cannabisnews.com: This Is Your Ass on Drugs
This Is Your Ass on Drugs
Posted by CN Staff on September 26, 2006 at 06:23:54 PT
By Seth Stevenson
Source: Slate
USA -- The spot: A high-school kid sits on a couch in a basement rec room, next to a couple of stoner friends. Looking straight at the camera, he says, "I smoked weed and nobody died. I didn't get into a car accident. I didn't OD on heroin the next day. Nothing happened. We sat on Pete's couch for 11 hours." The couch then magically teleports into the midst of some wholesome teen scenes (kids mountain biking, ice skating, playing basketball), while the zonked-out stoners just sit there, looking bored. Our narrator concedes that you're more likely to die out there in the real world ("driving hard to the rim" or "ice skating with a girl") than on Pete's couch back in the rec room. But, deciding it's worth the trade-off, he says, "I'll take my chances out there."
Click here to see the spot.: http://www.abovetheinfluence.com/the-ads/default.aspxIn the past two decades, the Office of National Drug Control Policy and the Partnership for a Drug-Free America have made countless TV ads about the evils of illicit drugs. There was the one where that tweaker chick on meth plucked out her whole eyebrow. There was the one where Rachael Leigh Cook smashed up her kitchen. And, of course, there was the granddaddy of them all: the fried egg. ("This is your brain on drugs. Any questions?") I've hated every single one of these ads with a raging, righteous fury. Until now.This new spot, titled "Pete's Couch," doesn't offend me. It acknowledges that smoking weed on your buddy's sofa is the "safest thing in the world." (Which is true. I actually had a friend named Pete in high school, and we did get high on his couch. No turmoil ensued.) The ad's main contention is that it's important to get off that couch and out into the world, where you can do things like ice skate with other teens. (Also true. It is indeed good to engage with the outside world, instead of just sitting in your rec room. Though I'd note that it's possible to smoke pot in your rec room one day and then go ice skating the next. Or even just smoke pot and immediately go ice skating—which, come to think of it, sounds like a blast. Who's in?)Whatever you may think of its arguments, this spot is quite a departure for the ONDCP. Finally, an admission that using pot isn't necessarily calamitous. It's possible we're seeing this about-face only because previous scare-tactic ads were recently proved to increase drug use. But either way, I applaud the new, more truthful strategy. Lying is never what you want from your government (even if you've grown accustomed to it). What should we be telling kids about drugs? I remember once seeing an anti-drug ad from way back when (I'm guessing the mid-1950s). Black-and-white footage showed happy kids horsing around on a playground while the kindly narrator offered his view that it's more fulfilling to find our bliss in life without mixing in the fog and dependency of drug abuse. Totally fair point, made without resorting to exaggeration or untruth. I recall thinking at the time that I wished modern anti-drug ads could be so reasonable. Instead, recent PSAs have suggested that drug use leads to: 1) Shooting your friend in the head, 2) running over a little girl on her bike, and 3) helping the terrorists.In this context, "Pete's Couch" is a work of bracing honesty. Other spots in the ongoing "Above the Influence" campaign have been unawful, too. In "Whatever," a straight-edge kid talks about chaperoning his stoned friends around, acting as designated driver and as a sort of den mother for his wasted buddies. The point is that this kid makes his own decisions and chooses to stay off drugs even though his friends are getting high. Aside from cloaking the stoner kids' faces in shadows (as though smoking pot makes them incorporeal nothings), the ad is done in a low-key, nonhyperbolic way. I like that it seems to say it's OK to be friends with pot smokers (instead of instantly calling the cops on them, as past ads might have recommended). Quick question, though, in light of this new marijuana glasnost: Will the ONDCP now retract its previous claims that pot is a dangerous gateway drug? And, logical next question (as others have noted): If smoking pot is the safest thing in the world, does not lead to the use of harder drugs, and, worst case, causes you to veg out on a couch for several hours, why is it a criminal offense? I eagerly await the ads addressing this conundrum. Grade: B+. In general, I approve of the message here. It isn't ideal to be stoned on your couch all the time. I think most high-school kids can grasp and appreciate that truth. Will the ad stop those kids from experimenting with pot? No. Because smoking pot is also fun and largely harmless, and most high-school kids can grasp and appreciate that truth, too.Note: The new case against pot? It makes you lazy.Source: Slate (US Web)Author: Seth StevensonPublished: September 25, 2006Copyright: 2006 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive Co. LLCContact: letters slate.comWebsite: http://www.slate.com/URL: http://www.slate.com/id/2150334Related Articles: YouTube Meets Reefer Madnesshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22200.shtmlCool Reception on YouTube for Drug PSAs http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22187.shtmlU.S. Uploads Anti-Drug Videos To YouTubehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22175.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help
Comment #87 posted by Hope on September 29, 2006 at 20:26:49 PT
Number 85 FoM
Excellent....studies is what he needs.Where's Dr. Russo when you need him.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #86 posted by Hope on September 29, 2006 at 20:25:31 PT
Dang, Whig. You're scaring me!
"They are the devil".Principals. Powers. Spiritual wickedness in high places.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #85 posted by FoM on September 29, 2006 at 11:06:26 PT
Whig
I thought maybe these articles might help. 'Cannabis' Acts as Antidepressant http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21188.shtml*** Marijuana May Live Up To Be The Elixir of Life http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21194.shtml
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #84 posted by whig on September 29, 2006 at 09:55:23 PT
CAGW and John McCain
Let me tell you the game plan, so you understand. I am putting on my Right Wing Wingnut Cap just for you so that I can understand how they think and what they want.John McCain would have us executed. I said that and it is true. So would George Bush, but he can't get away with it yet. That's the whole point. This is a WAR ON US. This is not a game to them, a public policy, this is WAR and they want us DEAD.So the way to sell that to the American people is as a cost-cutting measure. All that pork being spent on caging potheads, it's ridiculous, we are spending all that when we could just declare them enemy combatants and have them killed without any cost at all, especially since they get to seize all of our assets and take them for themselves. Very profitable, and exactly what the Nazis did to the Jews in Germany.They are NAZIS and you don't understand.Look at George Bush and tell me he is just misunderstood.John McCain is his soul mate.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #83 posted by whig on September 29, 2006 at 09:50:09 PT
Had Enough
You prove my point about CAGW. They are the devil.They do not object, not for an instant, about $78.5 billion being appropriated to kill people and destroy.They object only to a supposed $348 million spent on non-military projects that got tacked on to the $78.5 billion.Let me put this in some context, because big numbers are hard to appreciate. If you subtracted that entire $348 million (assuming every single one of those expenditures were unnecessary, though you have no idea that some of them might not be vital) you would have a supplemental appropriation of $78.152 billion.They are clever and evil when they do the numbers the way they do, by putting a small 78.5 against the big 348. Looks like that bulk of money is "pork pork pork"! And someone who is not very good at math will believe them.A billion is a thousand million (in American usage). That means the way to view this with less confusion is to say...Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today condemned Congress for passing a $78,500 million War Supplemental Appropriations bill filled with pork-barrel projects.Let me stop for a second... "filled with" suggests that a majority of this money was "pork-barrel" (which is yet to be defined). They also make it look like they are against this entire bill including the war spending by saying they "condemn Congress for passing" it. But that would be a false implication....lawmakers shamefully seized the opportunity to tack on funds for 29 unrelated projects, which cost more than $348 millionSo now we see "pork-barrel" defined as simply "unrelated projects" whether they are necessary or frivolous expenditures.Oooh, "shamefully." They are shaming no one, they are just playing rope-a-dope with idiots.I'm going to stop here, because to fisk them comprehensively would just be too off-topic for CNews. You are supporting an organization that is murderous, evil, wrong and everything that we are against, if you support CAGW.They won't even help you end cannabis prohibition. They will have us killed.That is John McCain's own party machine. John McCain is the object of CAGW and their candidate for President.Are you going to start campaigning for John McCain yourself? Do you think he's a great guy who will end cannabis prohibition? Oh, I'll bet he'll say nice things to us. I bet he'll reassure us of a kinder and gentler administration.He's a liar, and so is CAGW and you are spreading their lies.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #82 posted by whig on September 29, 2006 at 09:32:41 PT
More Tam...
