cannabisnews.com: U.S. 'Drug Czar' Criticizes Prop 1 in Lansing










††U.S. 'Drug Czar' Criticizes Prop 1 in Lansing

Posted by CN Staff on October 15, 2008 at 06:34:38 PT
By Barbara Wieland, Lansing State Journal†
Source: Lansing State Journal†

Michigan -- U.S. "Drug Czar" John Walters wants Michigan voters to reject a proposal that would allow doctors to prescribe marijuana to patients. But Zach Jarou wants his mother to live pain-free, even if that means using marijuana.That's why Jarou, the co-founder of Spartans for Medical Marijuana, went to hear Walters talk about Michigan's Proposal 1 at Lansing's Gier Center on Tuesday. Proposal 1, on the Nov. 4 ballot, would legalize the use of marijuana as a prescribed drug.
Jarou's mother has multiple sclerosis.Opiate pain killers don't give her much relief, the recent Michigan State University graduate said."This (proposal) could really help people like her," Jarou said.But Walters, the director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, said during a Lansing stop that the passage of Proposal 1 would result in more teens abusing marijuana and the expansion of the drug trade in Michigan.The proposal "gives people who are addicted a way to say I have a medical problem" and get more of the drug, Walters said.Walters, a Lansing native, compared Michigan's prospects to what has happened in California since 1996, when the state passed a medical marijuana bill.As a result, Walters said, numerous "pot shops," places where the drug is easily available, have opened up in places such as San Francisco, and teens have found sympathetic doctors to write prescriptions for them.Walters said that unlike opiate medications, such as morphine, medical marijuana there is largely unregulated. The potency of the drug can vary widely, and there aren't uniform production standards in place.Plus, he said, a pharmaceutical synthetic form of marijuana named Marinol is already on the market."We don't tell people the best we can do for them is make them intoxicated," Walters said."To say, we need to smoke a weed to make people high because that's the best we can do for them is an abomination."But supporters of Proposal 1 say marijuana offers benefits to some patients that opiates and even Marinol don't.Jarou said that marijuana can spur an appetite in patients who have lost the desire to eat. Marijuana can also quell nausea, he said, while drugs such as opiates can upset the stomach.And Marinol doesn't have the same chemical profile as marijuana, he said.Spartans for Medical Marijuana claims 30 active members and 400 supporters, Jarou said.He said that Walters and others who spoke against the proposal are trying to scare people away from voting for Proposal 1."I think these people are trying to protect the status quo by misleading Michigan voters," Jarou said.Source: Lansing State Journal (MI)Author: Barbara Wieland, Lansing State JournalPublished:  October 15, 2008Copyright: 2008 Lansing State JournalWebsite: http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/uc45fODdRelated Articles & Web Site:Stop Arresting Patientshttp://www.stoparrestingpatients.org/ It's Immoral To Not Vote 'Yes' on Onehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread24225.shtmlAnti-Drug Group Joins Fight Against Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread24224.shtml

Home †† Comment †† Email †† Register †† Recent Comments †† Help







†


Comment #87 posted by heretic on October 19, 2008 at 07:49:22 PT:

The msg is stable but formatting here lost in post
Call for Repeal of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970Honorable lawmakers, sign on now, to repeal the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (CSA). Without this authority, the ill-conceived War On Drugs (WOD) stops in its tracks. No one has discussed the WOD for eons now, but that doesnít mean it has gone away, or become more affordable. We still squander scarce resources on the fight against ourselves, at a time when foreign enemies are at the gate. Enough is enough, too much is too much, and any more of this futile war would be the height of fiscal irresponsibility. Do now, for the War On Drugs, what the 21st Amendment did for alcohol prohibition. Stop throwing good money after bad.If we could have learned from history, we would not have been condemned to repeat alcohol prohibition. Isnít there enough blood in the streets already, without continuing to shoot ourselves in the feet? Do we really need to ruin the lives of so many of our own children, perhaps on the theory it is for their own good? The CSA is unconstitutional. The CSA never had a constitutional amendment to enable it, like the 18th amendment enabled alcohol prohibition. The drug warriors have, so far, gotten away with an end run, subverting the lack of constitutional authority.An authority over interstate commerce provides the required pretext of constitutionality. I guess even a lame excuse must be better than none. So, how is that interstate commerce going, these days? Why would a bankrupt treasury distain to derive revenue from its number one cash crop? Without the CSA, much of the underground economy could be absorbed, growing the tax base. Growth is good, especially during economic depressions. The anti-capitalist CSA inhibits small farmers from cultivating for a taxed market, and cedes a tax-free monopoly to outlaws, some of whom may be friends of our enemies. This is not what the founders had in mind when they authorized meddling in interstate commerce. The Supreme Court got it wrong in Gonzales V Raich. Good on Justice Clarence Thomas for noticing that the so-called constitutionality of the law is a mockery. Was there due process enacting this CSA? Did any of the sentenced substances ever get their day in court to present exculpatory evidence? What lawmaker then, or now, would admit to knowing a thing or two about LSD? It is a no-brainer for candidates to cosponsor witch-hunts. It makes a great photo-op to pose as the hero who can protect the community against boogeymen. Governments around the world ignore fact-checkers and even their own commissioned reports. Forgive them Lord, they make it their business to know not what they do. If you want good advice on any subject, you should seek out experts with personal experience. Instead, we haul all the personally experienced ones we can find off to the hoosegow. We terminate good job-performers for the flavor of their pee. The lucky ones, who have not yet been fingered by zero tolerance, cannot afford to draw attention by speaking out. 
 
The lawmakers who enacted the CSA probably donít even get it that they deny freedom of religion to those whose sacrament of communion is not a placebo. Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religious freedom, says the First Amendment. But they did.
 
Many of the scheduled substances unleash the divine imagination. You canít speak your piece freely, if you canít think it up. You canít think it up, if you are not in a receptive state of mind. As a test case, I wouldnít have been able to imagine this crusade to end the WOD once and for all did I not civilly disobey the CSA. I imagined that a bum like me can make the government live up to its principles and stop the ruination of innocent lives. I imagined that a bum like me can save the economy billions, and lower taxes, during The National Meltdown. I imagined that a bum like me can unify the polarized society that is at each otherís throats. What was I smoking? So far, I have not heard any sober refutation of my addled reveries. The Constitution, as amended, does not enumerate any power to prevent specific states of mind or consciousness. The CSA usurps power to abridge consciousness, thought, and creativity. Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech, says the First Amendment. But they did.
 
None of these substances are even alleged to be as harmful as is prison. Grannyís justice provides a benchmark as a reality-check. A kid caught with cigarettes must keep on smoking until he or she has wretched, and thatís the end of it. Drugs are sometimes accused of causing paranoia, but it is prohibitionís threat of loss of liberty, employment, and estate, that introduces paranoia. Apparently it is true that some of these substances do cause insanity. However, the insanity is only in the minds of those who have never tried them. There shall not be cruel and unusual punishment, says the Eighth Amendment. But here it is, in the CSA.
 
In the 1630ís, the pilgrims wrote home glowingly that the native hemp was superior to European varieties. Now, the government makes a crime of hemp husbandry. How can it be a crime to do as God does? 
 
Let offenders cop a plea by rolling over on someone higher up in the organization. The farmer does nothing to natureís seed that God Himself does not do when He provides rain, sunlight, and decomposing earth. Is the original instigator to get off scot-free, while small users are selectively prosecuted? God confesses, in Genesis 11-12, it was He who created the seed-bearing plants, on the second day. Then, He saw they were good. There you have it. The perpetrator shows no remorse about creating weed, mushrooms, and cacti. Neither has He apologized for endowing humans with sensitive internal receptor sites which activate fascinating mental effects in the presence of the scheduled molecules. Book Him, Dano.
 
Common Law must hold that humans are the legal owners of their own bodies. Men may dispose of their property as they please. It is not government business which substances a citizen may ingest. Men have a right to get drunk in their own homes, be it folly or otherwise. The usual caveats, against injury to others, or their estates, remain in effect.
 
The Declaration of Independence gets right to the point. The pursuit of happiness is a self-evident, God-given, inalienable, right of man. The WOD is, at its core, a war on the pursuit of happiness. The WOD alienates men from their self-evident rights. Too bad the core concepts the country was founded on are not worth much in court. 
 
