago, the THC in marijuana was around 1-3%. Now it is up to over 40%. Scientist don’t know what the long lasting effects of drug use regarding that high of level of THC will pose.

    The governor is not in the pockets of pharmaceutical companies. Those drug commercials are shown as frequently in all 50 states. No she hasn’t sold out the people of New Hampshire. She is sticking to her campaign promises.  Remember, the majority elected her.

  14. Jumping Jacks Drac Vermell  A vote shouldn’t be used to make quality-of-life decisions for others. Voting is not a good way to solve the problems that other individuals face in their lives. There are plenty of examples of the majority being wrong. Drug prohibition is just one of them. When you vote, you’re only relinquishing to self-appointed experts the power to solve your own problems for you. And their solutions are always the same (elected experts are never very inventive). They take away your freedom to make your own choices and leave you with only one choice – to do what they say or else. That’s as clever as it gets.

    Have you noticed that their protocols are always the same? That their policies always require more money to be confiscated from the productive? It’s either more money for enforcement (enforcement which was supposed to eliminate the problem in the first place), or it’s more money to fund the social programs to fix the problems that prohibition was supposed to eliminate. It doesn’t matter. And it never ends. Because the success of any of these programs is irrelevant. And failure in these policies simply increases their budgets even more. It’s all profit either way for the state.

    As for Maggie Hassan’s hypocrisy on the subject? I care very much. So should you. Lives have been ruined on a daily basis because of drug prohibition. Why should she escape scrutiny?

    Should it be because she won a contest that’s held five times per decade? How that makes a person an expert on any subject is unknown, but you seem to prefer to elevate that rather mundane feat as being a sign of wisdom. Maggie won a contest, and this means that she is specially-suited to make life-quality decisions for others, even for those that DIDN’T vote for her. And since the majority agreed to her leadership, any of Maggie’s past indiscretions gets a pass from you. Way to stand up for what’s right, eh guy? Why should you bother? Siding with the majority means you don’t have to.

  15. Drac Vermell Jumping Jacks You said, “A vote shouldn’t be used to make quality-of-life decisions for others. Voting is not a good way to solve the problems that other individuals face in their lives”.  Are you serious? This is a democracy. Lets talk right to die.  In Oregon, the voters cast their ballots to offer a right to die clause in the states constitution. If it weren’t for those voters, it would have never been passed. How about all the right to life activists. They voted to help pass laws regarding contraception and abortion regulations. 

    The list goes on and on

    If you don’t vote, you really have no say. Voting is going to be around for ever. Our representatives are elected. If you don’t vote, that says you don’t care.

    Drug users ruin their own lives. They have the choice to use or not use. Prohibition isn’t a word that says everything will work out perfectly.

    Again, who cares if she smoked a joint 30 years ago. She isn’t using drugs now. 
    She has stood by her campaign promises. The majority elected her based upon the faith of her promises. She is against illegal drugs. The people who voted for her are too. She is doing what she is supposed to do. If you don’t like it, get out there and vote next time.

  16. Haha I know, totally joking. Read other stuff I said. Completely opposed to the drug war.

  17. Yes, DUI certainly happens, but that’s reckless driving regardless of the cause. THAT is the crime, that is the imposition on others rights. Using cannabis itself is NOT.
    Regardless of your own personal opinion about alcohol or cannabis, or really ANY personal behavior that might not be the healthiest, it’s simply not up to you, or anyone but the individual in question.
    “58%” I believe refers to the % of ppl who approve cannabis legalization in US. Personally I think it’s ridiculous, shouldn’t have to vote for something that’s your inalienable RIGHT to do in the 1st place.

  18. Find some numbers then man. I’m sure there HAVE been rare complications, but it’s virtually IMPOSSIBLE to fatally overdose on cannabis, if you’re just smoking or eating it.
    Dunno if you’ve ever used it yourself, but the potency of it’s effects is somewhere between coffee and alcohol. It’s really mild, safe stuff compared to other drugs, ESPECIALLY booze.
    I’m curious tho, why don’t you favor alcohol prohibition? I know we tried it and it completely failed, but hey who cares about outcomes right?