His latest says, among other things, "As someone who actually practices medicine and authors articles on medical education I think I know this better than you."When they start dropping those kinds of bombs, I am made to feel as if I cannot be perceived to win by people who know nothing other than one of us is a physician and the other is not, even if the physician is unaware of some facts and is therefore mistaken, the public will tend to believe him. Can someone respond and put him straight? And if I've made a mistake please tell me so.Need help please.http://tinyurl.com/nkmnn
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #81 posted by Had Enough on September 29, 2006 at 06:27:04 PT
Whig
Well this is the best I could come up with as per your request in comment # 72. They don’t slam them for spending war money but they slam them for adding pork to it. Congress Pigs Out in War Supplemental Billhttp://www.cagw.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr006=xzkdgrx2k1.app25a&page=NewsArticle&id=8220&news_iv_ctrl=1329CCAGW Blasts Senate for Bloated Emergency Billhttp://councilfor.cagw.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr006=t3vum5f2d2.app25a&abbr=CCAGW_&page=NewsArticle&id=9832&news_iv_ctrl=1329CCAGW: Cut Funding for Pork, Not the Troopshttp://councilfor.cagw.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr006=t3vum5f2d2.app25a&abbr=CCAGW_&page=NewsArticle&id=9860&news_iv_ctrl=1329CCAGW Warns Congress Not to Use War Supplemental as an Excuse for Porkhttp://councilfor.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=news_NewsRelease_03252003&JServSessionIdr006=zz19iux2x3.app25aRe: #74. George said at the signing ceremony, "Again, I thank the members. It's my honor now to sign the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006. (Applause.)"Confusion. You said I was confused about him wanting to sign this into law, I don’t think so.Do you really believe he meant what he said in front of all that press? I’m surprised you believe him. That signature is going to allow “Every Day People” access to information that was only available to select few. They didn’t want it, they caved into the voters. Again, do you really believe what George said here? Naturally he is going to say this. But deep down inside, him and the other politicians did not want to make themselves accountable to the voters. They have been working for years to put up veils to hide behind. We all know about how they feel about, "Money, It’s a Hit”Re: #73. I do not think they are a bunch of bloody-minded fascists that run around torturing people as you might have others belive. I think the only reason why they mentioned McCain, is because he is always screwing with politicians that waste taxpayer money.We will have to agree to disagree at this point.If you want to call these people names here and slam them, that is your option, but as long as they say good things about cannabis, and slam the Drug Czars office with the truth of the whole matter, I will support their efforts. If you really really think, they are torturous evil fascists, take it up with Thomas Schatz. Maybe you can debate with him on your blog, e-mail, or maybe even here.http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ccagw_contactsHere is their phone number 202-467-5300Roger and Out…
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #80 posted by unkat27 on September 29, 2006 at 03:14:36 PT
Correction on #56
In post #56 I said this "article" was BS, but what i meant to say was the "message" about the stoners on the couch was BS. I guess I'm so sick of all the BS put out by the prohibitionists that it just gets to me sometimes.As for the article itself, I really don't think the writer nailed the "message" very well on its errorneous over-generalized conclusion. In some ways, the idea that pot makes people lazy and lacking in ambition is just as effective, if not more so, in support of prohibition, because it presents itself as being more intelligent and reasonable, when in fact it is just a form of "reasonably moderate bulls__t" -- the kind that works well for prohibitionists.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #79 posted by Hope on September 28, 2006 at 21:51:10 PT
Thanks, Whig.
Hope it helps.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #78 posted by whig on September 28, 2006 at 21:32:48 PT
Hope
You wrote a good reply.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #77 posted by Hope on September 28, 2006 at 19:37:19 PT
Whig
You're response to him was very good. He hasn't replied to your post...but I lobbed one in because you asked. Hope it helps.If you think it won't help...delete it.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #76 posted by whig on September 28, 2006 at 18:17:51 PT
On background
http://vitualis.wordpress.com/authors/about-michael-tam/Michael Tam is a medical doctor in New South Wales, Australia. He studied medicine at the University of New South Wales, Sydney and graduated in December 2002. Clinical attachments during his undergraduate training were primarily at Liverpool Hospital though there were numerous rotations to other Sydney hospitals (including St. Vincent’s Public Hospital, St. George Hospital, Bankstown Hospital and Campbelltown Hospital) and to rural NSW (Albury Base Hospital, Wagga Wagga Base Hospital, and Broken Hill Base Hospital).
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #75 posted by whig on September 28, 2006 at 17:49:46 PT
Got a live one and requesting backup
http://cannablog.wordpress.com/2006/09/27/prescription-drugs-kill-cannabis-has-never-killed-anyone/#comment-242
Misleading and false.Cannabis, though generally safe, has killed plenty of people. There those people who become acute psychotic with cannabis and thus commit dangerous and impulsive acts. Then, there are the silly people who get stoned and drive.Please be polite when engaging if possible, but have some fun.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #74 posted by whig on September 28, 2006 at 16:24:27 PT
Had Enough is confused
Bush says:"Again, I thank the members. It's my honor now to sign the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006. (Applause.)"And then Had Enough says:"I doubt very seriously that George W. really wanted this. But he did sign it."
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #73 posted by whig on September 28, 2006 at 16:15:01 PT
CAGW
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_200309/ai_n9294986
CAGW, which is divided into tax-exempt 501(c)3 and lobbying 501(c)4 organizations, also runs projects such as a petition to reduce the United States' payments to the United Nations. Schatz said that Sen. John McCain (R.-Ariz.) is still the most aggressive and reliable anti-pork crusader in Congress.
Fascists they are, and fascists I will call them.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #72 posted by whig on September 28, 2006 at 16:12:11 PT
Had Enough
Show me where CAGW has once protested military spending for the invasion and occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan.Show me one example or do not tell me they are on our side.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #71 posted by Had Enough on September 28, 2006 at 15:41:22 PT
and....