So, the Supreme Court failed to overturn the CSA. That does not impede lawmakers from voluntarily retracting it. Honorable lawmakers, please do your duty and vote repeal, without undue delay. Who will put America first and do the right thing? Itís time to do or die. Who will step up to spearhead an urgent vote in the Senate, and who in the House of Representatives?
 
What if all the disobeyers of the CSA turned in notarized confessions tomorrow? We donít want that. That is a double digit demographic, including our favorite musicians and nicest neighbors. Even after years of spending more on prisons than on schools, the prisons donít have that kind of sleeping capacity. Converting taxpayers into inmates mathematically increases the tax burden on the remaining taxpayers. A higher tax burden canít be good. The USA currently incarcerates a higher percent of its populace than any other country. We are all about spreading liberty around the globe, but at home? Not so much.
 
The books have plenty of laws on them, without the CSA. The citizenry already has legal protection against injury to itself and its estate. Why persecute peaceful Americans who never injured anyone? No harm, no foul. People remain responsible for the damage of their screw-ups. 
 
Without the CSA, the empty prisons could conceivably be used to house the homeless. Homeland security could take over the choppers that arenít busy eradicating the most useful of all plants. The negative numbers that will have to be used to bottom-line our legacy to the next generation can be less ginormous. Americans can come together, as a people, in ways that are not possible with so many of our best and brightest under threat of disenfranchisement.
 
In particular, cannabis has a stronger claim to the blessing of the state than do the sanctioned tobacco and alcohol. Cannabis does not have the deadly lung cancer of tobacco, nor the puking, hangover, and liver cirrhosis of alcohol. To the contrary, cannabis shows promise as an anti-tumor agent. Cannabis intoxication is mellow, not belligerent. Stoned drivers typically practice defensive driving. Coffee drinkers cause more serious accidents by their efforts to gain a few car lengths, zipping in and out of traffic and tailgating. 
 
To assure public safety on the road, cops do need a procedure and a kit to objectively assess driving competence and alertness. Perhaps science can develop a virtual-reality simulator test. Hopefully it might detect drowsy, Alzheimerís, and perhaps road-raging, drivers as well.
 
John McCain should recuse himself on the CSA repeal issue, due to the conflict of interest of potential competition for his family beer franchise. Both candidates have promised to end Ďfailed programsí. Could this program be any more failed? Why wait for the next administration or even the election? What is wrong with ending it here and now in a bipartisan way?
 
The debate how a crippled USA can manage Ďthe two warsí flunks kindergarten counting. They forget to even count the war that is a war against me, a thirteenth generation American. After 38 years of failure, the unfettered WOD still runs amok. Its annual costs are what, 100 billion? Please correct me if I am off. I donít have the latest numbers. I am sure there is no lower-hanging, riper, or higher-yielding budgetary fruit than to stop this third war, cold turkey. 
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #86 posted by Nicodemus on October 18, 2008 at 15:16:53 PT

re: comment 85 
Thank You Heretic for your Passion and Clear Understanding.It dissolves into such a high price, caging an innocent human being or shooting them in the head brings very bad dreams, it is my thought that Every Citizen and Member gather and join The Most Highest Evolution, where if you like Obama..Gather And Be Strong http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7507165In St. Louis you came out in the 1 hundred thousand Hallelujah 
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #85 posted by heretic on October 18, 2008 at 08:35:56 PT:

one more time
Call for Repeal of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970Lawmakers, sign on now, to repeal the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (CSA). Without this authority, the ill-conceived War On Drugs (WOD) stops in its tracks. No one has talked about the War On Drugs for eons now, but it has not gone away, or become affordable. We still squander scarce resources on the fight against ourselves, at a time when foreign enemies are at the gate. Enough is enough, too much is too much, and more of this futile war would be the height of fiscal irresponsibility. Do now, for the War On Drugs, what the 21st Amendment did for the 18th, and with it, alcohol prohibition. Stop throwing good money after bad.If we could have learned from history, we would not have been condemned to repeat alcohol prohibition. Isnít there enough blood in the streets already, without continuing to shoot ourselves in the feet? Do we really need to ruin the lives of so many of our own children, perhaps on the theory it is for their own good? The CSA is unconstitutional. The CSA never had a constitutional amendment to enable it, like the 18th amendment enabled alcohol prohibition. The drug warriors have, so far, gotten away with an end run, subverting the lack of constitutional authority.An authority over Interstate Commerce provides a pretext of constitutionality. Any excuse is better than none. So, how is that interstate commerce going, these days? Why would a bankrupt treasury distain to derive revenue from its number one cash crop? The anti-capitalist policy inhibits small farmers from cultivating for a taxed market, and gifts a tax-free monopoly to outlaws, some of whom may be friends of our enemies. This is not what the founders had in mind when they authorized meddling in interstate commerce. Letís bring the underground economy into the taxed economy. The Supreme Court got it wrong in Gonzales V Raich. Good on Clarence Thomas for noticing that the so-called constitutionality of the law is a mockery. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-1454.ZD1.html How did we get this CSA? Was there an informed debate on the floor? Did the substances ever get their day in court? What congressman then, or now, would admit to knowing a thing or two about LSD? Lawmakers never want to know more than, ďWhat is a safe political position on the issue?Ē They want a boogeyman to protect their constituents against. Letís have a witch-hunt. Governments around the world ignore fact-checkers and even their own reports. Forgive them, Lord, they make it their business to know not what they do. If you want good advice on any subject, you should seek out experts with personal experience. Instead, we haul all the personally experienced ones we can find off to the hoosegow. We terminate good job-performers for a fault in their pee. The lucky ones who avoid the witch-hunt cannot afford to draw attention to themselves by speaking out. The congressmen who enacted the CSA probably donít even get it that they deny freedom of religion to those whose sacrament of communion is not a placebo. Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religious freedom, says the First Amendment. But they did.Many of the prohibited substances provide access to unique mental states. You canít speak your piece, if you canít think it up. You canít think it up, if you are not in a receptive state of mind. Neither the Constitution, nor its amendments, enumerates as a power of government the prevention of access to specific states of mind. How and when did the government acquire this power, to restrict consciousness and thought? Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech, says the First Amendment. But they did.None of these substances are alleged to be as harmful as prison is. Grannyís justice provides a benchmark for a reality-check. A kid caught with cigarettes must keep on smoking them, right then and there, until he or she has wretched. Drugs are sometimes accused of causing paranoia, but it is prohibitionís threat of loss of liberty, employment, and estate, that introduces paranoia. Apparently it is true that some of these substances do cause insanity, but the insanity is only in the minds of those who have never tried them. There shall not be cruel and unusual punishment, says the Eighth Amendment. But here it is, in the CSA.In the 1630ís, the pilgrims wrote home glowingly that the native hemp was superior to European varieties. Now, the government pretends to have a right to prohibit farmers from the husbandry of native hemp. It so doesnít. Let offenders plea-bargain by rolling over on someone higher up in the organization. The farmer does nothing to natureís seed that God Himself does not do when He provides rain, sunlight, and decomposing earth. How can it be a crime to do as God does? Is the instigator to get off scot-free, while small users are selectively prosecuted? God confesses, in Genesis 11-12, it was He who created the seed-bearing plants, on the second day. Then, He saw they were good. There you have it, the perpetrator shows no remorse about creating cannabis or mushrooms. Neither has He apologized for endowing humans with sensitive internal receptor sites which activate fascinating mental effects in the presence of the scheduled molecules. Book Him, Dano.Common Law must hold that humans are the legal owners of their own bodies. Men may dispose of their property as they please. It is none of Governmentís business which substances its citizens prefer to stimulate themselves with. Men have a right to get drunk in their own homes, be it folly or otherwise. The usual caveats, against injury to others, or their estates, remain in effect.
 
The Declaration of Independence gets right to the point. The Pursuit Of Happiness is a self-evident, God-given, inalienable, right of man. The War On Drugs is, in reality, a war on the pursuit of happiness. The WOD takes back what God has given and alienates men from their self-evident rights. Too bad, the Declaration of Independence is not worth much in court. The Supreme Court has failed to overturn the CSA. That does not stop lawmakers from undoing their error by repeal. Lawmakers, please do your duty, in each house, without undue delay. Who will put America first and do the right thing? Itís time to do or die.
 
