cannabisnews.com: It's Time To Rethink and Reform Drug Laws
It's Time To Rethink and Reform Drug Laws
Posted by CN Staff on September 05, 2004 at 08:07:17 PT
Editorial
Source: Denver Post
Thoughtful conservatives such as William F. Buckley are joining the call for sweeping reforms, including legalization, taxation and regulated sale of marijuana.America's war on drugs is now in its 90th year. Federal law first restricted access to cocaine, heroin and related drugs in 1914. Marijuana was outlawed in 1937. Now, after nine decades of largely futile and often counterproductive efforts at drug prohibition, the time has come to reevaluate and reform America's drug laws.
All wars have casualties, and this one is no exception. According to a recent report from the Independent Institute in Oakland, Calif., there are now more than 318,000 people incarcerated in the United States for drug-related offenses. The U.S. spends about $33 billion a year prosecuting this war, and law enforcement makes about 1.5 million arrests per year, according to Boston University economist Jeffrey A. Miron.Wars - especially long and fruitless ones - inevitably generate war protesters. What is striking about the new wave of criticism of the drug war is how much of it comes from conservative sources. Most prominent, William F. Buckley Jr. wrote in the June 29 issue of National Review in support of the proposition that "the government should treat marijuana more or less the same way it treats alcohol: It should regulate it, control it, tax it, and make it illegal only for children."That conservatives should question a government policy that intrudes on individual freedoms for no apparent public benefit is as natural as it is welcome. Their voices join with progressives, libertarians, and the downright hard to classify, such as former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura, in an impressive new book, "The New Prohibition," from Accurate Press in St. Louis. Seven Coloradans have essays in that book, including federal Judge John Kane, San Miguel County Sheriff Bill Masters, and Mike Krause and David Kopel of the Golden-based Independence Institute.We obviously cannot report all the information packed into that book in this short space. But Masters, Kane and others make a compelling argument that the problems with some drugs, notably marijuana, are actually magnified by the current prohibition policy."Marijuana use decreases aggression and threatening behavior," Kane notes. "The crimes by some drug users are committed in order to pay for drugs in the highly inflated black market. In other words, the crimes are caused by prohibition-induced high prices, not by the pharmacological effects of drug ingestion." Snipped: Complete Article: http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/rethink.htmSource: Denver Post (CO)Published: Sunday, September 05, 2004 Copyright: 2004 The Denver Post CorpWebsite: http://www.denverpost.com/Contact: openforum denverpost.com Related Articles:High Time To Eliminate Drug Laws?http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19118.shtmlAn End To Marijuana Prohibition http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19112.shtmlFree Weeds: The Marijuana Debatehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19103.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help
Comment #103 posted by Jose Melendez on September 19, 2004 at 07:17:53 PT
evolved symbiotically
from: http://www.indystar.com/articles/6/179846-9776-052.html "For a long time, scientists thought that marijuana altered the mind in a messy and random way.Now they've identified an elegant modus operandi. It adds to a growing body of research that explains the mechanism behind getting "high." Marijuana mimics the cannabinoids made naturally by our brain -- chemicals that influence a smorgasbord of body functions including movement, thought and perception.''The research, published in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature, sheds light on a powerful neurochemical system. Researchers hope that when they understand the job the chemical does in the day-to-day running of our bodies, they can design new therapeutic drugs. In their lab, Huguenard and colleagues David Prince and Alberto Bacci injected electric current into rat brain cells, then watched the chatter between the brain's two major types of cells.When overly excited, one type of neuron releases cannabinoids, which create a calming effect, they found."
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #102 posted by The GCW on September 19, 2004 at 03:50:35 PT
Another response.
US CO: LTE: U.S. war on drugs Re: "Should U.S. end war on drugs?" Sept. 12 Open Forum.Here we go again, with what I call "wave the magic wand, pass some legislation and all the problems will be cured."I read all eight of the letters in response to The Post's call for reforming the nation's drug laws, and only one, from Stan White of Dillon, even hinted at the problems that would remain after passing the magic cure-all of legislation.First, who would buy or manufacture the drugs in the U.S. to ensure their quality or safety? There would seem to be only one answer: the federal government.Second, who would distribute the now-legal drugs? Liquor stores? Don't they have enough problems handling their own products for sale without having a new bunch of zoned-out customers lined up at the cash registers? Since these are now legal drugs, how about pharmacies? Frankly, I can't imagine any thinking pharmacists - who depend on their prescription trade - considering putting their regular customers in that sort of atmosphere.So, where does that leave us? What else could there be but government drug stores? (Federal, of course, because some states would not want to run dope stores.)Now there is a program that would really create 100,000 jobs a president could be proud of and would certainly be entitled to take all the credit for their creation and move on to bigger government.Pubdate: September 19, 2004
Source: Denver Post (CO)Author: Miles C. McCormackReferred: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v04/n1265/a11.html?142823Referred: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v04/n1295/a04.html?146171Viewed at: http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E416%257E,00.html
U.S. war on drugs
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #101 posted by The GCW on September 12, 2004 at 11:56:44 PT
Hope,
I do.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #100 posted by FoM on September 12, 2004 at 09:32:34 PT
Hope
I think you might be right there. I was so upset about the elections that I finally said what will be will be and it's out of my hands. I am much more at peace now. I'm sure you will understand what I mean.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #99 posted by Hope on September 12, 2004 at 09:24:05 PT
The GCW
Do I sense a bit of Godspeed coming our way?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #98 posted by FoM on September 12, 2004 at 08:04:32 PT
Denver Post: Published Letters To The Editor
Published: Sunday, September 12, 2004
Should U.S. end war on drugs?Re: "It's time to rethink and reform drug laws," Sept. 5 editorial.Your editorial on the need for long-overdue alternatives to the drug war was right on target. If harsh penalties served to deter use, the elusive goal of a "drug-free" America would have been achieved decades ago. Instead of adding to what is already the highest incarceration rate in the world, we should be funding cost-effective drug treatment. Drug prohibition finances organized crime at home and terrorism abroad, which is then used to justify increased drug-war spending.It's time to end this madness and instead treat all substance abuse, legal or otherwise, as the public health problem it is. It's worth noting that tobacco use has declined considerably in recent years. Public education efforts are paying off. Apparently mandatory minimum sentences, civil asset forfeiture, random drug testing and racial profiling are not necessarily the most cost-effective means of discouraging unhealthy choices.Robert Sharpe, Washington, D.C. The writer is a policy analyst for Common Sense for Drug Policy. ...The authors of the book "The New Prohibition" are certainly right when they document that drug prohibition has been a failure and has resulted in "unintended consequences" that have adversely impacted the American public. Your own call for a repeal of minimum mandatory sentencing and to allow state governments to implement their own drug policy is certainly a sensible place to start.However, William F. Buckley's call for