For Immediate ReleaseOffice of the Press SecretarySeptember 26, 2006
President Bush Signs Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency ActDwight D. Eisenhower Executive Office Building
Room 350http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060926.htmlGroups like Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) help make things like this happen.I doubt very seriously that George W. really wanted this. But he did sign it.Note the date between the CAGW press release and the date of the signing ceremony.Now if only George would only sign a few more documents to end this insane Cannabis War that would be cool.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #70 posted by FoM on September 28, 2006 at 15:35:33 PT
Event: XM To Carry Saturday's Farm Aid Concert
CAMDEN, N.J., Sept. 28 (UPI) -- XM Satellite Radio plans to broadcast live Saturday's annual Farm Aid concert at the waterfront in Camden, N.J. Farm Aid mainstays Willie Nelson, John Mellencamp and Neil Young will be joined by the Dave Matthews Band, Shelby Lynn, Los Lonely Boys and Jerry Lee Lewis. XM said Thursday Ray Knight and Jessica Scott would host the broadcast on X Country, channel 21. Farm Aid was launched in 1985 as a benefit for struggling family farms around the United States. It has since evolved into a resource for disaster relief and advocates of sustainable agriculture. Camden's Tweeter Center was selected as the site of Farm Aid 2006 because of its location in a larger region of primarily small family-owned farms.Copyright: 2006 United Press International, Inc. http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060928-031427-6679r
Farm-Aid 2006 - Camden, New Jersey
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #69 posted by Had Enough on September 28, 2006 at 15:04:07 PT
Whig re: 58
I don’t think the people at Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) torture people.But it must feel like torture to the “pork barrel bureaucrats” they focus their attention to.***********September 12, 2006Pork-Barrel Spending: But That’s Not All…By Tom Schatz, President, CAGW and Orson Swindle, Former Federal Trade Commissioner and member of the CAGW Board of DirectorsMembers of Congress have returned after unwinding from a “grueling” legislative calendar: The Senate was in session for 101 days and the House was in session for 76 days, compared to 141 days worked by the average American. After catching up on their sleep, members will try to convince the folks back home to re-elect them. Based on the August 8 primary results, incumbents better wake up. The voters should also be aware that many members of Congress are preventing them from making informed decisions on Election Day.As in most recent years, Congress is woefully behind in passing the annual appropriations bills, its most basic constitutional duty. In addition to funding basic government functions, these bills will include thousands of pork-barrel projects. Sources indicate that senators want to delay voting until after the November elections in order to avoid the scorn and mockery that surely would await them back home because of the pork-laden spending bills.Pork-barrel spending is nothing new, but the deceitful act of purposefully stalling the budget process in an election year shows how far the practice has fallen out of favor with the general public. By avoiding these critical votes, the members would hope to “look good” (or at least, not look bad) while obscuring the pork-fest that would occur in an omnibus appropriations bill after the election. An omnibus bill would combine as many as nine individual spending bills a gigantic haystack in which to hide needles (pork). As documented in Citizens Against Government Waste’s 2006 Congressional Pig Book, the amount of pork in the federal budget skyrocketed from $3.1 billion in 1991 to a record $29 billion in 2006 an 835 percent increase. Beyond the obvious frivolity of projects like $500,000 for the Sparta Teapot Museum in Sparta, North Carolina, pork has also played a central role in recent ethics and lobbying scandals. It seems not a week goes by without a new revelation of earmark abuse. In late July, it was reported that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) may have to shut down scientific research at the International Space Station. Part of the reason for NASA’s budget squeeze is that, since 2001, members of Congress have earmarked $3 billion from the agency’s budget for pet projects in their home districts and states.
Efforts to clean up the political process after a scandal-ridden year have yet to bear fruit. The House lobbying/earmark reform bill (H.R. 4975) sits in an empty conference room with its Senate counterpart.
The Senate has yet to vote on the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (S. 2590), introduced by Senators Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.). The “Google government” bill, as Sen. Coburn calls it, requires the Office of Management and Budget to run a single public website listing the names and locations of all individuals and groups receiving federal grants and contracts. Such a database would be an invaluable resource for watchdog groups, the media, and bloggers to expose wasteful spending, conflicts of interest, and other shenanigans. The bill has 29 co-sponsors and has been endorsed by groups from across the political spectrum.
The purpose of voting is to hold elected officials accountable. Yet Congress wants to conceal from the public, to the utmost extent possible, how their tax dollars are being spent. That may explain why S. 2590 had been put on “hold” by an anonymous senator.
In the spirit of democracy and transparency, Congress should act now on the individual appropriations bills and let the voters decide on the merits of pork. Furthermore, the “Google government” bill should go forward to empower the public with the oversight and accountability that Congress has failed to exercise. Otherwise, Election Day ought to find many incumbents right where they are now back home.http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=10082&news_iv_ctrl=0&JServSessionIdr006=ii76ykuc43.app26aCitizens Against Government Waste is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to eliminating waste, fraud, mismanagement and abuse in government.http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=homePage
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #68 posted by FoM on September 28, 2006 at 11:06:07 PT
Whig
All done!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #67 posted by whig on September 28, 2006 at 10:46:37 PT
FoM
Please delete #60, it's just inappropriate. Sorry.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #66 posted by Hope on September 28, 2006 at 10:27:54 PT
BGreen...indeed, I have.
"Have you ever seen a kid with ADD, ADHD, BFD, WTF, SOB or some other acronymic disease that can sit like a zombie for hours on end while playing video games?"
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #65 posted by BGreen on September 28, 2006 at 10:03:38 PT
Did you ever notice?
Have you ever seen a kid with ADD, ADHD, BFD, WTF, SOB or some other acronymic disease that can sit like a zombie for hours on end while playing video games?I always got disgusted when a student of mine would say they had no time to practice but would tell me how they reached the thirteenth level of Death Slayer Zombie Killer on their Nintendo.It may be moral relativism, but there are a lot of things hurting our kids more than cannabis that are perfectly legal and common sense says that's just wrong.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #64 posted by Hope on September 28, 2006 at 09:57:28 PT
Thanks, BGreen
Oh...sigh of relief. I had rescanned comments trying to find it...but it seemed they were all acronyms and I missed the one that wasn't.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #63 posted by BGreen on September 28, 2006 at 09:52:52 PT
Citizens Against Government Waste
I found it in post #57.I think it's a bunch of people like me that think our government is a waste.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #62 posted by Hope on September 28, 2006 at 09:51:04 PT
11 hours on the couch!
Aarggh. No one would waste a good high like that, unless of course, they had to hide for some reason. Cannabis always inspired and motivated me to get things accomplished. It did. And it kept me from having nightmares that diminished the quality of my sleep.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #61 posted by Hope on September 28, 2006 at 09:47:20 PT
CAGW
Please, guys...I have some sort of acronym dyslexia. I've tried to figure out what CAGW is now for two days!What is CAGW?The only acronyms I get are the ones I am so used to...like ONDCP.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #59 posted by BGreen on September 28, 2006 at 09:09:11 PT
My feelings exactly, whig
I'm very careful about the company I keep.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #58 posted by whig on September 28, 2006 at 09:03:49 PT
Had Enough
I don't support Republicans or Democrats who torture, even if they are in favor of ending cannabis prohibition. This is a hard thing to explain so I will try.I believe cannabis prohibition must be ended, but my advocacy of this has to be peaceful and has to be against those who would commit horrors even while they may agree with my goal.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #57 posted by Had Enough on September 28, 2006 at 05:37:57 PT
Don’t shoot the Messengers.
Whig says,“Let's consider the messenger. CAGW is a conservative entity. They are very good at their message, but it is one-sided and misleading as the hard-line conservatives are.