What if all the disobeyers of the CSA turned in notarized confessions tomorrow? That is a double digit demographic. Even after years of spending more on prisons than on schools, the prisons donít have that kind of sleeping capacity. Converting taxpayers into wards of the state mathematically increases the tax burden on the remainder. Higher tax burdens are not the doctorís order at this time. 
 
We donít need the CSA. The citizenry already has legal protection against injuries to itself and its estate, without invoking any War On Drugs. We should stop committing resources to ruin the lives of peaceful Americans who never injured anyone. No harm, no foul. If someone screws up at work, fire him or her for the screw-up. The Books have plenty of laws on them, without this one.Without the CSA, the empty prisons could conceivably be used to house the homeless. Homeland security could use the choppers that wonít be needed for eradication. Maybe the negative numbers that will have to be used to bottom-line our legacy to the next generation can be less ginormous. Americans can come together, as a people, in ways that are not possible with so many of our best and brightest under threat of disenfranchisement.Cannabis has a stronger claim to the blessing of the state than do the sanctioned tobacco and alcohol. Cannabis does not have the deadly lung cancer of tobacco, nor the puking, hangover, and liver cirrhosis of alcohol. To the contrary, cannabis shows promise as an anti-tumor agent. Nor is cannabis associated with social problems like belligerence and crashing cars. Cannabis-intoxication is usually too mellow for fighting, and impaired drivers typically drive within the limits of their impairment. The roads will be safer, if slower, for every driver that switches from drink to smoke. Coffee drinkers cause more serious accidents by their efforts to gain a few car lengths, zipping in and out of traffic and tailgating. To assure public safety on the road, cops need a kit to assess driving competence and alertness objectively. Perhaps science can develop a virtual reality simulator. Hopefully it could also detect drowsy, Alzheimerís, and perhaps road-raging, drivers.
 
John McCain should recuse himself on the CSA repeal issue, due to the conflict of interest of potential competition for his family beer franchise. Both candidates have promised to end Ďfailed programsí, but neither has issued a timetable, or a roadmap, for standing down on the WOD. What map or schedule is needed to end it here and now?The debate how a crippled USA can manage Ďthe two warsí is blind. Hello, there are three, not two, wars. The War On Drugs, after 38 years of failure, is still running amok. Its costs are in the ballpark of the foreign wars. There is no lower-hanging, riper, or higher yielding budgetary fruit than to stop this third war, cold turkey. Stave off national meltdown, by repeal of the CSA, this week, if possible.

[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #84 posted by Hope on October 17, 2008 at 15:42:18 PT

Indeed you do.
"I need to send it to all the congressmen".As I was reading I was hoping you had sent it to at least your reps and as many more as you can get around to.It is very well said.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #83 posted by heretic on October 17, 2008 at 15:32:55 PT:

I need to send it to all the congressmen
I did send it to the Obama campaign. Also to Gwen Ifill. I welcome suggestions for other useful people with public emails I could send it to.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #82 posted by heretic on October 17, 2008 at 15:09:25 PT:

I'm just a bum trying to do his part.
I sent it to Maureen Dowd, Paul Krugman, David Brooks, Thomas Friedman, Clarence Page, David Broder, the McGlaughlin Group.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #81 posted by afterburner on October 17, 2008 at 14:45:03 PT

heretic 
Well said!
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #80 posted by Hope on October 17, 2008 at 13:51:39 PT

Heretic
If you are not a professional journalist... you should be.Your comment should be read by a lot of people.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #79 posted by heretic on October 17, 2008 at 12:17:01 PT:

Call for Repeal of the Controlled Substances Act
Lawmakers, sign on now, to repeal the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (CSA). Without this authority, the ill-conceived War On Drugs (WOD) stops in its tracks. No one has talked about the War On Drugs for a long time. It has not gone away. We are even still devoting scarce resources to the fight against ourselves, at a time when foreign enemies are at the gate. Enough is enough, too much is too much, and any more now would be the height of fiscal irresponsibility. Do now, for the War On Drugs, what the 21st Amendment did for the 18th, and with it, alcohol prohibition. Stop throwing good money after bad.We should have learned a lesson from alcohol prohibition, namely that it doesnít work. Isnít there enough blood in the streets already, without continuing to shoot ourselves in the feet? Do we really need to ruin the lives of so many of our own children, perhaps on the theory it is for their own good? The CSA is unconstitutional. The CSA never had a constitutional amendment to enable it, like the 18th amendment enabled alcohol prohibition. The drug warriors have, so far, gotten away with an end run, subverting the lack of constitutional authority.An authority over Interstate Commerce provides a pretext of constitutionality. Any excuse is better than none. So, how is that interstate commerce going, these days? Why would a bankrupt treasury distain to derive revenue from its number one cash crop? The anti-capitalist policy inhibits small farmers from cultivating for a taxed market, and gifts a tax-free monopoly to outlaws, some of whom may be friends of our enemies. This is not what the founders had in mind when they authorized meddling in interstate commerce. Lets bring the underground economy into the taxed economy. The Supreme Court got it wrong in Gonzales V Raich. Good on Clarence Thomas for noticing that the so-called constitutionality of the law is a mockery. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-1454.ZD1.html How did we get this CSA? Was there an informed debate on the floor? Did the substances ever get their day in court? What congressman then, or now, would admit to knowing a thing or two about LSD? The lawmakers have never wanted to know more than it is politically safe to be against it. Governments around the world ignore fact-checkers and even their own reports. Forgive them, Lord, they make it their business to know not what they do. Common sense tells us that personal experience deepens the understanding of issues. Personal experience is a good thing. But we herd the experienced to the hoosegow. We keep them out of jobs. The many who avoid detection must live double lives. The congressmen who passed the CSA probably donít even get it that they deny freedom of religion to those who prefer a non-placebo as their sacrament of communion. Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religious freedom, says the First Amendment. But they did.Many of the prohibited substances provide access to unique mental states. You canít say your piece, if you canít think it up. You canít think it up, if you are not in a receptive state of mind. Neither the Constitution, nor its amendments, enumerates a power of government to prevent access to specific states of mind. How and when did the government acquire this power, to restrict consciousness and thought? Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech, says the First Amendment. But they did.What would happen if the CSA was enforced one hundred percent? What if all the civil disobediants turned in notarized confessions tomorrow? That is a double digit demographic. Even after years of spending more on prisons than on schools, the prisons donít have that kind of sleeping capacity. Converting taxpayers into wards of the state mathematically increases the tax burden on the remainder. Higher tax burdens are not what the doctor is ordering at this time. 
 
None of these substances are alleged to be as harmful as prison is. Grannyís justice is a saner benchmark. A kid caught with cigarettes must keep on smoking them, right then and there, until he or she has wretched. Drugs are sometimes accused of causing paranoia, but it is prohibitionís threat of loss of liberty, employment, and estate, that introduces paranoia. Apparently it is true that some of these substances do cause insanity, but the insanity is only in the minds of those who have never tried them. There shall not be cruel and unusual punishment, says the Eighth Amendment. But here it is, in the CSA.In the 1630ís, the pilgrims wrote home glowingly that the native hemp was superior to European varieties. Now, the government pretends it has a right to prohibit farmers from the husbandry of native hemp, but it so doesnít. Could an offender get a plea-bargain, by rolling over on someone higher up in the organization? The farmer does nothing to natureís seed that God Himself does not do when He provides it rain, sunlight, and decomposing earth. How can it be a crime to do what God does? Is the instigator to get off scot-free, while small users are selectively prosecuted? God confesses, in Genesis 11-12, it was He who created the seed-bearing plants, on the second day. Then, He saw they were good. There you have it, the perpetrator shows no remorse about creating cannabis or mushrooms. Neither has He apologized for endowing humans with sensitive internal receptor sites which activate seductive mental effects in the presence of the scheduled molecules. Book Him, Dano.Common Law must hold that humans are the legal owners of their own bodies. Men may dispose of their property as they please. It is none of Governmentís business which substances its citizens prefer to stimulate themselves with. Men have a right to get drunk in their own homes, be it folly or otherwise. The usual caveats, against injury to others, or their estates, remain in effect.
 
The Declaration of Independence gets right to the point. The Pursuit Of Happiness is a self-evident, God-given, inalienable, right of man. The War On Drugs is, in reality, a war on the pursuit of happiness. Too bad the Declaration of Independence is not worth much in court. Notwithstanding the failure of the Supreme Court to overturn the CSA, lawmakers can and should repeal the act. Lawmakers, please get to it now, in each house, without undue delay. Wake up. Who has the guts to put America first and not prolong the tragedy?
 