heavy regulation and taxation of "legalized" drugs is in truth a form of prohibition called "neoprohibition." This approach does reduce the harm of prohibition, but why should we accept such a half-measure? Full legalization would completely eliminate the harm of prohibition and illegal markets and bring the full force of market regulation and social institutions to control the harmful effects of drug abuse. A free society rests on the proposition that people are allowed to fail and on the experience that only a free society is capable of adequately dealing with problems associated with the inevitable fallibility of man.Mark Thornton, Auburn, Ala. The writer is a senior fellow with the Ludwig von Mises Institute. ...It was with great satisfaction that I read your editorial calling for legalization and regulation of marijuana and other controlled substances. I have advocated this step for years in my three campaigns for public office, in letters to your paper, and in phone conversations with the late, charming Sue O'Brien, who agreed but was somewhat circumspect in what she was willing to advocate on the editorial page. I eagerly look forward to your endorsement for this year's election, as I am the only candidate in the U.S. 6th Congressional District campaign whose position on this matter coincides with yours.Jack J. Woehr, Golden The writer is the Libertarian candidate for Congress in the 6th Congressional District. ...Kudos to The Post for its editorial calling for the federal reform of the nation's drug laws. In keeping with The Post's recognition of the "inevitable failures of a federal nanny-state mentality" and the poor quality of the two major-party presidential candidates, both of whom are calling for a larger nanny state, I hope The Post will consider endorsing Michael Badnarik, Libertarian for president, the only candidate on the ballot who wants a smaller nanny state.David Aitken, Denver ...We applaud The Denver Post for continuing its strong support of drug policy reform with its editorial calling for the legalization, regulation, and taxation of marijuana. We are proud to announce the recent formation of a new non-profit organization, Sensible Colorado, dedicated to ending the failed policies of unregulated marijuana prohibition and the unproductive approach to other drug use in Colorado. Both Nevada and Alaska will have citizen's initiatives on the ballot this November calling for the regulation and taxation of marijuana.While marijuana use and abuse should never be encouraged, Sensible Colorado will educate voters about the social and economic benefits of regulating marijuana like alcohol. For example, as Colorado has one of the highest rates of marijuana use in the country, regulating it would remove the threat of arrest and jail for adults over 21 who use marijuana without harming others. Nationwide, there are approximately 700,000 marijuana arrests every year and at least 30,000 people in prison or jails for marijuana violations. This is an enormous waste of limited police resources that should be used to address violent crimes, property crimes, and people who drive under the influence of any drug. A 2001 study in Nevada showed that taxing marijuana could generate approximately $30 million per year, money that could be used to fund health care for all citizens or treatment for drug addiction. Regulating marijuana takes control away from the criminal element and eliminates the gateway effect by reducing the opportunity for drug dealers to push other harder drugs along with marijuana.The current system is not working. It's time for sensible marijuana policy in Colorado that focuses on reducing actual harms of the drug rather than on zealous prohibition to the exclusion of all other values.Sean McAllister, Denver The writer is chairman of Sensible Colorado. ...In 1969, the U.S. federal drug enforcement budget was $65 million. Last year it was $19.2 billion. (These figures don't include the cost of incarceration nor the state and local costs).In 1969, coffee sold for about 25 cents a cup. If the price of coffee had increased at the same rate as our drug-enforcement budget, coffee would now sell for almost $75 a cup.What have we received for our so-called investment? Absolutely nothing. Recreational drugs are just as available today as they were in 1969.In 1969, methamphetamine use and production was not at record levels and epidemic proportions. It is today.We cannot keep recreational drugs out of our highest-security prisons and jails, so how can we expect to be able to keep drugs out of our country with thousands of miles of coastline and international borders?As long as people want recreational drugs and they are willing to pay a substantial price for the drugs, somebody will produce the drugs and somebody else will get the drugs to the willing buyers.This is guaranteed.Kirk Muse, Mesa, Ariz. ...The Denver Post, along with millions of intelligent people, is calling for credible drug-law reform. It is one reason people supported Democratic presidential nominee Dennis Kucinich, who put in writing that as president he would decriminalize cannabis and regulate it like alcohol.This is a litmus-test issue: Politicians who don't support credible drug law reform should not be leading anything. So where do Colorado's senatorial nominees, Ken Salazar and Pete Coors, stand on this important issue?Stan White, Dillon ...What can we expect from our Senate candidates regarding medical marijuana?Ken Salazar, as chief legal counsel for Colorado, vigorously opposed the citizen-led initiative that approved medical use of marijuana in 2000. If elected to the Senate, he will be responsible for writing federal law, rather than advising the state on laws already enacted. As a legislator, will he support Colorado voters or will he continue the draconian anti-medical marijuana policies of his predecessors? It is time for Salazar to declare his position on this issue.Pete Coors should be asked the same questions regarding medical marijuana. Can we expect either of these candidates to support the right of a few Colorado citizens to use the only medicine that might work for them? Which, if either, of these men has the courage to stand up against our draconian drug policies of the past 40 years?The federal government has continually denied any medical efficacy of marijuana despite its own research that proves otherwise. The emperor wears no clothes on this issue, and now is clearly time to send someone to Washington who will deliver that message.Who should we send to be the messenger?Robert Wiley, Colorado Springs
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #97 posted by The GCW on September 12, 2004 at 04:06:55 PT
8 LTE's and no disagreement.
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E416%257E,00.htmlI spoke with the Post... He said there was a good response but He wished He received more letters with the other viewpoint, for balance.In the past, people have been afraid to speak out in public about this issue, calling for credible drug law reform.Now, people are afraid to come out and speak out in public, supporting the war on drugs, unless some one is paying them to do so.The people want CREDIBLE DRUG LAW REFORM.Also:I believe Ken Salazar and Pete Coors will not mention a word about this issue.They are both drug war lords.420-8 AUTHORSRobert Sharpe - policy analyst for Common Sense for Drug Policy. Mark Thornton, - senior fellow with the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Jack J. Woehr, - Libertarian candidate for Congress in the 6th Congressional District. David AitkenSean McAllister, - chairman of Sensible Colorado.Kirk Muse,Stan WhiteRobert Wiley
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #96 posted by breeze on September 09, 2004 at 04:28:45 PT
Hope- thanks, but i dont deserve credit
I had heard it somewhere before- a female comedian, but it is an EXCELLENT analogy, because it is so TRUE>
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #95 posted by Hope on September 08, 2004 at 07:24:49 PT
Breeze,brilliant "parable" of voting system!
In comment #92 you said, "Its like there are 14 people living in a house and a vote is taken for who gets to be boss. Three people are outside when the vote is taken, but their vote doesn't count even though they voted- simply because they weren't INSIDE the house when the vote was cast- leaving 11 people inside the house. Now of these 11 people- 8 people are in the living room, and they all vote for the same person. The other 3 people in the kitchen vote for the other guy, but they win the overall election simply because they were standing in the kitchen."