CAGW are a bunch of bloody minded fascists who you should not trust.”bloody minded fascists who you should not trust. ??????That seems a little strong.Keep looking.******************For Immediate Release
Contact: Alexa Moutevelis / Tom Finnigan202-467-5318 / 202-253-3852 (cell)June 26, 2006
CAGW Report Calls Drug Policies a WasteWashington, D.C. Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today released a report critical of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). Wasted in the War on Drugs: Office of National Drug Control Policy’s Wasted Efforts takes the ONDCP to task for functioning inefficiently and failing to achieve its core objectives.
“Billions of dollars marked for the war on drugs are being wasted on ineffective and counterproductive policies,” CAGW President Tom Schatz said.
The ONDCP was established in 1988 by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act. It funds four primary programs: High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA), the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center (CTAC), the Drug Free Communities Program, and the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign.
Created to reduce marijuana use, the media campaign has been the target of lawsuit concerning the integrity of the ad agency, a government report detailing the failure of the campaign, and a study showing that the ads have a reverse effect. Despite all this, Congress is planning to spend $120 million on the program in fiscal 2007.
The federal government’s war on drugs includes tracking down and persecuting patients using medicinal marijuana in states where it is legal. Even though numerous studies have challenged the assertion that marijuana is a gateway drug, the federal government’s obsession with marijuana use continues as the problems with methamphetamine and cocaine worsen.As it happens, Reps. Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.) and Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) could propose an amendment tomorrow to the fiscal 2007 Science-State-Justice-Commerce Appropriations Act. The amendment would prohibit the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) from using resources to pursue medical marijuana patients in states that have deemed it to be legal.
“The federal government must re-prioritize its drug policies,” Schatz concluded.
Wasted in the War on Drugs can be found here. It is part of CAGW’s series of Through the Looking Glass reports.
Citizens Against Government Waste is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to eliminating waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in government.
http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr006=12wbgegve4.app25a&page=NewsArticle&id=9940&news_iv_ctrl=1021********************************Allow States to Permit the Use of Medical MarijuanaWednesday, July 5, 2006 By: Rep. Dana Rohrabacher
Government Waste Watch, Spring 2006For the fourth straight year, a coalition of Republicans and Democrats will try to stop the federal government from interfering with the power of states to permit the medical use of marijuana. The coalition has gained support from members of both parties but has failed, thus far, to achieve the votes needed to permit individual states to set policy.
The Hinchey-Rohrabacher Amendment to the appropriations bill for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, Science, and related agencies would prohibit funds made available to the Department of Justice from being used to prevent Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia from implementing laws authorizing the use of medical marijuana.
This freedom-minded coalition is built on the principles of compassion, personal liberty, and federalism.
CompassionPeople who suffer from a wide variety of medical conditions use marijuana to relieve their pain. These people testify that traditional painkillers have not worked. One such victim, television host and former U.S. Marine Montel Williams, recently visited Capitol Hill and told us his story. He suffered years of agony from multiple sclerosis that only ended after he tried marijuana. Personal LibertyIn a free sociey, government allows individuals to peaceably live their lives. Voters in 11 states and the District of Columbia have decided to respect the personal right of others to deal with their pain.
FederalismOne of our country’s founding ideals is that most government functions are best left to the states. Decentralization allows innovation, creativity, and diversity to flourish. Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor stated it best: "One of Federalism’s chief virtues, of course, is that it promotes innovation by allowing for the possibility that a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory, and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country."In May 2005, the Supreme Court decided (6-3) to allow federal authorities to prosecute sick people who smoke marijuana under doctors’ orders (Ashcroft v. Raisch). The decision overturned the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ December 2003 decision which declared that states have the right to regulate marijuana as a medical treatment. The Supreme Court effectively placed the lives of hundreds of medical patients into the hands of members of Congress. The federal government continues to spend tax dollars waging war on sufferers of glaucoma, cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis, and other diseases.Justice Paul Stevens said, "The voices of voters may one day be heard in the halls of Congress on behalf of legalizing medical marijuana." Our coalition seeks to represent the growing number of Americans who favor state autonomy for the medical marijuana issue.
I ask that you contact your representative and urge them to support the Hinchey-Rohrabacher Amendment.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher is a Republican representing the 46th District of Californiahttp://www.cagw.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr006=12wbgegve4.app25a&page=NewsArticle&id=9954&news_iv_ctrl=1021*********************For Immediate Release Daytime contact: Alexa Moutevelis 202-467-5318August 30, 2006 After hours contact: Tom Finnigan 202-253-3852GAO Findings Confirm CAGW Drug ReportWashington, D.C. Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today heralded a new Government Accountability Office (GAO) study verifying that the government’s attempts to discourage drug use by minors are a waste of money. The GAO report, given the self-explanatory title Contractor’s National Evaluation Did Not Find That the Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign Was Effective in Reducing Youth Drug Use (GAO-06-818), recommends that Congress limit appropriations for the ad campaign until it is proven to be effective.“This new GAO report confirms what CAGW has been saying for years: billions of dollars marked for the war on drugs are being wasted on ineffective and counterproductive policies,” CAGW President Tom Schatz said.
In June 2006, CAGW released a report critical of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). Wasted in the War on Drugs: Office of National Drug Control Policy’s Wasted Efforts took the ONDCP to task for functioning inefficiently and failing to achieve its core objectives. The report specifically criticized the subject of the new GAO study, the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign.
Created to reduce marijuana use, the media campaign has been the target of lawsuit concerning the integrity of the ad agency, two government reports detailing the failure of the campaign, and another study showing that the ads have a reverse effect. Despite all of this evidence of ineffectiveness, Congress is still planning to spend $120 million on the program in fiscal 2007.
“It’s time for Congress to admit its mistakes and free up federal dollars for more important priorities,” Schatz concluded.
Wasted in the War on Drugs can be found at www.cagw.org. It is part of CAGW’s series of Through the Looking Glass reports.
Citizens Against Government Waste is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to eliminating waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in government.
http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr006=12wbgegve4.app25a&page=NewsArticle&id=10050&news_iv_ctrl=1021more…http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=issues_generalwastehttp://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=homePage
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #56 posted by unkat27 on September 28, 2006 at 05:05:46 PT
Gotta say it -- this article is BS to the MAX
This is that line of bull about cannabis that erroneously ties it to a loss of ambition. The people who first made such claims never used pot in their lives and were just grasping at straws, looking for a reasonable argument against marijuana minus all the fear-mongering. As am an experienced pot-user of 40+ years, i know this argument is pure BS, like all the others. There are a lot of things in this world that kill ambition and marijuana is just the scapegoat for all of them. One; poverty, two; hopelessness, three; humiliation, four; bullies, five; lack of security, six; paranoia: the idea that marijuana is illegal and can get people in trouble, etc...My final conclusion is that the main reason why those kids sit on the couch after smoking marijuana isn't because they don't want to do things, its because the demonization of marijuana has confined it and its users to closets, or, in this case, couches in basements.People who use marijuana don't lack ambition, they simply find it somehat difficult to do things when they are low on money and in need of direction. Weed is a nice agent for objective thinking -- outside the box. To accuse it of killing ambition just because it helps a person get in touch with their own individual mind and consciousness is absurd and caters to the moronic sports-jerk mentality. IOW, "Hey everybody, let's not even think about what we want to do, let's just go out and do it! First one out of the basement gets to drive, last one out buys the beer!"