  19. Jumping Jacks Drac Vermell  When she was voted in, the country’s views had not change toward cannabis as they have today.  She needs to keep-up with the times and execute the will of NH voters. She can make that choice; however, her seat is up for grabs next election. NH folks need to know if she is on their side. The incarceration model has already ruined more lives and broken more families than legal cannabis will ever cause.  It’s time to stop the incarceration epidemic.

  20. Jumping Jacks Drac Vermell  I’m suspecting that you enter into a religious fervor every time you mention the word “vote”. I wonder what would happen to you if your faith in that concept were to suddenly be questioned? Let’s find out. Did you know that your vote doesn’t really offer you a say in any matter? From a mathematical perspective, your one vote is merely the deciding ballot in the event of a tie. How many elections for governor have ended in a tie? Or any major election for that matter?
    As for drug users, their choice might ruin their lives or they might not. And they are free to do this. It’s their own lives they’re ruining. But you’ve neglectfully omitted that it’s the state that ensures that their choices always lead to ruin, with little hope of getting themselves back on the right track once they’re in the grasp of the state. Kicking someone when they’re down hardly seems like a solution. Especially when no one else was harmed by their actions.
    As for the matter of Maggie’s past indiscretions – I care. You don’t because you don’t think that justice should be extended to everyone equally. You insist that some people should be exempt, especially if those people agree with you. Remember, Maggie made choices that, had she been caught, would very possibly have ruined her life. It’s very likely that she wouldn’t be leading the life she has now. Yet she wants to keep a program that makes those same choices illegal for others, with the same disastrous consequences to their own lives if they themselves are caught. This makes her at the least a hypocrite, and at most a fiend. What kind of person would advocate for the character of someone like that? I know of one.

  21. Jumping Jacks eloyman22 Drac Vermell  You’re right. Scientists don’t know what the long-lasting effects of many drugs are. Nor do politicians. Nor do you. But that doesn’t seem to stop you and those like you from wanting to take over responsibility for the personal choices of others. Do you think it’s wise for the uninformed to be making life-changing decisions for others?

  22. Drac Vermell Jumping Jacks I’m proud to be able to take part in the democratic process. Presenting yourself with an unjustified attitude doesn’t help your case. 



    As you can clearly see, voting does matter. If you don’t vote you don’t have a say. Illegal drugs are not

    As far as no one supporting her, She won her election with 51% of the vote.  One thing you failed to state, She signed into law the medical marijuana bill.


    You said, “Maggie made choices that, had she been caught, would very possibly have ruined her life. It’s very likely that she wouldn’t be leading the life she has now”.  Does that also include the senators, congressmen, law makers, ect.. who have been caught doing illegal drugs? They are still in office.

    As I said before, her approval ratings have been climbing since she was elected to office.

  23. eloyman22 Jumping Jacks Drac Vermell You said, “When she was voted in, the country’s views had not change toward cannabis as they have today”. She was elected in 2012 with 51% of the vote. Not a lot has changed regarding illegal drugs. You also forgot to include Hassan signed a bill allowing medical marijuana. Isn’t that good for the sick people who’s illnesses might need a different approach to medication.

    You said, “She needs to keep-up with the times and execute the will of NH voters”. She received 51% of the votes for office. she is “executing” the will of the voters. She is on the side of the voters. 

    She needs to keep-up with the times and execute the will of NH voters. 

    The drug user is responsible for ruining families, causing the tax payers millions of dollars to pay for medical expenses.

  24. “My children are grown up enough to know taking illegal drugs and underage drinking is not the right thing to do. I keep an open dialogue with my kids.”
    This is exactly how it will be under de criminalization or legalization. No one is saying underage people should have legal access to pot unless their dr has deemed it appropriate. Parents, like yourself, with a regulated marketplace that prohibits youth consumption and providing youth accurate information on the damage drinking does to young brains have been very effective at reducing underage drinking across the board to the lowest levels in years. Yet it is peferfecy legal for consenting adults to have alcoholic beverages and they are not at risk of arrest unless they do damage to another person or property or get caught driving while drunk. I have faith that parents will be equally effective with marijuana.
    A fireman friend of mine here in Utah told me that he responds to more pharmaceutical and heroin drug overdoses than any other type of call. It is common for him to go into big houses with pictures of temple marriage on the wall and a woman passed out on happy pills. How is the current system of legal lethal drugs killing people who want to take pills for happiness better than a system of people using non lethal herbs to improve their mood and constitution?