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #94 posted by Breeze on September 08, 2004 at 00:09:21 PT
FOM- you just gave me inspiration
Since electronic votes are to be instantly counted, I wonder if these same votes will be instantly posted. I wonder if one could view their own vote being counted as they vote. I mean the reason for electronic voting is to make the count quicker and more reliable, I wonder why the machines couldn't show the total of votes as their being processed on a wall somewhere in the voting booth.I had heard one time that the inventor of television had hopeful dreams for his creation- and using it as a voting device was one of them instead of the commercial agent of advertising it has become now. Even then , a system to try to achieve fairness in voting was being speculated.I imagine in the next ten years, a system will be in place where there will be a pc in every home in America, and eventually people will be allowed to vote from the convinience of their lounge chairs, bathroom, or kitchen on any number of bills, heads of state and local issues. At the end of the voting cycle, an email could be sent to their home alerting them of how they voted, and allow them to challange any mistakes if there were any. But of course, the system would have to be run from a central corridor free from corruption or influence. Is this possible?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #93 posted by FoM on September 07, 2004 at 22:09:13 PT
Breeze
I'm dodging a storm so I have been off line and haven't been able to try to answer. This is how I see it all. We have a lot of people in the United States. We have corruption at every level of business and government. There are also many good people too. If voting has trouble again this time people will be watching. There's an old saying. First time shame on them. Second time shame on you. We aren't dumb and trusting this election. I think Michael Moore is planning to have his cameras rolling somewhere in Florida. Questions will be asked. Voters will be on guard. That might help it work a little better.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #92 posted by Breeze on September 07, 2004 at 20:43:38 PT
Fear and its teachings
FOM- I think that a LOT of people are afraid of what lay in the future, I know I am. All we can do is compfort one another in times like this, sometimes its all one has.On a side note though, this is something that occured to me while reading about the crimes bush has commited in the past regarding his coke and straw usage. Do't ask me why. :)The polls say that bush is leading, as it did in polls taken around febuary of this year on one site. But most people that I encounter on the web wonder about the validity of these polls. I, too, wonder. Could it be, that polls are being reported as to favor bush in order to assure a sedated transistion of bush into his second term with the science in manipulating numbers in the polls NOW, as well as later? If people are of the general opinion that others are voting for bush, then there would be no suspiscion or questions in the validity of the voting process- that bush won because people wanted him too. There is still the issue of how electronic voting booths are easily hacked and manipulated- making it easier for a candidate to "steal" the election. I know that just about every election office in my area will have electronic voting machines come November. I wonder this, as I don't think I am being just paranoid over the situation. It seems almost like a conspiracy theory, but it would fit into the details if a candidate were to steal an election- especially when the votes don't count as the total for each side- but only by region/area. Even then, the numbers would be meaningless- as the machine tallied the numbers to the liking of whomever might alter them.Our election process is really stupid to begin with,IMHO.
Its like there are 14 people living in a house and a vote is taken for who gets to be boss. Three people are outside when the vote is taken, but their vote doesn't count even though they voted- simply because they weren't INSIDE the house when the vote was cast- leaving 11 people inside the house. Now of these 11 people- 8 people are in the living room, and they all vote for the same person. The other 3 people in the kitchen vote for the other guy, but they win the overall election simply because they were standing in the kitchen.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #91 posted by Hope on September 07, 2004 at 19:57:17 PT
Virgil
You're right. Now I see still another "head" on the many headed beast that gave birth to and feeds prohibition.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #90 posted by FoM on September 07, 2004 at 19:56:47 PT
Breeze
I don't get upset like I have been very often. I am scared for our country. Most things just don't bother me that much. I am afraid. I will come to a conclusion soon that all my fear can't change anything. When I get to that point I will be able to handle Bush for another term. I'm just not there yet but I'm trying real hard to be at peace with whatever happens in November.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #89 posted by Virgil on September 07, 2004 at 19:31:30 PT
Insurance is a racket
After 9/11 insurance companies raised rates and forced Congress to insure the upper part of a large terrorism loss. The settlement with the families losing relatives on 9/11 was goverment stepping in on the insuance companies behalf- not that the cover-up of government needed covering up. It is called public risk, private profit. Now we see on television the brainwashing under the marketing term, tort reform. They can go on and on and not tell how many lawsuits there are or the average settlement. It is not the tort laws or courts that are broken. It is the insurance industry and the government.Insurance companies are subsidized by people paying cash. People paying cash pay higher rates to keep the system afloat while the insurance companies limit payouts and still raise rates. Companies that would have no interest in drug testing feel the pressure to do so with more attractive insurance rates.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #88 posted by Hope on September 07, 2004 at 19:10:56 PT
The insurance business should have been good
The concept. The idea. It is a very good idea. Yet somewhere along the line...the good idea was turned into a cash cow and a strange amount of people got strangely rich from the insurance business. The lower downs...the workers...don't make much money...but the executives are abnormally rich. They've taken away from a doctor's ability to doctor and they are so huge that they have huge lobby power in government. The helping hand...gamble/idea turned into a squeezing not so helpful hand.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #87 posted by Breeze on September 07, 2004 at 19:05:50 PT
FOM-allow me to clarify
When I said you can like which ever party you want- I actually meant people who support bush, kerry-not exactly the bush party or the kerry party in themselves- but people who support a party for their own personal reasons. I have family who supports bush- because he says he is a christian, not because of his policy. I tried to say to them, "Do you think that if he was a satanist, and he wanted to be re-elected, that he would actually come out and say so?" It never caught on with them, they believe every word he says as truth. Kerry also said he was a christian, but bush beat him to it- as I tried to point out to the relatives. But there are other reasons some people want to vote bush instead of kerry anyway- and it has nothing to do with religion. One is party loyalty, another is he has labeled himself as a true patriot by considering himself the war president- never considering that war is not always a godly thing, especially when you are supposed to be a christian. War is never good, unless you are defending yourself- or trying to relieve oppresion of a people by a fascist dictator. While there are some good intentions that led to the war in Iraq, the news NEVER reports the other nations where dictatorships have killed literally thousands of innocent people- places where liberation would be quick and easy with our current technology. But the government doesn't get involved unless their is a defined threat to our nation's welfare- right?FOM-I am sorry you are under going so much stress. Many people are right now, and to have someone improving from cancer and then die, it is truly awful. Bush again can be blamed for not allowing stem cell research- something a few people know about, but may have reluctance to study it because of "moral' implications. Apparently bush and company think that stem cells are harvested from abortion clinics or some other thing like that, which is not true- it could be done that way, but for the most part it isn't. We are standing at a pentacle of possibilites here, jobs, healthcare, the war's- the list goes on. being a president is not an easy job- and its not one that I would want to have, but it is plain to see that not just anyone can be a leader- especially when common sense doesn't take root in a persons realization that what their doing is not right for the masses. So, its back to square one. I live in a state where jobs are hard to find, and there has been an increase in crime because of it- but the majority of people are voting bush even if its going to injure them further in the future. There are a few reasons for this, bothe the injury and the need to vote for bush by many people here- even though the reasons don't make sense. But then again, study history, and you will find that people on a grand scale didn't do things that made sense- they often followed herd mentality.