The US Drug War Conspiracy
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #55 posted by whig on September 27, 2006 at 23:03:05 PT
Hope
It's a catch-22, really. If "network neutrality" is required then the government asserts limited regulatory control over the internet. If network neutrality is defeated, then AT&T or some consortium of corporations will be given complete regulatory control over the internet.It's similar to discussing the problem of semi-regulated marijuana. We want this. We want the government to come and meet us half way and let people have their medicine. You shouldn't be required to go through them, but it is better than sick people not getting their medicine at all.We also want people to be able to grow their own medicine, but this can be (and in California, is) part of the regulated compromise. It's not a full loaf, but it is half a loaf and that is better than none.I'm for ending cannabis prohibition even if it is to be replaced with cannabis regulation. And I'd rather have regulations which control what bandwidth providers can do than to let them go off with an unregulated monopoly.Network neutrality is preferred.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #54 posted by whig on September 27, 2006 at 22:56:58 PT
Had Enough
Let's consider the messenger. CAGW is a conservative entity. They are very good at their message, but it is one-sided and misleading as the hard-line conservatives are.CAGW are a bunch of bloody minded fascists who you should not trust.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #53 posted by Hope on September 27, 2006 at 19:30:24 PT
"Internet Neutrality"
A very, very misleading name. Typical of politician types who are out to deceive to get their way. If they called it what it really is...they wouldn't make any headway with it at all and they know it. That's why they do it. I've noticed this often with Bills our government is considering. OFTEN.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #52 posted by FoM on September 27, 2006 at 18:46:10 PT
museman
That's my reason basically. I can't take anymore Republicans after Bush. I get sick when I see him on tv. I always change the channel. That is why I want the Democrats to win. The only person I like I worry someone might try to get rid of him. Everytime I really like a politician something happens to him.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #51 posted by museman on September 27, 2006 at 18:33:18 PT
BRM
Oh, I am not 'asking' for it. I am 'expecting' it. I worked hard for Nader in 2000, and after getting to know the structure of the green party I decided I didn't want to be part of the club anymore so I re-registered Democrat because Americans over-all won't embrace anything new, unless it's previewed in prime-time, endorsed by their favorite celebrity, and offered for sale at your nearest botique or Walmart. republic-rats or democrans, I agree there's hardly any difference in a lot of ways, but the fact that no third party has a chance in hell of getting enough electoral votes, and in case you haven't noticed, the fact that the majority of Americans voted twice against G_W AND HE'S STILL THERE, should be enough evidence to conclude that democratic majority does not rule.Virtuousness is not generally a quality that gets into politics. It's a standard adhered to by the 'best and the brightest' (of the Nephalim). It's not 'understanding' the law which qualifies you, but your 'understanding how to circumnavigate the law' which makes you rich and powerful enough to get public notice, and enter into the political fray.I am merely tired of having to witness mr bush and his monkeyshines day in and day out...anything to get rid of the monkey, and if I thought a third party had a chance in hell, I'd vote for them. But they don't. Unfortunate, but real.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #50 posted by FoM on September 27, 2006 at 17:45:19 PT
BRM
I want to say it isn't only museman but me too that wants so very much Democrats win. I haven't cared about politics until this administration and I'm a woman and not a young one either. I will register as a Democrat after this election. I never had done this and it is special for me. There are more issues then our special issue to me and only the Democrats and as far as a minor party the Greens could possibly interest me with my value structure. That's why we can say we hope for this or that but I don't post articles with politics in them very often. We are Democrats, Republicans or minor parties but we are all good people and I respect others opinions and will not ever push my feelings about a party on anyone because that's polite and proper.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #49 posted by Had Enough on September 27, 2006 at 16:52:31 PT
re: 46
My post from CAGW EXACTLY was about keeping big corporations out of control of the Internet. The biggies want big brother to pass laws in their favor. They want regulations requiring all not so biggie Internet Service Suppliers to heed to their standards at their cost. This means that cost of meeting their requirements would be passed down to people who use these ISP’s, all of them.Let these services be added as the ISP companies determine which ones, and when. The customers of these ISP's will naturally pick which service is ‘of choice’ to them, and others will follow suit. Users will choose what is right for them, and avoid paying for services they don't want.Now who benefits from these regulations Big Corp wants, big corp, or the consumer?Free enterprise vs. regulated enterprise? The phrase ‘Internet Neutrality” comes from the ones who want to control. They coined that phrase and used it to make it sound better. Just the opposite is true.Keep in mind that this type of legislation big corp wants, is a Gateway to more rules and regulations. Let the Internet evolve on it’s own without manipulation from Big Corp wanting government regulations, tilting things in their favor.Look again.********from Citizens Against Government Waste:In the name of so-called “net neutrality,” a number of special-interest groups, like MoveOn.org, and Internet content providers, such as Google, Yahoo, and Amazon.com, are pushing for federal regulations of the Internet that will ultimately hit you and all Internet users right in the pocketbook!This cadre of high-tech companies that provide search engines, websites, and other “content” for the Internet want Congress to mandate that your Internet service provider the company that you pay for broadband or dial-up access to the Internet must carry every single piece of content and every service they have to offer, no matter the cost. If Congress bows to their demands and imposes some of the first-ever regulations on the freewheeling Internet, your service provider will have no option but to pass the higher cost for such universal service on to you. In short, Google and the other high-tech Internet giants would have the government guarantee them below-cost access to premium high-speed network services with you, the end-user, footing the bill!
The Internet has thrived as a tool enhancing communications and commerce precisely because the government has, for the most part, taken a hands-off approach with regard to regulation and taxation. Net neutrality regulations would discourage crucial investment in broadband networks and stifle the innovation that is at the heart of the Internet’s success.http://councilfor.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=CCAGW_get_inv_Advocacy_netneutrality_IssuePage
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #48 posted by BRM on September 27, 2006 at 16:35:16 PT:
Reps. And Dems there all the same.
museman, I'm not Saying you are wrong with hoping for a Demoratic victory. I will say be careful what you ask for, you just might get it. I'm what you would call a recovering Rep. If you want real change vote third party.I don't know if you have heard of Gary Johnson? I voted for him both times. He was gov. of N.M. and brought drug reform to the front page. Now we have Bill Richardson and he won't even talk about it. My new battle cry is "Vote third party and send the message to the Dems & Rep.that you are ready for some real change. Even if we do not win they still look at the polls. Johnson is a Rep. Richardson is a Dem.
museman
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #47 posted by BRM on September 27, 2006 at 16:32:18 PT:
Reps. And Dems there all the same.
museman, I'm not Saying you are wrong with hoping for a Demoratic victory. I will say be careful what you ask for, you just might get it. I'm what you would call a recovering Rep. If you want real change vote third party.I don't know if you have heard of Rep. Gary Johnson? I voted for him both times. He was gov. of N.M. and brought drug reform to the front page. Now we have Bill Richardson A Dem. and he won't even talk about it. My new battle cry is "Vote third party and send the message to the Dems & Rep.that you are ready for some real change." Even if we do not win they still look at the polls.