We donít need the CSA. The citizenry already has legal recourse for various injuries to itself and its estate, without invoking any War On Drugs. We should stop committing resources to ruin the lives of peaceful people who never injured anyone. If someone screws up at work, fire him or her for the screw-up. The Books still have plenty of laws on them, without this one.Without the CSA, the empty prisons could conceivably be used to house the homeless. Homeland security might be able to use the choppers that wonít be needed for Law enforcement resources could be reallocated to Maybe the negative numbers that will have to be used to bottom-line our legacy to the next generation can be less ginormous. Cannabis has a stronger claim to the blessing of the state than do the sanctioned tobacco and alcohol. Cannabis does not have the deadly lung cancer of tobacco, nor the puking, hangover, and liver cirrhosis of alcohol. To the contrary, cannabis shows promise as an anti-tumor agent. Nor is cannabis associated with social problems like fighting and crashing cars. Cannabis-intoxication is usually too mellow for fighting, and impaired drivers typically drive within the limits of their impairment. The roads will be safer, if slower, for every driver that switches from drink to smoke. Coffee drinkers cause more serious accidents by zipping in and out of traffic and tailgating. To assure public safety on the road, cops need a kit to assess driving competence and alertness objectively. Perhaps science can develop a virtual reality simulator. Hopefully it could also detect drowsy, Alzheimerís, and perhaps road-raging, drivers.
 
John McCain should recuse himself on the CSA repeal issue, due to the conflict of interest of potential competition for his family beer franchise. Both candidates have promised to end Ďfailed programsí, but neither has issued a timetable, or a roadmap, for standing down on the WOD. The debate how a crippled USA can manage Ďthe two warsí is blind. There are three, not two, wars. The War On Drugs has not let up after 38 years. Its costs are in the ballpark of the foreign wars. There is no lower-hanging, riper, or higher yielding budgetary fruit than to stop this third war, cold turkey. We are making new enemies faster than we are killing the old ones. In the crisis, we should avoid being own worst enemy. Stave off national meltdown, by repeal of the CSA, this week if possible.
 
Without the War On Drugs, Americans can come together as a people in ways that are not possible with so many of our best and brightest under threat of disenfranchisement.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #78 posted by E_Johnson on October 17, 2008 at 07:41:04 PT

Joe the Plumber is so over
a. He's not really a plumber.b. He doesn't even pay his taxes now.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #77 posted by FoM on October 17, 2008 at 07:15:13 PT

OT: Obama, McCain Share Laughs at Dinner
This was so funny last night. I missed a little of SNL's Thursday show because they were on at the same time. McCain was really funny too. There's a video on this link for those who missed it and would like to see it.http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/10/obama_mccain_share_laughs_at_d.html
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #76 posted by FoM on October 17, 2008 at 07:00:17 PT

Hope
Obama said that Biden wants to be called Joe the Senator! LOL!
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #75 posted by Hope on October 17, 2008 at 06:57:12 PT

Joe the Plumber 
Six-Pack Joe.Where's Smokin' Joe?
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #74 posted by afterburner on October 17, 2008 at 00:23:58 PT

Hope #47 Trickle down & FoM #68 Joe The Plumber
Hope #47 "Trickle down" {
Maybe "trickle down" is what takes people's pension plans and blows them or the price of everything going sky high. I think the old "trickle" downers think up is down and down is up.
}"Trickle Down" is actually Trickle Up, or transfer of wealth. Fake "free" market deregulation policies create economic "bubbles" (boom) which suck in the dollars of the working poor and middle class. When the bubble is just about to burst (bust), the rich cash out, declare bankruptcy, lay off their workers, leave their customers and suppliers high and dry, and move on.Trickle Down
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5F9fEJCkvVcFoM #68 OT: Joe The Plumber "It isn't Joe Six Pack anymore." So, is the Republican party the champion of the working class (Palin's Joe Six Pack) or the party of the $250,000 wealthy class (Joe The Plumber)? BTW, Joe the Plumber said on CNN on Thursday that he would receive a tax break under Obama's plan ... if he could believe Obama. 
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #73 posted by John Tyler on October 16, 2008 at 19:01:41 PT

Re #47
We already have a type of socialism for the wealthy. Weíve all seen it in action recently. If you are not in the protected class, then it is laze faire cutthroat capitalism. We, the under $250,000 a year crowd, are the prey.  Re #49
No need to envy those swanky granite counter tops, for they have been found to be a source of radon contamination. (Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas emitted from some types of stone and earth that can cause lung cancer after long term exposure.)

[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #72 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 14:42:24 PT

Something Ethan Nadalman wrote in 1999.
http://www.drugpolicy.org/library/ethan_perspective2.cfm
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #71 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 14:38:03 PT

  :0)
I appreciate it.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #70 posted by museman on October 16, 2008 at 14:31:12 PT

Hope #65
No, I mean in the 'classic -status-quo' sense.I don't mean 'making do with what you have' or 'making the best of a bad situation' or 'pulling rabbits out of hats' which often includes the dead presidents. The dead presidents seem to have been insinuated into almost every facet of our lives.Being a 'good manager' is a necessary skill for many women who have to run households while the men perform their various acts of slavery to 'bring home the bacon.' Even in this 'new' 'liberated' post-E.R.A. 'environment' women who also work, usually also manage the household as well -with very little acknowledgement from society -or their own men, in my experience.There are job descriptions and titular appointments that have only to do with 'managing money', some are low paid accountant-type positions, but most are directly related to ones ability to amass and accumulate the money, rather than use it efficiently, or ethically. That is the 'meaning' I ascribe to that terminology. Sorry if I was misunderstood. :-)>
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #69 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 14:25:50 PT

  OT
"Time is the great legalizer, even in the field of morals."http://www.quoteworld.org/quotes/8958and some other interesting Mencken quotes
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #68 posted by FoM on October 16, 2008 at 13:07:31 PT

OT: Joe The Plumber
It isn't Joe Six Pack anymore.Oops!`Joe the Plumber,' Obama Tax-Plan Critic, Owes Taxes http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ak7GnW2GiKF4&refer=home
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #67 posted by FoM on October 16, 2008 at 12:49:47 PT

museman
Obama seems real to me too. He is a deep thinker. Deep thinkers analyze why they feel the way they do about a subject. 
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #66 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 12:02:22 PT

I mean
I was talking earlier about what it might be like to "manage" an income of two hundred fifty thousand a year.I don't think I would get, actually, greedy. I might... but I doubt it.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #65 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 11:56:48 PT

You mean me?
""Managing money" in my mind is just a deliberately deceptive, descriptive term for GREED."
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #64 posted by museman on October 16, 2008 at 11:23:39 PT

Hope
Somehow I knew you hadn't got through unscathed by our 'free-market economy.' A lot of people get to the point you described, and can't go any further. I surely understand.There are a lot of reasons why some people haven't really the option. The list is long and full of false assumption, prejudice, and condemnation, a veritible republican justification.You know, I admire craftsmanship. I admire dedication to ones task. I admire anyone who can keep a family together (the under 250 thou crowd) and still love each other when they're done. I have no admiration for 'monetary success' on any level, for the simple reason that that success is exclusively regulated, defined, given, denied, and justified by the elite-rich, who consider themselves 'successful' because they 'managed' their money."Managing money" in my mind is just a deliberately deceptive, descriptive term for GREED.When the needs of humanity and the world are placed second to the solvency of the banks -to even consider that giving more resource to those who already have most of it is some kind of solution to the greed that has destroyed this economy, and in the process a great deal of the natural world is just complete confirmation as to the corruption of the US government, from the cop on the beat to the highest 'office' in the land.More emperors invisible clothes. Instead of getting real, the government chooses to prop up the fakery, to fatten the already fat-cats who have them all in their financial pockets.Obama seems so much more real than anything I've seen yet, I dare to hope for the 'change' that his campaign is going on about. I do know that unless the people do more than just vote for him, there will be no change at all.FREE GANGE FOR EVERYONE
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #63 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 11:11:27 PT

You are truly blessed with a wealth beyond gold
"... trying to raise (and succeeding far beyond my expectations) 7 children..." I bet you spent a lot of time with them and talked to them, and listened to them, and helped them, right then, often. That was a huge and wise investment in "the future" that is now.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #62 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 10:56:19 PT