If there was a list made of all of the bad ideas of the last thousand years, compared to the list of good ideas, the bad idea list would wrap around the world three times. Its all a process of trial and error, unfortunately people tend to make the same mistakes over and over and over again.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #86 posted by FoM on September 07, 2004 at 18:43:46 PT
Correction
I thought it was $700 a month. It was $350 a month. That still was hard to come up with and it increased each few years so it would have been never ending.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #85 posted by FoM on September 07, 2004 at 18:40:35 PT
Hurricane Frances
We don't know how good our home owners insurance is because we haven't needed to use it for anything luckily. I'm sure many people will not have their claims paid the way they thought they would after Frances. We had a health policy on the both of us years ago. We paid $700 a month. I was thrown from a horse on New Years Eve and broke my wrist. The ambulance took me to the hospital and they said they could set it right away but if I wanted to go to sleep for the procedure I would have to stay in the hospital over night. I said I'll grin and bare it and they pulled and got it back in line and in a cast and we went home. The insurance wouldn't pay it because they said it was an outpatient visit. It cost $2500 until everything was added up. Insurance is really not for our protection.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #84 posted by Hope on September 07, 2004 at 18:26:16 PT
"some get rich and some lose everything"
and we all lose a lot.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #83 posted by Hope on September 07, 2004 at 18:24:42 PT
insurance
and corporations, obviously, can take away liberty, and peace, and freedom we once thought this country stood for.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #82 posted by FoM on September 07, 2004 at 18:09:39 PT
That's Right Hope
You said: Is it because of Insurance companies wanting to find ways to not pay? I agree because even if there is no possible way it's a drivers fault in an accident drug testing is required. It's a very big money game and some get rich and some lose everything.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #81 posted by Hope on September 07, 2004 at 18:06:06 PT
that's a ok
It's too easy to get down and serious. So much tragedy...might as well and better be happy while and when you get a chance.Thanks.Oh you guys.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #80 posted by Hope on September 07, 2004 at 18:02:44 PT
Oh my gosh
I keep getting so down and serious...and you guys keep making me laugh!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #79 posted by Hope on September 07, 2004 at 17:55:11 PT
oh boy
Do you think that lawsuits or prohibs are to thank for this mess? All the drug testing mess I mean?In our community, three young adults were killed turning into their driveway, recently. They were talking or something and the driver turned left in front of an eighteen wheeler on a seventy mile per hour, busy highway. There was nothing the truck driver could do. The two sisters in their twenties, one of them married to the driver were killed immediately. The young man lived for a few hours, I think. After the horror and grief that truck driver must be suffering...he has to submit to body fluid tests...which we all know are not 100 percent accurate and the body of the young driver will be tested and autopsied. Why? No matter what was in the driver's blood stream...it was obvious to everyone, that it was not his fault.The three young people are gone. Nothing will bring them back. It was an accident...the car driver didn't see the truck. It's horribly tragic...but I can't see the good in doing all that testing to everybody. Why? To get statistics? Why? These are real people and real families and the "authorities" are adding sorrow upon sorrow and grief upon grief. Is it because of Insurance companies wanting to find ways to not pay?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #78 posted by FoM on September 07, 2004 at 17:37:31 PT
Hope You Could Be Right
Stick went out and scraped all the Grateful Dead Bumperstickers off his truck. That might help! LOL!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #77 posted by FoM on September 07, 2004 at 17:30:40 PT
Hope
That's a good question. No that's not why. They random guys every three months. 25 percent of them will have to test. It must have been longer then a year if that's how it is. That means that he has gotten picked in the last six randoms. He was in the 25 percent. It's all about the odds. They pick the names by a random draw. They even alcohol tested for the first time today.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #76 posted by Hope on September 07, 2004 at 17:30:13 PT
Oh my gosh...BGreen
That is so funny!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #75 posted by BGreen on September 07, 2004 at 17:22:29 PT
It Could Be The Grateful Dead Bumperstickers
Stick has stuck on his truck. LOLThe Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #74 posted by Hope on September 07, 2004 at 17:15:44 PT
FoM
This may be too personal a question...but if it is...just say so. I'm sorry if it is...ahead of time.The question. Could Stick be getting so many "randoms"...if it is "many" where he works...it sounds like a lot to me...but could he be getting so many randoms because of what you do?Is it possible?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #73 posted by FoM on September 07, 2004 at 17:07:56 PT
BGreen
That was funny. Thanks. Everytime he gets randomed it reminds us of how life has changed since years ago when a physical exam determined if a person was healthy and fit enough to do a given job.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #72 posted by BGreen on September 07, 2004 at 16:50:00 PT
Something for Stick and Others To Think About
In the movie "Up In Smoke," Sgt. Stedenko kept getting his pants and shoes, um, "wet."Sgt. Stedenko represents all of the urine collectors in this so-called "free" country as we symbolically piss on *their* legs.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #71 posted by FoM on September 07, 2004 at 13:33:45 PT
BGreen
Thank you. I have never cared about an election like this one. It's not because of our issue but war. 1000 soldiers are dead they just said. I can't say what my heart feels about this war. I know we have important issues coming up for us but they aren't here yet and meanwhile we get bombarded with the lunacy of what we are seeing and hearing on tv.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #70 posted by BGreen on September 07, 2004 at 13:24:30 PT
You're not alone, FoM
Missouri is also a "swing state," so we're being inundated with commercials on TV and the radio that are so hateful and full of lies from the republican candidates. I'm SO PISSED OFF plus I still have to deal with all of the crap the monkey of life keeps slinging at me.The repugnants control the presidency, both houses of congress, the supreme court, law enforcement and have the full spectrum of the (un)patriot act at their fingertips, but they're running this campaign like the demorats have been in power and are totally responsible for all of this country's woes, therefore we must elect the repugnants to set this country on the right course.I've been through many periods of ups and downs with you, FoM, and we've always been here for each other for some comforting words. Please don't let yourself fall too low. Lean on Stick while he's leaning on you and you'll hold each other up through the pain.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #69 posted by FoM on September 07, 2004 at 13:03:35 PT
Breeze
Once again I want to say something. I am very upset. When I am upset I sound mean. I don't mean to sound mean. I must work thru these feelings of fear that I have as far as Bush goes. Anxiety isn't healthy. My husband is doing another random drug test today ( at least 6 in the last 12 months) and his boss's brother and one of my husband's friends died this weekend. He suffered a brain aneurysm. He was around 46 or 47. He survived cancer and then he died when he was getting better from cancer. Life is short.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #68 posted by FoM on September 07, 2004 at 12:18:27 PT
Breeze
I know Breeze that I can like or dislike any party but I really don't like any party. I don't like to wish time away but I will so glad when this election is over. I get so upset when I think of Bush for 4 more years. It makes me physically sick.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #67 posted by Breeze on September 07, 2004 at 12:07:31 PT
FOM- you can like who ever you want
Republican, democrat,greenparty,libertarian- you like whomever you please. The democrats of past (clinton) haven't exactly been kind to the marijuana party, there was an actual INCREASE in marijuana arrests when clinton was in office. Bush may be a republican, but he is an awful president. Republicans are not known for their sympathy for poor people, that is why so many people dislike republicans- but there are many who like republicans as well. I only like libertarians, and there is not a well known representative from that party thats even been mentioned on any of my local broadcasts. Bush is more than just a hypocrite, and Kerry has buried the topic deep beneath other topics that are very important, but not as important, on his town meeting forum. So there, Democrats aren't exactly on our side at this time either, they just happen to fit the opinion, ANYONE but Bush...
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #66 posted by kaptinemo on September 07, 2004 at 10:31:58 PT:
Good to see you again, Nicholas!