museman
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #46 posted by whig on September 27, 2006 at 15:00:41 PT
museman
"Even though there are a few worthy programs available, television, and it's new counterparts like youtube,"...I have to stop you there, Museman. YouTube is not a counterpart of television. It may be video, but it is not controlled by any mainstream media company, with the further point that copyright enforcement can prevent a lot of things that the mainstream media even produced from being shown.Much of YouTube is homemade video, and what is not is still what people like you and me wanted to show people. It's a free (except for that copyright problem) speech zone.Like Cannabis News and Blogtopia, YouTube is part of the new ecosystem, not the old media. It may not succeed in establishing itself over the long run, but if not, replacements will. This is how we are reinventing all communications, so that everyone who wants to watch rather than listen, or listen rather than read, or read rather than watch, can have access to our shared media environment and submit our own responses that can equally be viewed by all.But the threat remains that the government will shut down this free ecosystem, will restrict it to those with special permission, will limit our access. That is why I was so surprised to even hear Had Enough opposing network neutrality. The fact of the CORPORATE state is that the CORPORATIONS have more power than anyone, and libertarians never seem to understand this. They want to give more power to CORPORATIONS -- legal fictions that act outside of law and without limited lifespan or susceptability to any but financial harm.We can't be silent and we can't be satisfied to sit and read and listen and watch any more. You are absolutely right about that. We need to be active, speaking and writing and performing for whomever we can get to listen to us, and then encourage them to speak as well.Please come blog, you are so very wise and good, I want your voice to be heard by more people.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #45 posted by museman on September 27, 2006 at 14:54:21 PT
FoM
I too hope for a Demoratic victory, though I see it as only a potential 'breathing space' before the next wave of lunacy comes from such sources as 'the moral right.'I do not believe in any aspect of this system. It's roots are deep in ancient lies, and it's fruit speaks loudly for the heart of the tree which bears it.Thus though I am forced once again to exercise my right to choose between two f**ked up 'orders' of evil, and the Democrats appear to be the lesser of the two, I will make the token effort of near futility and vote.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #44 posted by rchandar on September 27, 2006 at 14:48:13 PT:
in other words...
...in other words, it means that pot smokers are losers. Plain and simple. This isn't a departure at all, nor should anyone recognize it as one. It means that potheads don't play basketball or pursue girls, or ride bicycles. In other words, potheads depart through lethargy from fundamental, stereotypical "good things" available in the pot-prohibited world. no one should be endeared to this ad, even if it decides not to link potheads with hard drugs, recklessness, or anything. it is straight out of the doctrine of the Drug War--in other words, we're sissies afraid at taking a chance, being someone, being in love. 11 hours??? Does anyone at all have this concept when they burn, that they're going to drop on a couch and do nothing for 11 hours? This stereotypical portrayal does NO justice to any dimension of pot-smoking culture. I can remember my early twenties burning: we climbed mountains, fished, played softball, frisbee, played music, worked--how could such a bombastic commercial be accepted as truth? Oh, I forgot--professional and collegiate sports drug tests, so obviously no heads play sports. (???) Oh, I forgot--potheads are sissies, so they don't try to make it with girls (????) Oh, I forgot, potheads don't love nature, so they don't bicycle. (f#$%$%k!). Nothing excuses this ad from complete stupidity and worthlessness.On NPR's "Topical Currents," a guest speaker admired the ad as a "departure" which made anti-drug thinking "more believable."A believable crock. Hell, what do I know. All I am is a professor.--rchandar
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #43 posted by FoM on September 27, 2006 at 13:12:35 PT
museman
I'm so sorry. I am very selective with what I watch on tv. I know the power of the tv. That's why I watch videos on Youtube like I am doing now and I still can think and type. I can't stand the news anymore. If the Democrats don't get back some power this fall I probably will be so depressed and will feel so hopeless that tuning out will be the only way of coping. That's how upset I am with what Bush has done to our country.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #42 posted by museman on September 27, 2006 at 13:00:31 PT
FoM
Yes, if the rumor is true. I hope it isn't but since no one has heard of him since before that event, it probably is. I'm not kidding about TV however, and my telling briefly of my brother is to illustrate the point -just like anything else- without guidance and honesty- to teach moderation in all things, television is a dangerous and addictive device. More dangerous and addictive than even alcohol or heroin if left to run unhendered and uncontrolled in front of a young mind.The fact that our entire generation soaked up dangerous levels of radiation from those older TVs from the 50's and the 60's, probably has nothing to do with all the incidence of cancer in our age group?The fact that the current regime of fascists, war mongers, and bio-destruction engineers use the medium to highlight their obfuscating doublethink, and to deliberatly create confusion about the very foundation of right and wrong- so that they can 'do no wrong' in the 'public eye' - goes almost completely unremarked about.Television, airplanes, and automobiles; the death of a world.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #41 posted by FoM on September 27, 2006 at 12:22:53 PT
museman
That happened to your brother? That's terrible.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #40 posted by museman on September 27, 2006 at 12:05:13 PT
Couch sitters
I am surprised that no one commented on the fact that the original concept of a 'couch potato' has to do with the most addictive and actually dangerous substance known to man; TELEVISION!Even though there are a few worthy programs available, television, and it's new counterparts like youtube, teaches children all the lies they need to know, all the false pretexts of a Hollywood America. It glorifies cops, lawyers, and doctors as some kind of modern 'heroes' just by virtue of their 'profession.' It falsifies history to create a consumer 'hook' in hopes to get all to watch the commercials in between.Real nasty characters are resurrected (and created) as justified killers, and destruction is hailed by shouts of agreement and joy as the rubble comes down - it's no coincidence that everybody got to see the twin towers go down- though the shouts of joy were mostly in U.S. covert ops, and in Arab lands.One of the estimations of percentage of herb users in the U.S. hovers around about 50% (though we all know it is more) the estimation of TV use is so close to 100% it would be hard to accurately get all the numbers in on the other side of the decimal point of 99.Nobody can smoke herb and 'stay in one place for 11 hours', unless they are disabled and can't move, or as often happens when you smoke a lot of good bud on a couch- (in front of the TV)- you fall asleep. Does sleeping count?TV on the other hand is known and documented to turn children into zombies. I had a brother who spent most of his waking hours in front of the tube. You could yell, pound on the table, even stand in front of him, and he would act as if you did not exist. Only if you actually managed to block his vision of the TV -by turning it off or something, could you get his attention. We used to do that and time how long it took before his consciousness came back into his head. There was measureable lag.I heard on the grapevine a few years back that my brother had dabbled once too many times with meth-creation, and died in a resulting explosion. Our family did not even get the opportunity to bury him. If I were to make some real correlations between original causes, and 'gateway' devices, I would say that TV sitting is the gateway to a world of horrors, and knowing the choices my brother made over his life, I know without a doubt that TV started his over-all lack of understanding reality, and led to the final illusion of the fake 'power' that meth gives it's users. I am convinced that without that TV constantly broadcasting all that pure BS into his formative brain, he would have been a completely different person, and his intelligence would have been benefit to the world.I gave him a few more years I think, by turning him on to the herb, but TV got there first.I think the government must've all been couch potatos -left in front of the TV while their wealthy parents partied, how else can one explain their idiocy?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #39 posted by FoM on September 27, 2006 at 11:30:26 PT
A Little Trivia from CSNY's Tour
BOO-OMETER RESULTS By RB Warford, LWW TodayDuring the CSNY Tour, which wound up in Pittsburgh PA two weeks ago, the song "Let's Impeach the President" received wild responses. After a review of the recordings, the Boo-ometer was connected to the recordings and the results are: #1 Atlanta GA #2 St Louis MO #3 Fresno CA #4 Irvine CA No reading is perfect and it may be that Atlanta, the only concert measured that was inside a building, may have benefited from the enclosed area acoustics. No other cities had booing that was loud enough to register on the Boo-ometer. In Atlanta, the boos were still not as loud as the cheers. http://www.neilyoung.com/lwwtoday/
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #38 posted by whig on September 27, 2006 at 09:26:07 PT
Sad
Kinky Friedman is a racist.http://cannablog.wordpress.com/2006/09/27/sadly-noted/
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #37 posted by FoM on September 27, 2006 at 08:33:36 PT
WoodSongs Old Time Radio Hour Link
http://www.woodsongs.com/index.asp
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #36 posted by FoM on September 27, 2006 at 08:31:42 PT
Off Topic: WoodSongs Old Time Radio Hour
When I was looking for the lyrics to -- You Ain't Going Nowhere -- because of the ONDCP Pete's Couch last night I found this link to an interesting and relaxing concert. It reminds of a PBS special when they have a musical guest on and the guest sings and talks. Roger McQuinn from the Byrds was the guest. I downloaded it and am watching it on my TV now. I thought some here might like to check it out too.Roger McQuinn: http://www.byrds.com/Watch or Download: http://webcast.msc.uky.edu/woodsongs-398.wmv
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #35 posted by whig on September 27, 2006 at 00:16:36 PT
Mel Sembler
http://cannablog.wordpress.com/2006/09/27/check-out-dis-sembler/
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #34 posted by FoM on September 26, 2006 at 22:27:07 PT
Celaya
I just read that it wasn't going to be online live. I'll look forward to seeing it when they get it up. Thanks.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #33 posted by BGreen on September 26, 2006 at 21:22:01 PT
In Amsterdam
I ate cannabis, drank cannabis, smoked cannabis (a lot! it was legal there,) and wore cannabis the entire trip and I was on the go from morning 'til night, walked seven to ten miles a day, drank wonderful Belgian and Dutch beers, ate delicious food, shopped, went to the Van Gogh museum, rode trams and busses, walked in the North Sea, ate seafood on the beach, and did more things in that week than most people do in a month.These jokers want to stereotype me and millions of others but we just don't fit their caricature.Man, I had fun! LOLThe Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #32 posted by Wayne on September 26, 2006 at 21:05:05 PT
11 hours? i could barely stand 2!