  25. All I hear when I watch this video is Wah, Wah, Wah, Wah, Wah, Waaaah!!!! Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blaaaah!!!! The tactic of behaving like a two year old child with shit filled britches does not gain support for your cause. You three look and sound like middle aged crybabies. I agree with some of the things you said but not at all with the manner nor the place you said them at. Best part was at the 6:10 mark when the badass with the handlebar mustache booted your asses off the property. I was hoping that Rich would keep running his mouth because that guy would have sliced some bacon off Rich’s pudgey piglet ass.

  26. Jumping Jacks Drac Vermell  Pride? Isn’t that one of the deadly sins? Hmm. I think it is. But you misunderstand what’s guiding me here. I’m not trying to make a case with you. That would be a waste of time. You already know what’s best for others. You’ve expressed that sentiment in your posts many times. Polls and approval ratings are your only guide as to what’s right and what’s wrong. How could I convince such a loyal and obedient citizen like yourself that the facts say otherwise? I’m simply refuting your positions on this matter. I don’t do this for you, I do this for any others who may be reading.

    As for your assertion that non-voters have no reason to complain? That is a ridiculous notion on its face. Frankly, those that do NOT vote are the ONLY people who have the right to complain. That’s because those that do vote endorse and/or elect politicians. Then the elected politicians reward their minions with bureaucratic appointments who will then engage in activities (under the color of law of course) that would be punished if you or I did them. Those who voted for people who lose elections may not be responsible for the crimes of state agents to the same degree, but participating in this system helps to create the appearance of legitimacy for actions which are inherently illegitimate.

    More to the point, the election process helps to impose rulers upon the rest (including those that don’t want them), and that process gives the appearance of legitimacy to institutions that deserve none.

    My opinion of the usefulness of the democratic process probably wouldn’t be as jaded if the state was content with using it only for those things for which it is constitutionally approved. But that’s immaterial. The state and its advocates (like yourself) are not. You want to utilize the process of democracy to decide everything under the sun. There’s absolutely no limit to the number of contests you wish to hold.

    Here’s a summary of the process you’re proud to be a part of.

    Your role is to elect a representative. For this, a popularity contest must be held. If your choice wins this contest, you get represented. But if your choice loses, you do not. In these contests, there is always a loser, so there’s always people who won’t get represented.

    After the popularity contest, the winners hold even more contests to decide how much of our own productivity they get to steal from us as well as which personal choices they must make or limit for us. Examples can (and do) include what foods we get to eat, what drugs we may take, what kind of insurance we must buy, and even how much we must pay our employees. I could spend an entire day listing these things. The CFR itself is almost 160,000 pages long, and those are just the FEDERAL regulations. It’s that extensive. And while New Hampshire’s list of statues is nowhere near as extensive as the federal government’s, it’s still growing.

    That’s the American version democracy in a nutshell. A series of contests. While the constitution limits what may be voted on, those restrictions are never obeyed. Why is that?

    Because voters don’t object (in truth they CAN’T object, but that’s another subject). There are many reasons for this, but one of them is that voters need only be told that politicians wish to enhance SAFETY in some way or that they will increase JOBS and they’re all on board with the politicians’ proposals. As for the consequences? You’ve said yourself that they don’t matter. Only public opinion is important. Polls and approval ratings. Less choices. Less freedom. After all, people might make personal choices for themselves that the majority may not approve of. You can’t take that risk, even if that risk isn’t yours to take.

    People who make choices that harm no one other than (perhaps) themselves should be left alone. Many of the articles on this site (and the comments that usually follow) address this concept in detail repeatedly. Drug use is just one of these examples. Yet your only response is that it’s justified because “it’s the will of the people”. So I’ll ask you again – does it occur to you that the majority could ever be wrong? If so, should it also follow that personal decisions are best left to the individuals concerned rather than to people whose one skill in life is to win popularity contests?