You haven't graced us with your presence for far too long; don't be a stranger. :)
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #65 posted by kaptinemo on September 07, 2004 at 10:29:47 PT:
Jose has agian brought up something interesting
Namely, how when an economic niche occurs, the tendency is for *local* sources to supply it...such as here in the States, most weed either comes from Mex sources, or is domestically grown. The Germans are only doing what any enterprising people with monetary needs would do, and I'd bet that if it isn't already, it will be finding it's way into Dutch coffeeshops in a year. 'Duitshanf' or 'Berlin Blast' or 'Osten Sonnenschein', anyone?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #64 posted by FoM on September 07, 2004 at 09:18:52 PT
Just A Note
I feel bad. I like my sister and she's a republican. I'm sure there are other republicans I like besides Nicholas. That was just to harsh for me to say. There I feel better.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #63 posted by Breeze on September 07, 2004 at 08:49:08 PT
Thanks BGreen!
I knew that ONE of the bush girls has a little problem with toot-toot, I get them all confused. But you mentioned the bush girls like to binge, tsk tsk- seems the whole family has their abuse issues and/or addictions, doesn't it? My,my- and then they call themselves conservatives...Hmmm.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #62 posted by FoM on September 07, 2004 at 07:44:10 PT
Hi Nicholas
When he tells you tell us! You are unique to me. You're the only republican I like! LOL!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #61 posted by Jose Melendez on September 07, 2004 at 07:15:15 PT
ich bin Hanf
Got Commerce?from: http://www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp?subchannel_id=52&story_id=5589&name=Dope+laws+up+in+smoke In the past, much of the illicit cannabis came into Germany from Turkey or the Mediterranean. Now though, many struggling farms in former East Germany have hired out their barns for high-tech pot production facilities. "The pot people in Berlin smoking generally comes from acreages closer to their homes than the ones producing the fresh fruit and vegetables they eat,"
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #60 posted by BGreen on September 07, 2004 at 05:48:54 PT
Noelle Bush is the daughter of Jeb
w's girls are just boozers like their daddy.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #59 posted by Breeze on September 07, 2004 at 05:15:21 PT
I have another politically incorrect question....
Why is it the media refuses to bring the public to light about Bush's drug and alcohol abuse? His kids made a speech at the convention, so therefore , they are NOW open to public scrutiny, didn't one of the children have a bout with crack and prescription drugs at some point? Strangely, the media never brings this up.And as for the Vietnam war issue, Bush's records continually magickally disappear, yet THIS is never mentioned except on the web.Does anyone else notice this?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #58 posted by Nick Thimmesch on September 07, 2004 at 01:50:26 PT:
You know FoM...
...I really should not post something and go to bed: I miss your messages until the next day. Nope: Doobya has not given me the dope nor briefed me -- yet -- on his future drug reform policies, but it looks like some of his previous "drinking & drug" policies are coming to light.Doobya's drinking & driving policy: try not to get caught by driving in the wee hours with a tennis star by your side:http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/bushdui1.htmlBush's Camp David drug summit:http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=14609301&method=full&siteid=50143&headline=bush--took-cocaine-at-camp-david--name_page.htmlBUSH 'TOOK COCAINE AT CAMP DAVID' Sep 6 2004
And wife Laura liked dope, says book
By Emma Pryer
GEORGE W Bush snorted cocaine at Camp David, a new book claims.His wife Laura also allegedly tried cannabis in her youth.Author Kitty Kelley says in her biography The Family: The Real Story of the Bush Dynasty, that the US President first used coke at university in the mid-1960s.She quotes his former sister-in-law Sharon Bush who claims: "Bush did coke at Camp David when his father was President, and not just once either."Other acquaintances allege that as a 26-year-old National Guard, Bush "liked to sneak out back for a joint or into the bathroom for a line of cocaine".Bush has admitted being an alcoholic but, asked during the 1999 election if he did drugs, he said: "I've told the American people that years ago I made some mistakes."I've learned from my mistakes and should I be fortunate enough to become president I will bring dignity and honour to the office."Later an aide clarified his remarks saying Bush hadn't taken illegal drugs in the past 25 years.Kelley says that the Bush family covered up scandals because of their wealth and influence. She claims George W started drinking at school and continued at Yale university to overcome shyness.Former student Torbery George says in the book: "Poor Georgie. He couldn't relate to women unless he was loaded."Another says: "He went out of his way to act crude. It's amazing someone you held in such low esteem later became president."His supporters have slammed the allegations as outrageous.The White House said: "This book appears to be filled with the same trash discredited years ago."
THIMMESCH OVER & OUT: gotta take the kid to school.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=14609301&method=full&siteid=501
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #57 posted by Hope on September 06, 2004 at 20:20:38 PT
Golden Lung
"Millions of stoners going to prison just because I want money."Sadly...you aren't the only one.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #56 posted by Golden Lung on September 06, 2004 at 20:03:03 PT
My Apologies
Let me clear up on this if anyone cares. I didn't actually mean what I said about the benefit for 'me' with it being illegal. The fiction of me claiming to be a drug dealer was purely boastful. I do sell pot, but not so much that I should consider myself a 'drug dealer'. But just from a far out cosmic plain mind, if weed was legal, controlled, regulated, and taxed without some fake shit in it, what use would be a drug dealer if you get much better pot from companies that can create super weed or whatever. I'm sorry for being such an asshole to the guy who wrote the article, I might have been drunk. So, sorry fellow stoners. It was selfish of me or anyone to not want pot to be legal just for the sake of money. Millions of stoners going to prison just because I want money. Now I'm on a guilt trip
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #55 posted by E_Johnson on September 06, 2004 at 10:22:03 PT
What will 2008 be like I wonder
I take this editorial to mean there is now a viable drug reform faction growing inside the Republican Party.Will the drug reform factions growing within each party be strong enough by 2008 to control the agenda of the election?Could it be possible that the two parties will offer competing drug reform platforms in 2008?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #54 posted by FoM on September 06, 2004 at 10:20:14 PT
Nicholas Please Read This New York Times Article
Feel The Hate: http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread19443.shtml
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #53 posted by FoM on September 06, 2004 at 10:11:14 PT
Thanks Virgil
I don't know what to say except I'm sorry to read that she is gone.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #52 posted by Hope on September 06, 2004 at 09:58:32 PT
This signed Editorial
should have a good effect on a lot of people who just weren't sure what to think. Now they know.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #51 posted by E_Johnson on September 06, 2004 at 09:55:59 PT
Sick people torturing sick people
Biz Ivol died from a physical illness but the people who wanted to prosecute her are mentally ill, that's what I think now.Marijuana prohibition is like some kind of mass societal personality disorder involving lies, multiple identities and violent acting out on innocent people.Perhaps one root is economic, perhaps another root is emotional.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #50 posted by Hope on September 06, 2004 at 09:52:09 PT
Biz
She's slipped out of that body of pain.A brave woman.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #49 posted by Hope on September 06, 2004 at 09:43:08 PT
Lehder
Hey, man!Good to hear from you. I was just thinking about you a day or two ago. Thanks for posting!("You start unraveling mentally often when you hit 70 years old! " ( #27 )
Only if you can't roll a joint.)That draws a funny picture on my imagination. At least it's funny now. My mother and I were talking the other day about a lot of things that were happening to older people when we were young were usually rather inconsequential to us and sometimes even seemed funny. Doesn't always seem so funny now.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #48 posted by E_Johnson on September 06, 2004 at 09:21:50 PT
How marijuana laws promote the cycle of abuse
Suppose someoine is sexually abused as a child and as seems to be normal for the victims of this crime, represses the memory and never achieves justice by demanding accountability from the abuser.I imagine two things could happen to this person as an adult if this problem is never healed:1. They end up smoking pot to cope with the PTSD, then they get arrested and end up in jail -- where they can get sexually abused again, making them need more pot and end up in jail once again available to imprisoned abusers.2. They stay drug free and their coping mechanism for dealing with the lack of justice in thier own lives is to become a criminal prosecutor or someone who supports harsh criminal prosecution -- demanding from the rest of the world the accountability they were never able to force upon the person or persons who damaged them in the first place.It's all part of the cycle of abuse, I think.Our prison system is a reflection of our internal emotional stress in this country.There's no rational reason to lock up marijuana users. Therefore the reason must be irrational i.e. emotional.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #47 posted by FoM on September 06, 2004 at 09:13:14 PT
Lehder
It's good to see you! I hope all is well!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #46 posted by FoM on September 06, 2004 at 09:07:44 PT
Hi Nicholas!