The closest I ever came to this scenario was freshman year of college. I was in my dorm room with two acquaintences down the hall. We scored some beer, broke out the pre-prepared joints, fired 'em up, told dirty jokes, and laughed our asses off for 2 hours while watching in amazement at the psychedelic screensaver on my roommate's computer. After 2 hours, we couldn't stand it anymore, and had to go down the hall where some fellow smokers were playing dirty tricks on some nerd under hypnosis.Besides the inherent ridiculousness of the ad, I must disagree with it on a fundamental level. Now the ONDCP is saying that the worst thing that can happen to pot smokers is that they will waste their life away. I beg to differ, the times I've had smoking cannabis are some of the most valuable times in my life. And that evening is just one of many fine glowing examples in my mind. I value my times smoking cannabis just as much as every vacation I've taken, every family gathering I've attended, and every girl I've fallen for.Ahhh, the early years when I truly was experimenting with cannabis, when every experience was so new and exciting. And to think I'll never get those two hours back... but it will always put a smile on my face.I feel sorry for the drug warriors, because when they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're gonna feel all day long.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #31 posted by John Tyler on September 26, 2006 at 19:41:31 PT
Pete’s couch off the mark
The Pete’s couch scenario was kind of interesting, but only for a non-hipster. It sounded to me though like a scripted scene written by someone who didn’t understand the cannabis experience or at least was trying to put a negative spin on it. The statement that they sat on the couch for 11 hours like bored zombies is not accurate. Who has 11 hours anyway? It will be quickly forgotten. When I was in college I did have a lot more leisure time to spend with friends. We had some really great times. But you know for all of the stuff that we did and all of the fun we had, we all graduated from college and went on to lead regular lives, with of course, a heavy hipster background. I think we were the better for it. One of the things that I noticed then (it was a really big topic of conversation) and I see it here too, is that we had and still have a deep sense of our own spirituality and connection to the cosmos.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #30 posted by OverwhelmSam on September 26, 2006 at 19:32:26 PT
Who Has Time To Sit on A Couch for 11 Hours?
Sure Would Be Nice!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #29 posted by whig on September 26, 2006 at 19:10:47 PT
Had Enough
You're opposing network neutrality?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #28 posted by whig on September 26, 2006 at 19:09:12 PT
lombar
http://cannablog.wordpress.com/2006/09/26/say-hello-3/
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #27 posted by FoM on September 26, 2006 at 18:53:12 PT
Easy Chair
Pete's Couch made me think of this song.The Byrds - You Ain't Going Nowhere ***Oh oh are we gonna fly down in the easy chairI don't care how many letters they sent The morning came the morning wentPack up your money pick up your tent you ain't going nowhereOoh we ride me high tomorrows the day my brides gonna come
Oh oh are we gonna fly down in the easy chairhttp://www.lyricsondemand.com/soundtracks/e/easyriderlyrics/youaintgoingnowherelyrics.html
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #26 posted by FoM on September 26, 2006 at 18:48:24 PT
BRM
That was wonderful. Thank you.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #25 posted by charmed quark on September 26, 2006 at 18:23:20 PT
Pete's Couch
As propaganda goes, I think this style will be more successful than the old "this is your brain on drugs". But it's still propaganda and doesn't match my remembrance of high school pot.WAYYYYYY back then, we also would occasionally smoke pot on "Pete's" couch. Maybe the pot was different then ( mostly Mexican) but it didn't give us couch lock. What I remember was that we would then engage in some very interesting conversations or realllllly listen to some interesting music, followed, typically, by cooking some munchies or performin a munchies search, followed by "let's go out and do something interesting", such as walk in the woods stoned and really look at nature. It was great and I think an enriching thing.I think it was these events that got me interested in philosophy, cooking and nature, interests I still have today.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #24 posted by Hope on September 26, 2006 at 18:22:27 PT
BRM
Excellent testimonial. Excellent.Your experiences are the norm as far as I can see...and I can see pretty dang far. The only people I've known who were harmed from using marijuana were the ones who got criminal records.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #23 posted by ekim on September 26, 2006 at 18:18:45 PT
thank you
BRM please keep posting your thoughts
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #22 posted by Hope on September 26, 2006 at 18:18:25 PT
Thanks, Guys. I appreciate it.
That was a bad article, for sure.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #21 posted by BRM on September 26, 2006 at 18:14:33 PT:
Pete's couch
I grew up here in New Mexico. I went to school with a young man named Lynn Pierson. Lynn and my older brother were good friends, they were two years older then me. Maybe you also know about Lynn. We still have here in N.M. what is known as the Lynn Pierson act. Lynn is the reason marijuana was made available in 1978 for people with cancer here in N.M. You to can give money to this act. My older brother and Lynn did not use marijuana back in High school, but I did. When I got out of High school back in 1971 I moved to Albuquerque, were the next four years of my life I would get out of bed at 5:00am smoke a joint sometimes two, Get ready for and be to work by 7:00am and start building homes for people to buy and raise their familes in. Smoke a joint at the 9:00am break, then one more at the lunch break, and one more at the 2:30pm break. And you know what? Thirty six years later all of those homes are still standing and familes are still growing up in them. At the end of the work day I would go home to my wife and daughter where I found all the love in the world. On the Week ends I would get out of bed smoke a joint, play house with my daughter and her dolls, take my wife and kid to the zoo, go rolles skating ect... And what I'v found out about marijuana in my life time is this. The laws surrounding marijuana will do a hell of alot more damage to your life then marijuana will, if you get caught with it by the law. So I give Pete's couch a D+ for what its worth.