I know a bit about it, Museman.
I decided to check out food stamps at one time. We were eligible for them and we had contributed plenty to the tax base and I thought I would check it out. But the "humiliation, accusation, derision, you have to go through and still have to suffer the situation of not having enough. The hoops you have to jump through if you are a struggling young poor family are just f-in horrible." made me never go back... after getting my paperwork and "The treatment". We, my husband and I and our combined four young children, survived and had joy, too. By Grace.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #61 posted by museman on October 16, 2008 at 10:37:11 PT

250 thou?
I'd like to know how many people make more than that in a year. There are some of us who haven't yet reached that number in 40 years."OMG! you must be one lazy SOB!""A drug user!""What the hell did you do with your life?""So, I suppose you just 'sat back' and collected welfare.""Its people like you that make it hard for the rest of us.""White trash!""Damn Hippy!""Get a job!""You must be bi-polar or something.""There's definitely something wrong with you!""Didn't your parents ever teach you to respect your betters?""What, are there no workhouses?"The Teacher I admire the most said;"You will know them by their fruits." I'm pretty damn sure he wasn't talking about property, posession, and economic worth.I'm absolutely sure he wasn't talking about how one looks, whether the clothes are new and clean, or whether you have a perfect set of teeth, a haircut, and can afford to waste, but not to share and give.When it comes to kharma, relating to such things as a carbon/pollution footprint, and the unwitting support of taxation without representation, I know I got a record.If you search the tax records for me, you will find that -since I was in the military, the fed has gotten $0 from me for their wars, their persecutions, and the offices/officers that carry them out. Its not 'tax evasion' I just never made enough money -trying to raise (and succeeding far beyond my expectations) 7 children up to be responsible adults in a society that prioritizes willing slavery -to those who make more than 250 thou a year- over good character.I did a lot of barter and trade. Learned more skills than would be believed by those who only have to pay others to do the work.Yes, I admit there were some years when I had to take that welfare check, but I guarantee it was never a first choice. People who haven't been on that lineup have no idea what kind of humiliation, accusation, derision, you have to go through and still have to suffer the situation of not having enough. The hoops you have to jump through if you are a struggling young poor family are just f-in horrible.Health Care. What is that? My doctor gets paid around $300 a visit, so he can calculate his cut on the drugs he prescribes, and ask me "How am I doing?" The $300 question.I am required to visit him every 3 months, even if there is nothing wrong with me. They call that 'preventative medicine.' I call it welfare for doctors.People are paying for services that they do not actually get in their 'insurance.' Unless of course you can afford to be in the 'over 250 thou club.' Then you can 'afford' to tell the doctors to actually give you what you need.Money is a false god. But it is certainly an American God. It certainly isn't the standards of "Do unto others as youi would have them do unto you." Is it?I do hope that when Obama gets elected that people really get busy setting their 'representatives' to rights, and don't just breathe a premature sigh of relief and 'go back to work'thinking everything is hunky dory.FREE CHARAS FOR EVERYONE
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #60 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 09:42:46 PT

Take a little trip 
to New Zealand for a few minutes.http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominionpost/?source=dompost
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #59 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 09:35:26 PT

Kind of refreshing.
I picked this up from over at the Media Awareness Project.Politics in New Zealandhttp://www.stuff.co.nz/dominionpost/4727460a23918.html
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #58 posted by FoM on October 16, 2008 at 09:17:21 PT

Mental Health
People have mental illness the same as people have physical illness. Anyone that ever saw the movie Sybil can't deny that we have mentally ill people in the world. 
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #57 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 09:02:00 PT

It's only been a few years ago
that doctors and media were urging people to try anti-depressants. It was good for whatever was ailing you... because your stomach trouble, headaches, rashes etc... were really caused by your mind... probably.. since they hadn't found a cell consuming reason. "Try this."Now it can and will be used against you in a fight you may find yourself in to actually receive the insurance coverage you thought you had firmly purchased and paid for.

[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #56 posted by FoM on October 16, 2008 at 08:58:12 PT

Hope
The majority of our married life we struggled. We put in sweat equity to afford building our home. Real Estate went down during that time but we knew that happens and to be patient because in the long run we would recover. Life was hard but not as confusing as how things are now.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #55 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 08:55:58 PT

That's happening quite a lot to people
with insurance these days. I never used to hear of such a thing. I'd heard of denials... but not over such as that."They got a bill in the mail that blew them away. The insurance company said that had a clause that didn't pay for experimental drugs and the bill is for $20,000." They also can, after the fact, deny paying for something because you used to or do smoke and if you ever took an anti-depressant (treatment for mental illness). That apparently means that you have eternally poor and suspect judgment and trustworthiness of some kind and so do any doctors you see. 
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #54 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 08:46:01 PT

To anyone who's "judging" the veracity
of what I say.You might be saying to yourself, "I bet they all had enough money for beer, pot, and cigs."No. We didn't. Nope. Not one. All of us, true Teetotalers.The judgmental think they are so "Smart" when they think things like that about people. It's their way of discounting and "disappearing" all those they literally WANT to think little or less of. It's their way of "not hearing" and "not seeing". It's quite handy, apparently. I see quite a bit of it at times. Specially the times someone is being asked to actually care.FoM. Two hundred fifty thousand a year to manage? Oh my. It would have to be like winning the lottery.I know I wouldn't tie it all up in possessions I might not really, even then, be able to afford, so that if the time came I wouldn't be able to help anyone else. People that I know that I KNOW have much greater wealth on paper and in things (having had business reasons to actually view their financial reports) than I do, might not be able to help their own mother with an extra ten dollars, if she needed it. Heck. Some of them are bums for their daily coffee and food.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #53 posted by FoM on October 16, 2008 at 08:31:42 PT

A Tale of Two Families
My husband and I were talking about how we don't remember needing to pay any real amount of money for our surgeries we needed back in the 70s.My one family member's wife was diagnosed with breast cancer. She has worked for over 20 years for the same company. She was treated and as of now she is in remission. They got a bill in the mail that blew them away. The insurance company said that had a clause that didn't pay for experimental drugs and the bill is for $20,000. My niece who doesn't own a home and was employed but with no insurance is having her bills covered for her cancer treatment. We have a great divide in our country and we really need to fix it in my opinion.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #52 posted by FoM on October 16, 2008 at 08:10:37 PT

Hope
I can't imagine having a $250,000 net income. I don't know what I would do with that much money.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #51 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 08:08:28 PT

The McCain types out there 
certainly couldn't maintain there lifestyles on two hundred fifty thousand a year and it might look paltry to them... but I can assure them, there are plenty of people who would indeed feel very rich if they could earn that sort of income.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #50 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 08:05:32 PT

I wonder if McCain can imagine
what friends of mine had to do one Christmas to have a Christmas present for their son? They are good, responsible people who hit a really rough spot in their lives. They managed to make a road kill raccoon into a Davy Crockett hat for him. If I'd known them then and known what was happening to them, I would have found a way to help. But I didn't. Those same people gifted us with groceries when we were struggling so hard.I was selling Avon at the time and when I got home... to my amazement... the back seat floor board was full of groceries. I traced them back to that family. While she was looking at my Avon book... she sent her kids out the back door to put some of their groceries in my car.Yes... it still brings tears to my eyes.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #49 posted by FoM on October 16, 2008 at 07:53:29 PT

Hope
The figure of $250,000 blows me away too. My husband's boss makes a lot of money but he buys stuff that is tax deductible and only pays tax on $30,000. If our tax liability is high we will buy new truck tires for our truck and trailer before the end of the year. My husband's boss bought all new granite counter tops for his home and can deduct them. You need to own a business and or a home to deduct many different things. 
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #48 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 07:52:08 PT