Has George told you when he will legalize marijuana? If he's so wonderful I'd sure like to know. I love the comments in this thread. It shows how strongly we feel. Republicans think they are better and like condescending and that's another reason I don't like republicans.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #45 posted by Nick Thimmesch on September 06, 2004 at 08:44:50 PT:
Wow...
...all extraneous posted comments, aside, looks like The Denver Post has awoken.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #44 posted by E_Johnson on September 06, 2004 at 08:44:12 PT
I have a cricism of Fred Gardner -- OT
Sex abuse recovered memory cases are not whacko. I will give you two facts:1. A study of adults in New York who were verified child victims of sexually transmitted diseases treated in New York clinics revealed that a substantial fraction (like half) of adults never remebered being treeated for syphilis or gonorrhea when they were four or five years old. They did not remember the circumstances of these visits to the hospital or the sexual abuse that had to have given them sexual diseases.This shows that child victims of sexual abuse often do not remember the avbuse or the immediate consequences of the abuse.Some of the adults surveyed did remember but their memories were spotty and were recovered in stages.2. Vast numbers of photographs of children being sexually abused have een recovered by police who crack down on child porn.Many of these photos go back to the sixties and seventies. Who are these children, and why are they not now going to the police to identify themselves so that their abusers can be prosecuted and sent to prison where they so richly elong?Because most of the children who are abused by child pornographers repress the memory -- just like the repressed memory movement has always claimed.They certaibnly has een vast amunts of child sexual abuse in America -- the photographic evidence is all over the Internet.So Fred Gardner is way off the mark on this one. The physical evidence I have cited suggests that sxexual abuse of children in America has been widespread enough to statistically validate the rate of sexual abuse allegations being made in this country.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #43 posted by Virgil on September 06, 2004 at 06:09:25 PT
Dude Lehder, hello & Biz Ivol has died
The comments on the announcement of the death of Biz Ivol can be read at UK420- http://www.uk420.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=28806&st=0 Billy Barker gave this link to inform people who Biz Ivol was- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1334388.stm
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #42 posted by Lehder on September 06, 2004 at 03:07:15 PT
young people and marijuana
"You start unraveling mentally often when you hit 70 years old! " ( #27 )Only if you can't roll a joint.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #41 posted by Virgil on September 05, 2004 at 22:50:36 PT
Can't make this up- the prohibitors did though
Al Giordano wrote an article dated Sunday on the drug warriors talking of a "super coca" in an article titled ""Super Coca!" A New Pretext for Drug War Funding"- http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2004/9/5/11245/88503It is way too much, as he really laughs at this one. THC can be maximized in cannabis because it is on the outside of the cells and in coca higher concentrations of the desirable chemical would kill cells and the plant. Giordano ask for pictures of the "super coca tree" that makes the old bush obsolete for cocaine making.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #40 posted by Virgil on September 05, 2004 at 21:54:52 PT
Apples and oranges are both good fruit
I feel like I might have slighted Richard Cowan in comment37. There are probably bloggers and things like Drug War Rant that write somewhat continually as does RC. Fred Gardner having something up every weekend at CounterPunch is slightly different. It is all too small to worry about, but they are all works of good fruit.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #39 posted by FoM on September 05, 2004 at 21:33:37 PT
I Was Asked By a Friend To Post This Poll
POLL: Do you think the Da Kine store on Vancouver’s Commercial Drive should be allowed to sell marijuana? Please Vote: http://www.canada.com/vancouver/theprovince/index.html
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #38 posted by Virgil on September 05, 2004 at 21:04:56 PT
What Fred says
This is news fit to amplify. This comes from the Gardner work of this week at http://www.counterpunch.org/gardner09042004.html Angel Raich is flying to New York Sept. 10 to tape a Montel Williams show. Also appearing will be Irvin Rosenfeld, the broker from Boca, one of six surviving patients who are provided with marijuana by the feds under the federal Investigational New Drug program (cut off in the late 1980s by George Bush I when large numbers of AIDS patients started applying)... A feature on medical marijuana will appear in a future issue AARP Magazine, which is sent free to millions of geezers and pre-geezers. Author Eric Bailey is an honest, thorough reporter employed by the Los Angeles Times. There's no more appropriate readership for a story on this subject than AARP's...