  27. Jumping Jacks eloyman22 Drac Vermell  You’re correct. Taxpayers often must pick up the tab for the medical expenses of others. But aren’t you making an argument that stealing money from taxpayers to pay the medical expenses of others is the real problem? Not the choices made by the drug user? Wouldn’t it be more FAIR to have the individual who made bad choices take those financial consequences upon himself rather than pass it on to the taxpayer?

  28. Drac Vermell Jumping Jacks eloyman22 I disagree with you. We all have to pay the price  for the use of illegal drugs.  First there is the social costs. Family, neighborhoods and communities. Second, there is the crime taxpayers have to pay for. Burglaries, petty theft, Neighborhood and community crime. Other more serious crimes such as, prostitution, money laundering, homicide, sex trafficking,human trafficking, drug cartels.. Every time some one buys and uses illegal drugs, the money is going to fund those crimes and American taxpayers are going to have to pay to clean it up.

    You said, “Wouldn’t it be more FAIR to have the individual who made bad choices take those financial consequences upon himself rather than pass it on to the taxpayer”?

    That isn’t how it works. If you don’t pay your medical bill, that cost is incorporated into higher medical costs to make up for the difference in lost revenue.
    In order for a hospital or Dr. office to receive money for it’s services, they have follow medicare and medicaid guidelines. They can’t turn anyone away. If that person comes in sick do do a past drug history, They aren’t going to pay. The taxpayers are going to pay. Part of the solution is Obama care that states everyone must have medical insurance. How are you going to make a drug addict with no employment, living in the street, owning nothing, pay their medical bills.

  29. Jumping Jacks Drac Vermell eloyman22  You continue to make my argument for me. I know that’s not how it works. And that’s another problem. Medicare and Medicaid are government programs. Government programs are funded by taxpayers. When people make bad choices that the taxpayer is forced to pay for than why should there ever be the need for someone to ever make sound choices? Why should the drug user change his behavior when someone else besides himself will be forced to burden the financial consequences? Drug addiction is just one problem that the government needs to extricate itself from. You’ve brought up another – taxpayer-subsidized healthcare programs.
    In your latest post, you’ve made it clear that you at least partially recognize that government programs designed to fix a previous problem have led to even more problems. Unfortunately, you’re blaming the wrong people for the problems that have arisen. In your example you noted that when a doctor provides his services to his patients, it’s paid for using funds granted by a government program, whether it be Medicaid, Medicare, or now indirectly through the myriad of regulations brought about by the passing of the ACA. In order to get that money he must obey those regulations stipulated by the program. The doctor does this, NOT for the good of his patients mind you, but for the BUREAUCRACY that writes the regulations. Worse still, these bureaucrats tell this doctor that he MUST take patients, regardless of the patient’s medical history and regardless of the patient’s ability to pay. Does this sound like a voluntary relationship or a coercive one? Who benefits from it? Maybe the patient, but should he be passing on those costs to the doctor, who then must pass it on to the taxpayer? The bureaucrats say he must, but who would agree to this arrangement if it weren’t imposed by force?
    Do you see the relationship here? You’re blaming drug users for financial shortfalls that are being caused by government regulations in the first place. Shouldn’t the elimination of these regulations and programs be the goal instead? Why shouldn’t these financial responsibilities also be assumed by the individual? Why should the government take these responsibilities from you, and levy more taxes on you to force you to pay for it? You’ve noted the poor results wrought by this one paradigm, yet you continue to support it. Can you think of nothing better?

  30. Drac Vermell Jumping Jacks eloyman22 LMFHO … oh man.  Jumping Jacks absolutely destroyed both of you.  

    Drac: you are absolutely clueless and tripped over your own logic multiple times. Give it up.  You’re not even close to being as intelligent as you think you are.

    eloyman22: well … you’re just a straight-up moron. Your comments speak for themselves.

    Now run along boys – you’ve both been schooled.

  31. Lord Keene of NH Drac Vermell Jumping Jacks eloyman22 

    You forgot to call us “Freetards”. How could you have missed such an obvious insult? Can’t you do anything right? Honestly, you are useless in a pinch.