Not always of course...
but I think security and wealth must make some people a peculiar sort of blind to those struggling around them. Do they even have to go grocery shopping? Do they see what average people are going through there? Do they comprehend not having or being able to get a good car or being able to afford insurance or fuel?Do they comprehend not being able to go to the doctor when you're hurt or sick?I don't think they do. I think they're just worried about having to share, even through reasonable taxes, anything with those they look down on, if they deign to acknowledge their presence at all.If I ever was wealthy, I don't think I'd forget the time I, literally, almost fainted dead away in the check out line at the grocery store when I looked at my checkbook balance and thought I had overdrawn the balance I thought I had, and couldn't afford the carefully (frugally) shopped for and selected groceries I was buying for my family. I literally started going to the floor... somebody caught me and I leaned against a rack and managed to recover. I told those who were concerned, that I had been dieting and was apparently suffering a dizzy spell from that. It wasn't that. It was the check book balance and fear. Sheer fear.My children still fondly, with gas jokes and survivor mentality, remember the months we ate only beans and cornbread for our protein. I did vary the menu with different kinds of beans. More than they ever knew existed. 
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #47 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 07:33:19 PT

Macabre
It struck me as macabre that McCain was attacking Obama's "rich" line of $250,000. The look on his face! It was a hatred of sorts. McCain has been outrageously wealthy for so long he has forgotten how many, many people in this country live way under that $250,000 a year income. He really doesn't know? He's in denial, perhaps. I never saw such a blatant "government must protect the wealth of the wealthy" attitude displayed so publicly. I found it disgusting... and revealing, of course. McCain really jumped all over that "spreading the wealth" remark of Obama's. I guess Obama should have said "Trickle down". That's the Republican way of "spreading the wealth". Trouble is, as we all know, trickle down doesn't work worth a damn and most people see it. There is something wrong and way too tiny a trickle hole, obviously, about that so called "Trickle down" effect. Maybe "trickle down" is what takes people's pension plans and blows them or the price of everything going sky high. I think the old "trickle" downers think up is down and down is up.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #46 posted by Hope on October 16, 2008 at 07:09:08 PT

E_Johnson Comment 40
Lol! That's true!It's a wonder ONDCP hasn't forced all the towns with such names to change their names... to further the cause of the ONDCP's goals, of course.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #45 posted by ezrydn on October 16, 2008 at 06:45:55 PT

McCain a "Federalist???"
In the third and final presidential debate, Senator McCain stated, quite emphatically, "I'm A Federalist!"If you look at the definition of "federalist" in the Wiki, you'll find this: "federalists advocate the principle of greater regional autonomy within the United Statesóusually by allowing individual states to set their own agendas and determine the handling of issues, rather than trying to impose a nationally uniform solution."Can someone, preferably a Republican, explain to me how a person can be considered a "federalist" and, at the same time, tow the national prohibition line? Please meld the two together so they make sense for us. Federalist or Prohibitionist? I see no room to claim both!
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #44 posted by FoM on October 16, 2008 at 06:36:42 PT

Obama
For the last 8 years Democrats have been silenced but now they are being heard. I would much rather live in a society that looks at the big picture when it comes to our citizens. I really don't have any sympathy for rich people who complain about taxes. I think Obama will do a good job for the majority of the people. McCain actually reminded me of a person ready to emotionally snap. That is scary. Obama is calm and thoughtful. I'll take calm and thoughtful any day over a hot head.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #43 posted by ezrydn on October 16, 2008 at 05:23:40 PT

Obama's Budget Comment
Senator Obama has continually stated that he will go through the National Budget, "Line by Line," and cut those programs that are a drain, with no positive movement. Now, every time I hear that, I visualize him sitting there, perusing the budget and coming to the section titled "ONDCP." It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that that office is a "money hole" that produces no appreciable differences.The ONDCP = Line Item Veto!
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #42 posted by The GCW on October 15, 2008 at 22:06:16 PT

Something I'm still seeing!
Bush remains in office.-0-What would it take for Bush to remain in office; what would have to occur for Bush to stay in power?Isreal attacking Iran and then a world war????What about assassination of Obama? What if some freak killed Obama before He even becomes President?WHAT WOULD HAPPEN?-0-And if that were to happen, I bet it would be a disobedient Christian.-0-On the 5:00 news the night of the 911 plane crashes, Bush had the frown on His face that indicated He knew ahead of time...If someone kills Obama, I suspect Bush will have that same frown.-0-America has some very dark pasts that may extend to / include a very dark future.-0-Some people; maybe the type that wants to perpetuate cannabis prohibition have the power to do cannabis prohbiition but don't have the power to maintain other discriminations / do other evils but want to and will make moves as they feel threatened in losing more ground.Racists in America are at large. That cockroach still lives.Racists should be thought of as terrorists, but are they?There are tweaked people out there and militant racists are amongst the most tweaked.The discriminator.That's what a cannabis prohibitionist is; the DISCRIMINATOR.They have one in the same mind. -The cannabis prohibitionist discriminator doesn't have to hide their beliefs as much and some don't hide their feelings... The racist more often must hide their inner darkness but can not resist lashing out completely and so discriminates against cannabists'. That human trait is either there or it is not there and it one the one hand exposes what on the other hand or shall I say in the inner mind.What they do say exposes what they don't say.-0-I take a moment to thank the Spirit of Truth and Our Master for it. It teaches Us all things; as You see.-0-I hope Obama has eyes over His shoulder and eyes on His protector.America needs Obama.Cannabis prohibitionists, racists, power hungry people that are used to walking over who ever they want to get what they want; DISCRIMINATORS not only don't need Obama, thay must stop Obama.-0-I don't trust Bush that bad.-0-What is the disobedint Christian not guilty of?I see the next Christ being hung up by a Christian; a disobedient Christian.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #41 posted by The GCW on October 15, 2008 at 21:08:47 PT

Yes, -Hempstead, that's interesting / & FLAXFUEL.
I watched TV for the 1st time in a long time so I could see the debate.Haven't really seen Obama speak at all till now.Hempstead. Hmmm. I didn't know that till I read it here; thanks!There was one issue / statement that Obama made that didn't go unnoticed.He mentioned flax fuel; didn't He.-0- Before the debate, the other day even... My wife showed Me something of concern about Obama. It was the thing that now I see and identify as spreading; that Obama supports babies being born that were from an abortion that didn't work and left to rot... die. I told My wife that doesn't sound right, that that would be alarming but there must be more to the story. Well Obama helped clear up that rumor. It seems the anti-abortion people are hooked onto what is not true within their own mind to guide them.Obama pointed out that that is not true; He doesn't not support babies that are born being allowed to die. He pointed out there are already laws to prevent that type of wrong from happening. The hypcratic oath prevents doctors from doing anything similar... That what was the case is that Obama didn't support a bill or law that went further than what was already in place to protect such terrible acts from occuring, a law that would include wording that would compromise Roe vs Wade.Obama explained it; I thouroughly(sp) caught it. My wife caught it.The anti-abortion crowd, I suspect doesn't care for the truth, they will continue to spread this untrue lie. They will contine to believe Obama supports killing babies that are born alive.Example:My local newspaper will be printing this following letter in tomorrow's paper which pushes the issue...Maggie Postlethwaite: Protecting lifehttp://www.summitdaily.com/article/20081015/LETTER/810157039/1025&title=Maggie%20Postlethwaite:%20Protecting%20life-0-By the way, how is flax fuel similar to hemp fuel? Are there implication in flax fuel that may lead to hemp fuel?
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #40 posted by E_Johnson on October 15, 2008 at 20:48:49 PT

Hope
I bet the campaign workers were all joking about the name Hempstead. Nobody can resist a good marijuana pun, or even a bad one unfortunately for that matter.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #39 posted by ekim on October 15, 2008 at 20:42:20 PT

Howard will be in Kalamazoo on Halloween
LEAP on the HillStories from the week of October 17, 2008 The gentleman from Virginia continues to impress:  On Wednesday Senator Webb (D-VA) held the third in a series of hearings on current drug policy. For the first time ever, a LEAP speaker was considered for the second of three panels. (Sachverstšndigengremium) Though we were not selected, it is just a matter of time. Prior to the hearing, I met with the two aides that put the panels together. Both expressed appreciation for the work LEAP was doing and urged us to continue. 