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #37 posted by Virgil on September 05, 2004 at 20:50:10 PT
Ah, the power of pot
Fred Gardner has his usual weekend piece up at CounterPunch- http://www.counterpunch.org/gardner09042004.html It is titled "Pot Shots- The Hempstead T-Shirt." It has three distinct segments. At this point, would you think that Fred Gardner is the only individual in America that writes a regular column on cannabis on the Internet? He joins the enjoinment and that is good news.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #36 posted by AlvinCool on September 05, 2004 at 19:44:24 PT
Dankhank
I know it may be hard to get them to understand that a shift is needed when someone has been killed "in the line of duty" due to meth. But taking the line that cannabis is, without argument, the largest black market in existance. If the market were to shift drugs like meth would be much harder to market.Hence when a cannabis user goes to his friend that he's be dealing with for years he can be introduced for different reasons to different drugs that he would never have tried in a legal system. That puts police in less "line of duty" calls.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #35 posted by Virgil on September 05, 2004 at 18:24:04 PT
It is good that they see the light
We here know that it is flat out absurd to have cannabis illegal and hemp is a complete mind blower. In future times they will look the fool to continue this prohibition, as anyone that has ever toked is built in opposition to the idiotcy of prohibition.Newspapers have to compete with the Internet anyway, and whoring for a plutocracy is no way to attract the news seeking consumer. It wasn't but a few months back the circulation manager of the Chicago paper that is sister to the LA Times lost its circulation manager when they found out that he intentionally propped up sales figures. I wonder how many advertisers sued since rates and circulation are highly related.Cannabis may not be in the media, but I bet there are a few ounces within a mile of me out here in the country and a couple dozen people, including children, have smelled the smoke today and know how screwed up it all is.Everyone has an ego that makes them want to be right, and there is only one right here and that is legalization. It is not like a husband and wife putting out views on whether to paint the room white or blue. It is not about tweaking, as this is all a miserable failure and everyone knows it on some level. Are there any rallies to continue prohibition? It is like Tom Paine said a long time ago- time is more important than reason. In this case there has been plenty of time and now is the time. You do not here Bush himself say that marijuana has no medical value. He would incit a riot everywhere. One more thing about the elections. Not voting is the second worst thing only to voting for Bush in my opinion. Victory for my point of view is that neither uncandid candidate receive a majority. The smaller the percentage the better. For someone to receive a majority in my opinion would be terrible. It is going to be bad enough without that.In nine days we may see the possession and cultivation laws in Canada formally declared dead. The vote in Alaska is 58 days from now and has a great chance. Then there is GW extracts that fly in the face of all things the government promotes on MMJ.The jig is up and drug warriors do not kill their enemy, they grow them. I sure wish we had some extensive polls. We may have to be happy with the voter poll in Alaska in two months.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #34 posted by rchandar on September 05, 2004 at 18:11:06 PT:
gloovins
yeah--I think that's about the size of it. The unpopularity of the Iraq War will lead him back to home issues and the targeting of drug users/offenders. Some horrible legislation will be passed, or parts of it, a lot of noise and delusion will be fomented about "moral crisis" due to the taking of drugs, and another wave of fanatical demonization will be headed our way......anyway, that's what I think'll happen."A DAY IN SAN FRANCISCO"--this year"Breakfast"Prohibitionist Woman (about 60, Republican, very serious): "I want you to stop."Me: "Wellll,... you ain't gonna get your wish!!!"
--rchandar
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #33 posted by FoM on September 05, 2004 at 17:32:05 PT
Dankhank
Good luck to you! The Meth story will make it hard to get them to understand. Most of us are aware of the problems that Meth creates but they put cannabis in the same category as Meth and think they are the same thing.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #32 posted by Dankhank on September 05, 2004 at 17:24:56 PT
shift of thought ...
I spoke with the general manager of the local newspaper for thirty minutes the other day, capping our discussion with the request to meet with the entire editorial staff for an hour or two. I spoke to the Editorial head later that same day for about ten minutes. We speak regularly about the failure of the drug war and I asked him same. They are taking it under advisement one must suppose ...One problem we have here is the recent shooting death of a local, young father/State Policeman by an alledged meth-cooker. Makes sane talk about changing the drug war diffult at times.So anyway, here is another way to educate ... badger the local media to make them hear the truth.Wish me luck, should they say Yea ...
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #31 posted by FoM on September 05, 2004 at 17:20:23 PT
goneposthole
Thank you for understanding about Nader's age. Look at Clinton. He is 58 and is having serious health issues. I don't want you or anyone to think that I am prejudice about a persons age because I am not. When a person gets up there in years more can go wrong with their health. It's the laws of nature. The older a person gets the harder it becomes to see the world thru young people's eyes too. It's just the way life evolves and not something that is wrong. It's just reality.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #30 posted by goneposthole on September 05, 2004 at 17:12:36 PT
Yes, I know
That he is too old.Actually, the only two qualified people that would be able to do the job are Ricard Cowan or Kaptinemo. It's a toss up. Both are winners, so take your pick.Kaptinemo for President for honest governance.Richard Cowan for President for honest governance.No negative ions there, by golly.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #29 posted by siege on September 05, 2004 at 17:05:16 PT
voting
They found that 68% of voting machines in Chattanooga Tennessee. it did not mater who you voted for it come out BUSH and the state did not have the money to fight it.so we have look for the corruption in the voting PLACE.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #28 posted by The GCW on September 05, 2004 at 16:53:46 PT
This many good.
The Denver Post is not pulling a ploy.The Post is respected.Someone here in the past said when the media starts to say it, it's done.Well family, the media knows.The media is going to tell the truth.And We all know the truth here.Now the media is going to pull through.The Denver Post was compared to the Denver Rocky MOuntain News in a story following the Don Nord stories... The Post was leading in accurate Journalism.I think We can see if it is a ploy by seeing what they print in the LTE's section.I do see the possible ploy... but I think better of the Post.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #27 posted by FoM on September 05, 2004 at 16:52:13 PT
goneposthole
I have a few reasons why I won't consider Nader. Here's the main reason. He's too OLD!!!! You start unraveling mentally often when you hit 70 years old! He's very old! Doesn't that matter? Kerry is almost too old.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #26 posted by FoM on September 05, 2004 at 16:43:01 PT
siege
I am a realistic person. I get upset when anyone implys I should vote for someone other then Kerry or Bush. Any vote for anyone other then Kerry will guarantee Bush wins just like what happened in 2000. Where would we be today if Bush wouldn't have gotten in as president? I don't know but I can't help but feel life wouldn't be this hard.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #25 posted by goneposthole on September 05, 2004 at 16:40:43 PT
George Bush loses election
John Kerry comes in a close second.Ralph Nader wins.That would be a positive and may put an end to a lot of trial and tribulation.'Bout the only positive that comes to mind.The rest sticks in my craw.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #24 posted by siege on September 05, 2004 at 16:31:49 PT
FoM
FoM don't let it get you down. I live 2 states below you they keep saying that the big E has it. there are about 8 states around us they say they have it I don't think so from all I have talked to I thank it is the way they put it in the polls and news. they try to make the DEVIL look good, and bush works for F O X News.So expect any thing from the people that worship those type of people.C E how negative IS negative, working on a Ballast that run 4 Ballasts 4 LIGHTS of 400w each,have not burnt down anything yet. I know onthing about Ele. I only let it run while I'm awake. power that it uses is ONE for the 4. both are bad for the people.
moveonforamerica and moveamericaforward
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #23 posted by FoM on September 05, 2004 at 16:27:45 PT
AlvinCool
I know you're right. I will vote for Kerry because of Bush. My mind is made up and most people here their minds are made up. We have two people that could become the next president and we know it's Bush or Kerry. I will vote if for no other reason then I like Teresa Kerry. I like shove it type of people when they can say it in a nice way like she did.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #22 posted by AlvinCool on September 05, 2004 at 16:20:16 PT
No!
Sorry FoM. Not voting is not the option! Of Bush and Kerry we KNOW what Bush will do if turned lose on a second and final term. For us it will turn to hell on earth.The thing we need to figure out how to do is make them work against each other the way they do us. The days are showing that the drug war is no longer economically viable. It's a shame it has to come to that rather than common sense but economics play such a large part of American policics.Moving Social Security to 70 - 75 isn't the answer, the answer will lie in smarter drug policy.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #21 posted by FoM on September 05, 2004 at 15:02:48 PT
gloovins
Maybe not voting will be best for many of us then. I could easily just forget about it as long as there isn't any hope.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #20 posted by gloovins on September 05, 2004 at 14:49:09 PT
I promise you this...