  32. Drac Vermell Jumping Jacks eloyman22 You said, “Why should the drug user change his behavior when someone else besides himself will be forced to burden the financial consequences”? A drug addict’s behavior is destructive. Have you ever seen people who are meth users, heroine users, marijuana users? They are losing everything. They take what little money they may have and buy drugs. They are destroying their bodies and the tax payers pick up the bill.

    You said, ” Drug addiction is just one problem that the government needs to extricate itself from”. So who is going to pay the bill?

    You said, ” In your example you noted that when a doctor provides his services to his patients, it’s paid for using funds granted by a government program, whether it be Medicaid, Medicare”. First off, medicare and medicaid programs are for those who are retired, disabled, or on welfare. Those groups of people need medical care as well. If they have no money, how can they receive medical care and preventive services?  At one point in your life, you will be applying for SSI benefits. What if you don’t get those benefits? Do you really believe your retirement pension is going to pay for insurance and a lifestyle you are accustomed to?  Most Americans live for the moment. They don’t always plan for the future.

    You should read the Hippocratic Oath. Patients should not be turned away. But it is also a business. The care received by a health care provider costs money. There are multiple bills Dr’s need to be payed.

    You said, “You’re blaming drug users for financial shortfalls that are being caused by government regulations in the first place”.   That is not correct. As in the link I posted, The use and abuse of illegal drugs cost tax payers over 181 billion per year. That is not a governmental downfall. Those numbers come from choices drug addicts make by buying illegal drugs. They use them, their lives crumble, they become unemployed, turn to crime to support their habits which result in crime tax payers have to flip the bill. It has nothing to do with the government and never has.

    You said, “Why shouldn’t these financial responsibilities also be assumed by the individual”? They are. But when the “individual” doesn’t have the money to pay his/her bills who is going to pay for it? The tax payer. The taxpayer pays for increased health costs, and a higher overhead cost for medication, hospital equipment such as wheelchairs,  hospital supplies, the constant frivolous lawsuits, ect…

    You said, “Why should the government take these responsibilities from you, and levy more taxes on you to force you to pay for it”?  Someone has to pay for those services when someone can’t pay their bills. That is why Obama care requires everyone to have health insurance to help cut those costs.

    You said, ” Can you think of nothing better”? The best way to decrease costs is to implement social programs to provide education to people. “Prevention” For example, well baby checks are implemented to those women who cannot pay their bills. It provides preventative care and interventional care to babies so the mom’s can be better parents. It also provides multiple education programs to help mothers be better mothers.  A large part of the problems American’s face is the break down of the family. There is also WIC which helps financially strapped mom’s to get formula, and diapers, ect.. for their babies. You may say, why not have the father’s pay for the babies things?  What if they are drug addicts with no financial  opportunities. Of course they will always get enough money to support their drug habits. There are quite a few deadbeat dad’s out there.

    There is no easy solution but I believe social programs to provide prevention and intervention are going to be more successful than taking a illegal drug and making it “legal”. In my opinion, Hassan is making the right choices. Don’t forget, she signed medical cannabis laws. If memory serves, activists have been arguing for medical marijuana. If you think those who ride the coat tails of that legislation to make marijuana legal, you are very sadly mistaken.

  33. Drac Vermell eloyman22 I forgot to add, This is not the way to lobby for your cause.


  1. New Hampshire Governor Questioned about Promised Veto of Cannabis Decriminalization Bill - […] goons approached and tried to use their indoctrinated authority to question their free speech. Watch their Video Here Let’s…
  2. Keene State College Students Appreciate Hassan Confrontation | Free Keene - […] the Keene Cannabis Coalition released a public statement supporting Rich Paul and I in our confronting of Maggie Hassan…
  3. 4/20: State Representatives Smoke Cannabis at NH State House with Crowd of 100+ | Free Keene - […] to the list. Will republican governor Sununu prove to be more compassionate on this issue than his democrat predecessor?…
  4. Cannabis Civil Disobedience Hits NH State House for 9th Year of 420 at 4:20 on 4/20 | Free Keene - […] Democrat governor Maggie Hassan did sign the medical cannabis bill, she stood in the way of any decriminalization efforts.…

Care to comment?