[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #38 posted by Hope on October 15, 2008 at 20:42:11 PT

Thanks, FoM and Afterburner
I didn't think hemp or medical or even prohibition would be mentioned... but I wanted to know for sure.Guess it being in Hempstead said something... not much, but something.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #37 posted by E_Johnson on October 15, 2008 at 20:25:01 PT

Hempstead, that's interesting
I didn't watch the debate. I already know I'm voting for Obama. I watched The Pink Panther instead. The Republicans are in a state of post-neocon ideological collapse. The smart ones are staying low key and thinking things over. So we're only hearing from the nasty dumb ones right now.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #36 posted by afterburner on October 15, 2008 at 19:42:34 PT

Hope #33 
"Anything mentioned about our issues?"Only indirectly. Focus on health care reform by emphasizing prevention and by reducing costs: increasing access to medical cannabis would help both goals.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #35 posted by FoM on October 15, 2008 at 19:38:34 PT

Hope
No, I didn't think they would. It's not an important issue considering how our economy went down over 700 points again today. 
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #34 posted by FoM on October 15, 2008 at 19:36:30 PT

John Tyler and Ekim
I believe you about the difference in the rallies. John McCain scared me big time tonight. Ekim, I didn't see that just the sign earlier.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #33 posted by Hope on October 15, 2008 at 19:31:20 PT

The debate
I didn't get to watch the whole thing.Anything mentioned about our issues?
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #32 posted by John Tyler on October 15, 2008 at 18:25:35 PT

Dems and Repubs
Went to two political rallies this weekend. The Democratic one was mellow, and upbeat, with positive vibes. The Republican rally was totally weird with scarey vibes. The Republican message was that if you are not a right wing conservative, you are some kind of trator. The Republicans at the state level are vicious. 

[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #31 posted by John Tyler on October 15, 2008 at 18:08:35 PT

debate tonight
The debate tonight is at Hofstra Universitywhich is located in HEMPSTEAD, Long Island, 25 miles east of New York City.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #30 posted by ekim on October 15, 2008 at 17:58:48 PT

Hard Ball at 6 had a guy with a Hemp Gate sign
which said Green jobs = alt fuel and much more
he had a fone number and web site -- but did not get them.
Cris walked up to the line of sign holders and stood right in front of the Hemp Gater only to turn the other way and ask questions -- but the Hempster was still in view.i was watching at 7 but no Hemp Gate man in sight.who was that shade wearing truth bearing stranger?
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #29 posted by afterburner on October 15, 2008 at 17:54:20 PT

OT: I am Watching a Video Tribute to John Lennon
It feels so good to kick back and dream after a mixed Canadian election. It feels so good to hear John & Yoko and their friends singing Give Peace a Chance, with Timothy Leary singing, clapping and swaying along with the crowd. It feels so good to hear Power to the People to remind us that music, the real revolution, goes on, even after the leaders are once more enshrined in their secular temple. It feels so good to hear Come Together and to hope that the bossism that most neocons embody will be replaced with cooperation.One Love.It feels so good to hear Across the Universe, created by Love. Modern physics and ancient religions dream of this land beyond Star Wars, beyond purple states, beyond 50-50 splits, beyond fear and greed.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #28 posted by FoM on October 15, 2008 at 17:25:39 PT

mykeyb420
That was great! It made me smile and now I'm ready for the last debate.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #27 posted by mykeyb420 on October 15, 2008 at 17:12:14 PT

dont be a dick
this is a nice wholesome song
acting like a dick
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #26 posted by Sam Adams on October 15, 2008 at 17:07:02 PT

wall street
I'm sure the cannabis has been getting delivered to Wall Street all along! I'm not sure what that means.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #25 posted by goneposthole on October 15, 2008 at 16:28:03 PT

High Potency Cannabis
Give the US economy some one hit wonder because it needs it bad.It is one sick puppy. Cannabis will help.Michigan is suffering in this recession and cannabis will do wonders.Weed in times of no money is better than money in times of no weed.The ONDCP doens't know if it is afoot or horseback.Let people in Michigan make up their own minds and butt out of their business.When the Dow falls from 14,164 down to today's 8577, it is in a crash mode. A couple of tons of cannabis delivered to Wall Street would help. They're going to need it.So do sick people everywhere.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #24 posted by FoM on October 15, 2008 at 15:03:27 PT

Sinsemilla Jones 
I am looking forward to Rove and the Republicans fading away for at least 8 years. Maybe by then Rove will be harmless.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #23 posted by FoM on October 15, 2008 at 14:30:55 PT

Legal Weed 4 All
I'm watching MSNBC and they just showed someone's sign that said Legal Weed 4 All. I can't wait for tonights final debate. 
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #22 posted by museman on October 15, 2008 at 14:30:04 PT

Hope
Well, I may not be as old as I can get -hopefully- but theres no doubt in my mind, body, or spirit, that I am certainly not 'young' in terms of years, and the entropic effects of time.That dream of Obama was so good, I slept about 3 hours longer than normal -staying in the dream.I think there are some people in for some huge and wonderful surprises, while some are in for a huge rude awakening!FREE BO FOR EVERYONE
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #21 posted by Sinsemilla Jones on October 15, 2008 at 14:26:59 PT

Wups, kinda screwed that up...
When Karl Rove's office requested special help for beleaguered Republican congressional candidates in the months before the 2006 elections, the head of the Office of National Drug Control Policy jumped to the task. Director John Walters carried half-million-dollar grants to news conferences with two congressmen and a senator, earning a top Rove aide's accolade of "superstar" after the election.Walters's visits to Utah, Missouri and Nevada were among at least 303 out-of-town trips by senior Bush appointees meant to lend prestige or bring federal grants to 99 politically endangered Republicans that year, in an orchestrated White House campaign that House Democratic investigators yesterday called unprecedented in scope and scale.Although federal law prohibits the use of public funds or resources for partisan political activities -- and specifically barred Walters from any involvement in a federal election campaign -- the agencies involved said most of these trips were paid for by taxpayer funds, according to the draft report released by the Democratic majority of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.http://tinyurl.com/4o6nm6
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #20 posted by Sinsemilla Jones on October 15, 2008 at 14:21:50 PT

Well, looky here -
Rove's Office Urged Spending to Help GOP Incumbents in Tight Races (Washington Post)When Karl Rove's office requested special help for beleaguered Republican congressional candidates in the months before the 2006 elections, the head of the Office of When Karl Rove's office requested special help for beleaguered Republican congressional candidates in the months before the 2006 elections, the head of the Office of National Drug Control Policy jumped to the task. Director John Walters carried half-million-dollar grants to news conferences with two congressmen and a senator, earning a top Rove aide's accolade of "superstar" after the election.Walters's visits to Utah, Missouri and Nevada were among at least 303 out-of-town trips by senior Bush appointees meant to lend prestige or bring federal grants to 99 politically endangered Republicans that year, in an orchestrated White House campaign that House Democratic investigators yesterday called unprecedented in scope and scale.Although federal law prohibits the use of public funds or resources for partisan political activities -- and specifically barred Walters from any involvement in a federal election campaign -- the agencies involved said most of these trips were paid for by taxpayer funds....http://tinyurl.com/4o6nm6
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #19 posted by museman on October 15, 2008 at 14:17:13 PT

young and old
The powers and their minion/slaves didn't listen to our 'visions' when we were young. Are they gonna listen to the old dreamers?Here's what's happening;Inside the 'church' the 'experts' 'authorities' and 'scholars' are pouring over ancient information, scouring detail and arguing passionate interpretations -that haven't changed in about 2,000 years or more- and outside the walls and constraints of the religion, people are seeing the stark and obvious truths that cannot be seen from inside the conformed limits of doctrine and psuedo-science.The religious can't see the forest for the trees, and those who do see, are the 'rejected stone.'The Stone That The Builders Rejected.Of course, Yashua is the primary 'corner stone' of the New Temple -which is correctly labeled but totally misunderstood as the 'body of Christ.' That stone, along with all the rest of us who embrace the truths -not the doctrines invented by the religions- of YSHWH and YHWH has been rejected, persecuted, oppressed, repressed, murdered, imprisoned, mocked, ridiculed, and discredited by; what else? THE STATUS QUO -which is the Nephalim-powered 'economy,' 'religions,' 'state-funded-institutions' The State itself, and all the mis-directed, mistaken investment of time, belief, and faith that the principalites have the people dancing on their strings.One of the earliest symbols of God, or YHWH, was the tree.When Moshe first 'talked to God' HE was in the 'form' of a burning bush - a small tree.A tree is alive. The 'books' about god, are written on dead trees, and the words on those dead pages do not live, or breathe, or exist in any way outside of the minds that percieve them. As a record of past insight and wisdom, those tomes are invaluable, but they are neither an 'authority' or a 'source.' If you want to 'talk to God' start with the trees, and give the priests and gurus a wide berth, avoiding them at all cost.FREE BLUNTS FOR EVERYONE
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #18 posted by Hope on October 15, 2008 at 13:55:46 PT