If you vote Kerry or Bush --- government will only get larger, more intrusive, more inefficent and more laws will be passed.Either, at this point and until Nov. 2 will say ANYthing to get elected. ANYthing to get themselves there. They are both like robots, programmed not to say anything that might hurt their chances of raping you (legally) of your vote in November.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #19 posted by CorvallisEric on September 05, 2004 at 14:48:29 PT
Negative ions
Figuratively (as expressed here), negative ions aren't helping us (thanks, E_Johnson).Literally, negative ions are good for you (well, they were last time I cared which was decades ago and new research may have debunked it). It's all Ben Franklin's fault, since he arbitrarily chose the negative sign for the polarity of electrical charge which was later known to apply to the electron. Anyone who's studied electrical engineering knows the mess this caused.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #18 posted by AlvinCool on September 05, 2004 at 14:37:56 PT
Sorry if the truth upsets
Sorry dude but I'm a cynic, always have been always will. It's great that newspaper articles in conservative papers try to see a better point of view. But that is not their real agenda. If it was they would be pushing for national debates and true change and that is the furthest thing from their minds.I state their intentions. Their intentions are to seem progressive then let it drop. Our movement controls a large voter group of about 30% of all America. That is what they don't want us to realize. What they will attempt to do, through ploys like this one, is to get that vote for nothing but dry promised and whispers. They have been successful since Carter at this and nothing, that I can see, can stop it.One day it will backfire on them, maybe this will be the day. That doesn't change what they are doing now does it?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #17 posted by FoM on September 05, 2004 at 14:19:34 PT
CorvallisEric
I am glad you said what you did. I wondered why no one commented before. I appreciate it.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #16 posted by CorvallisEric on September 05, 2004 at 14:17:17 PT
Re: Sez Who? (comment #4)
I hope the Republicans don't make it legal, because if they do, be prepared to die from all the shit they'll be putting in there.Having previously explained why you like the illegal status, do you expect anyone to take this seriously?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #15 posted by E_Johnson on September 05, 2004 at 13:10:28 PT
You must be the cooler Alvin
So your conclusion is since it's all hopeless, we should all cry and go home?Some people here seem to choose negativity and hopelessness as a way of life.It's hard to resist given the times but it upsets my stomach to be negative so I try to avoid it on purpose.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #14 posted by AlvinCool on September 05, 2004 at 12:51:14 PT
It's just a ploy
It's an election year ploy to try to swing people who would favor drug reform over to the Republican party. This is just the same crap as the 2000 promise of "States will determine their own medical marijuana laws"When it's over this will all dry up. I wish is wasn't so but it is
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #13 posted by FoM on September 05, 2004 at 12:24:34 PT
EJ It Is Big
The Denver Post is conservative. I think of conservatives as republicans and then I think of Bush and I can't get fired up. I'll get over it soon.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #12 posted by E_Johnson on September 05, 2004 at 12:10:24 PT
I think this is big
It was an accomplishment to get the liberal papers to start thinking drug reform. The Denver Post is not a liberal paper. This is an accomlishment and it should be celebrated. These people on the editorial board all vpoted together on this editorial. This is not the opinion of a professional pundit, this is the collective wisdom of the people who run this newspaper. That means a lot.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #11 posted by FoM on September 05, 2004 at 11:19:15 PT
BGreen
Mrs. Kerry got sick while in Iowa campaigning for her husband. They took her to the hospital and then released her and she went home back to Pittsburgh. John Kerry stopped campaigning temporarily and went home to be with her.Teresa Heinz Kerry treated at hospital, released:
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2004/09/05/election2004/15_36_579_4_04.txt
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #10 posted by BGreen on September 05, 2004 at 11:13:30 PT
What are you referring to in post #8 FoM?.
I haven't heard anything about her being sick.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #9 posted by goneposthole on September 05, 2004 at 11:08:43 PT
remove those negative ions
if you want to do that, move to Canada. Canada doesn't invade defenseless countries. Canada takes care of their own. Canada has an amazing amount of natural resources. The amount of forest in northern British Columbia, The Yukon, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba is inexhaustible.If you want to see true wealth, take a trip to Canada. No doubt about it, it's there.The Yukon is one of the most beautiful places you will ever want to see. I didn't detect any negative ions in Whitehorse. It had one of the best hemporiums I've ever seen.Canada is well worth the visit. Eighty-five degrees in Whitehorse and wilderness everywhere. Take your time, enjoy your freedom there because that is where it is. It is gone from America.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #8 posted by FoM on September 05, 2004 at 10:31:47 PT
Just a Comment
I hope Teresa Kerry isn't seriously ill. I really like her. Fighting the Bush people has to be hard particularly when you aren't into fighting.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #7 posted by FoM on September 05, 2004 at 10:12:05 PT
New Web Site I Just Heard About On CNN
Here we go now!http://moveonforamerica.org/
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #6 posted by goneposthole on September 05, 2004 at 09:28:30 PT
E_Johnson
Modern day 'Republicans' don't know what a liberal is. They've never seen one. If it weren't for Democrats in Congress, they wouldn't know what they are, either.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #5 posted by goneposthole on September 05, 2004 at 09:24:19 PT
sorry to say
but as long as the 'rulers' in our government hold the reins of power, the will be no process to re-legalize cannabis. You are not free, you are a 'resource'. You have life and that's good enough. Liberty and happiness must be bought before you can enjoy such luxuries. That is the way things are.The 'natural right' ain't about to have it any other way.http://www.straussian.net/You're going to need some pretty good cannabis after reading through the Leo Strauss' BS.It's a beautiful Sunday on Labor Day weekend.Happy days are here againLet's sing a song of cheer againHappy days are here again
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #4 posted by Golden Lung on September 05, 2004 at 09:15:23 PT:
Sez Who?
Did a high-up political figure(with power) say its time for a change? I really didn't get the tone of the article from the writer. Are you saying that someone mentioned aforehand wants the laws to change, or are you demanding that they change. We all are demanding that they change, and change for our better. Yes it would be glorious for the economy if marijuana was regulated, controlled,and taxed. It don't mean it is going to happen from the Republicans. The Republicans aren't the type to actually do what they say they will do(neither does Kerry). They'll say what the Republican public wants to hear and what the undecided never thought of. I hope the Republicans don't make it legal, because if they do, be prepared to die from all the shit they'll be putting in there. If they make it legal I'm going to pure cocaine, much like our president. It is time for the laws to change but that don't mean the law changing time is present. The future ain't what it used to be.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #3 posted by E_Johnson on September 05, 2004 at 08:34:46 PT
Expel those negative ions
Seeing this really made my day.Maybe there is hope for the Republicans after all.They will accept controversial facts from fellow conservatives that they won't accept from liberals.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #2 posted by Virgil on September 05, 2004 at 08:26:00 PT
No shit, Sherlock
Now, after nine decades of largely futile and often counterproductive efforts at drug prohibition, the time has come to reevaluate and reform America's drug laws. Yeah, they should evaluate failures and institutionalized injustice every century or so. Makes sense to me.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #1 posted by Overwhelmsam on September 05, 2004 at 08:23:00 PT
Duh!
Great article, but I'm just not sure that logic and common sense will work on the "We don't want people to get high." cry babies. They need a to do what a third of Americans are already doing when they can't face human nature and drug use, take Prozac.
[ Post Comment ]
Post Comment