Ezrydn
John Walters can't tell the truth. He'd lose his job for one thing. His job is to keep the terrible, big lie of cannabis prohibition propped up and propped up good. He can't tell the truth even if he wanted to.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #17 posted by Hope on October 15, 2008 at 13:51:27 PT

Museman
Dream. Wow. That's great. It must have been neat. That same scripture came to my mind that FoM mentioned... not that you're old.Well, older than some.:0)
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #16 posted by FoM on October 15, 2008 at 12:49:11 PT

museman
I think that is really cool. This bible verse came to my mind when I read your comment.http://bible.cc/joel/2-28.htm
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #15 posted by ezrydn on October 15, 2008 at 12:48:14 PT

Drug Czar sidesteps main point in presentation
"Walters said that unlike opiate medications, such as morphine, medical marijuana there is largely unregulated. The potency of the drug can vary widely, and there aren't uniform production standards in place."Points made:
1. unregulated
2. varied potentcy
3. no standards of productionSo, as a citizen addressing a Washington official, my question is "Why Not?" Why is it "unregulated?" Why are there no federal potency standards? Why are there no standards of production? Why has the US Government continually "dropped the ball" on this one?Tell us the truth, John! Tell us the truth!
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #14 posted by museman on October 15, 2008 at 12:13:06 PT

OT: I had a dream
last night. Obama came to visit me, and hang out. We talked for hours about everything, the man listened to me, asked me questions about a lot of things, and I felt real good about him.I know, it was just a dream. However I don't usually have vivid dreams involving famous or powerful people. The last one I had was of Saddam Hussein, (about a week before the invasion) who gave me something to keep for him because he knew he was going to die.The closer we get to the election, the more I hear and see of Obama, the higher my hopes rise. I will ask that people say a little prayer of protection for him though, he is the biggest potential political target since Kennedy, and maybe even a lot more real in terms of his empathy with the people.FREE SINSEMILLA FOR EVERYONE
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #13 posted by FoM on October 15, 2008 at 12:08:39 PT

museman
November 5th will be the biggest party ever!
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #12 posted by FoM on October 15, 2008 at 12:07:09 PT

ekim
I saw him being interviewed yesterday. He really likes Obama.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #11 posted by museman on October 15, 2008 at 11:59:21 PT

Ya Think?
"I think these people are trying to protect the status quo by misleading Michigan voters," Jarou said"...and the expansion of the drug trade in Michigan."Oh? Is pharma planning on moving to Michigan?"We don't tell people the best we can do for them is make them intoxicated," Walters said.No, we tell them that they just have to suffer, or take the wonderful chemicals the REAL DRUG DEALERS make by extracting them from PLANTS and HERBS, (without benefit of the natural combination that makes them work in the first place) or by synthesizing them out of things like petroleum. No, don't want them 'intoxicated' unless its the true blue brain killer alcohol, but they can have and enjoy all the wonderful side effects of their drugs they buy from the rich folks who own the drug companies and the doctors."To say, we need to smoke a weed to make people high because that's the best we can do for them is an abomination."ooooh! a big word! Must've got it when he looked in the mirror and saw the caption; ABOMINATION. Mr. Pisshead Walters, you are an abomination, you and your monkey king. Obamas gonna throw you out on your ass, and we will party, oh yes, we will.Come november 5th, there will be a lot of bud smoked that day.FREE TETRAHYDROCANNABINOL FOR EVERYONE
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #10 posted by ekim on October 15, 2008 at 11:58:19 PT

today on C-span Wash Journal
read a story on Cris Buckley the son of late great W.F.Buckley.
Seems that Mr Buckley has resigned from the National Review.
Rich Lowry said Mr Buckley was filling in for a writer that had been gone but now is back.Mr Buckley had written elsewhere that he thought Sen Obama was a decent man-- which had caused all the fuss.Good for you Cris Buckley your dad and mom are smiling knowing that they had done all they could to bring you up to stand tall and say what you think.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #9 posted by E_Johnson on October 15, 2008 at 11:56:28 PT

And the ultimate problem with that movie
Max is growing a big crop, he's in California, he could very well be growing for a dispensary, but the film makers aren't going to allow for that option.They treat medical marijuana like a joke, with the frighteningly silly aging hippie woman -- Max's mother -- asking Peter's medical professor father if he could write her a recommendation.Again -- they all appear to be living in a world without the Internet. In real life, you can find plenty of pot docs on the Internet willing to hear your story and figure out whether it's credible enough to hang their license on.That's why the movie feels so weird -- it seems to take place after 911 yet before the Internet.

[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #8 posted by E_Johnson on October 15, 2008 at 11:01:14 PT

The thing that makes no sense in "Humboldt County&
If the the grower guy Max is growing 200 plants, then he must have started with a lot of seeds. It's not going to be bag seed. He's going to buy his seeds online.And that means he's talking about strains online and participating in grow forums.Well, you can't participate in grow forums without gaining a community and a political consciousness. It's all around you there.That's what bothers me about the movie. It seems to be set back in the days before the Internet, when growers really were socially isolated and had no positive avenues for their frustration.And that aspect of it also gives it a colonial narrative, where the natives don't have the Internet so they really are isolated in their own ignorance and innocence out there in the Third World.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #7 posted by runruff on October 15, 2008 at 10:08:11 PT

Addicted?
This overgrown momma's boy nerd is addicted to the only job he could have. Imagine, without this job he would be a CPA or whatever his college edgumacation has prepared him for. With any luck he will know the feeling of cold turkey before long.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #6 posted by Hope on October 15, 2008 at 09:50:50 PT

Walters is a dispicable mouthpiece for fascism.
"The proposal gives people who are addicted a way to say I have a medical problem" and get more of the drug, Walters said."People who are "addicted" to something that's basically destructive to their health do have a medical problem. Cannabis is not as "addictive" as coffee.The only thing Walters is expert at, apparently, is lying and playing the shill.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #5 posted by The GCW on October 15, 2008 at 09:30:17 PT

Way to go John Walters.
There's a lot of people in Michigan like Zach Jarou that know U.S. "Drug Czar" John Walters is not being honest with them.U.S. "Drug Czar" John Walters' appearance may even help the cause.It's kind of like the stock market. Someone told Me the other day, that every time Bush is seen speaking on TV the stock market goes down.It may be important for all the states that are trying to get medical use of cannabis legalized, to have U.S. "Drug Czar" John Walters come and make an appearance to help increase the chance of success.Walters may be doing more good than harm.Imagine the eye opener when people find out NORML etc. have paid all of Johnny Walters expenses to come to Michingan etc. to speak against cannabis because He helps make their case....Way to go John Walters.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #4 posted by NikoKun on October 15, 2008 at 09:28:11 PT

Ever seen someone on Morphine?
If that's not an intoxication... lolThe drug czar is so hypocritical on this topic... drawing a fake link between legal medicines and medical marijuana.
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #3 posted by runruff on October 15, 2008 at 09:04:22 PT

John Walters!
Oooo he...., I..., that guy...., gurrrr..., I'm so..., if he..., god watta...., he's so..., aaaaurg...., I just wanna..., ooooo that guy...!!! 
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #2 posted by FoM on October 15, 2008 at 07:01:19 PT

OT: Show Yields More Than 20 Drug Law Violations

By Elizabeth Murphy, Collegian Staff WriterOctober 15, 2008PA -- Balloons reading "stoned again" were not the only contraband found at the "Change Rocks" concert Monday night, which featured the Grateful Dead and the Allman Brothers Band.URL: http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2008/10/15/show_yields_more_than_20_drug.aspx
[ Post Comment ]


†


Comment #1 posted by OverwhelmSam on October 15, 2008 at 06:42:29 PT

Bob Saget
ďMarijuana is not a drug!!! I used to suck dick for coke! You ever suck DICK for marijuana?ĒNo, but I've eaten a little tang after smoking marijuana, but I don't think that qualifies to fall into the same category as Bob's addiction to coke. Bob's right though, marijuana is a mild sedative like caffiene compared to other legal and illegal drugs.http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache:BqkbxTYpiogJ:www.feloniousramblings.com/2008/10/marijuana-quote-archive.html+marijuana+quote+archive&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us
[ Post Comment ]





††Post Comment