Life on the desert couch of New Mexico
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #20 posted by FoM on September 26, 2006 at 18:07:45 PT
A Question
I can't find the debate anywhere on line. If someone sees this and is watching the debate please post the link for us. I really was hoping it would be live. Thank you.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #19 posted by FoM on September 26, 2006 at 17:52:42 PT
The Article is Posted Now
I was working around home and didn't check out Sukoi's link until a little while ago but it is posted now.http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22205.shtml
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #18 posted by freewillks on September 26, 2006 at 17:41:28 PT
Hope
I was talking about lombars post. Bill Janes states that "Smoking marijuana can promote cancer in the lungs due to 50 percent to 70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke." and then has the balls to close with this "Government and medical science have participated in debates and presented the research evidence. The editorial gives false hope for those who seek any justification to smoke pot or to bash all levels of government that are charged with protecting our youth and society. The author clamors emotionally for marijuana legalization but, like those who have similarly argued over the years, presents no scientific evidence to support his assertions. The result is dangerously misleading at a time when our youth and society need clear, strong messages against illicit drug use.Janes is director of the Florida Office of Drug Control.This dude Must be smokin crack! The latest study shows Cannabis smokers are somewhat LESS likely to get lung cancer. He must still have the 1960's copy of talking points...LOL
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #17 posted by lombar on September 26, 2006 at 17:23:10 PT
Hope
It was about comment 8.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #16 posted by afterburner on September 26, 2006 at 17:01:54 PT
Hope
I think they're referring to Sukoi #8 article from Bill Janes, director of the Florida Office of Drug Control. In other words, the Florida Drug Czar. You remember Florida, home of Straight Inc., Drug Free America Foundation, Save Our Society From Drugs (SOS), the 2000 disputed federal election, Governor Jeb Bush, and the fictional Miami Vice.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #15 posted by Celaya on September 26, 2006 at 16:32:53 PT
Debate Tonight - Mason Tvert vs. Attorney General
When the marijuana reform debate has been so stifled, this debate seems like a huge breakthrough to me!From Denver's television 9 News:DENVER - The debate over Amendment 44 will heat up on Tuesday when Colorado's Attorney General faces off against a local marijuana activist. Attorney General John Suthers will speak in opposition of Amendment 44. Mason Tvert, campaign director for Safer Alternative for Enjoyable Recreation (SAFER), will speak in favor of marijuana reform.
Amendment 44 is a statewide issue that would legalize personal possession of less than one ounce of marijuana for people over the age of 21 if it passes. A similar initiative passed in the city of Denver last November.
The debate is being held at the Gates Concert Hall in the Newman Center for the Performing Arts at the University of Denver.
"Ballot Measures 101: Issues and Insights" is free and open to the public and will be aired on tape-delay on 9NEWS.
The event will be hosted by 9NEWS reporter Adam Schrager and will be streamed in its entirety on 9NEWS.com.The story seemed incomplete, so I contacted 9 News and received the following additional info:Thanks for your interest in 9NEWS.com’s video streams. Unfortunately, this event will not be streamed live or aired live. We will be airing this debate locally this weekend, and will attach a streamed video to our elections page over the weekend after it airs on local TV first. It will be located on our elections page, probably on Saturday. You can find our elections page here:
http://www.9news.com/news/elections/
Find story here with seach on "Tvert"
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #14 posted by afterburner on September 26, 2006 at 16:32:36 PT
Speaking of Ads on Buses
I saw an ad for Weeds on a local city bus. Do you have those down there?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #13 posted by Hope on September 26, 2006 at 16:32:05 PT
Comment 10 and 11 Lombar and Freewillks
Are you guys talking about this article?I thought it was pretty reasonable. Am I missing something?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #12 posted by observer on September 26, 2006 at 16:06:06 PT
await the ads from now till doomsday
If smoking pot is the safest thing in the world, does not lead to the use of harder drugs, and, worst case, causes you to veg out on a couch for several hours, why is it a criminal offense? I eagerly await the ads addressing this conundrum. (In other words, it is illegal because it is illegal. I needn't mention the circular reasoning there.)The author might wait a very long time. Even when reformers have cash in hand, they aren't permitted to tell their side of the story.
In Oregon, radio stations that played hours of government messages
demonising drug users refused to run a short ad paid for by a couple
questioning government drug laws. "Portland's KUFO-FM . . . turned
them down. KUFO wasn't alone in such thinking. Jeff and Tracy, both
39, have also been turned down by Portland's KNRK-FM, KGON-FM,
KKRZ-FM, KKCW-FM and KEX-AM, and by stations in Seattle and
Bend."91 Attempts by the couple to advertise on buses and in local
papers were also turned down as 'unsuitable for publication.' (p.300)
... Noted a student of media drug policy: "Even when reformers have cold,
hard cash, it's often hard for those who disagree with governmental
policy to buy into the mass media."102 (p.302)Drug War Propaganda, http://www.cafepress.com/drugpropaganda2
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #11 posted by freewillks on September 26, 2006 at 15:40:04 PT
Horse Pucky!
this dude needs to spend some time reading current research. And they pay him to spew lies about decades old research that has been proven false time and time agian.year 2050:
Carb Junkie sentaced to life in prison for selling 12 year old box of twinkie's!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #10 posted by lombar on September 26, 2006 at 15:32:19 PT
Its pure propaganda.
Not even worthy of tearing apart, it is blatantly false. There is a falsehood in every single paragraph. He must be the new guy, freshly programmed from the automaton-drugwarrior(tm) factory. He hit every lie they have in such a short article. It's a tyranny of pinheads.I decided to create a blog to pin my thought of the day:
My Blog
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #9 posted by Had Enough on September 26, 2006 at 15:26:46 PT
Help Stop Costly and Unnecessary Internet Regulati
Dear xxxxxxxxx, I urge you today to tell your U.S. Senators to reject any attempts to add a “net neutrality” provision to telecommunications reform legislation. In the name of so-called “net neutrality,” a number of special-interest groups, like MoveOn.org, and Internet content providers, such as Google, Yahoo, and Amazon.com, are pushing for federal regulations of the Internet that will ultimately hit you and all Internet users right in the pocketbook! Let me explain. This cadre of high-tech companies that provide search engines, websites, and other “content” for the Internet want Congress to mandate that your Internet service provider - the company that you pay for broadband or dial-up access to the Internet - must carry every single piece of content and every service they have to offer, no matter the cost. If Congress bows to their demands and imposes some of the first-ever regulations on the freewheeling Internet, your service provider will have no option but to pass the higher cost for such universal service on to you. In short, Google and the other high-tech Internet giants would have the government guarantee them below-cost access to premium high-speed network services - with you, the end-user, footing the bill! The Internet has thrived as a tool enhancing communications and commerce precisely because the government has, for the most part, taken a hands-off approach with regard to regulation and taxation. Net neutrality regulations would discourage crucial investment in broadband networks and stifle the innovation that is at the heart of the Internet’s success. Tell your U.S. Senators that you won’t pay more for your Internet service because of new and unnecessary regulations that benefit a few big companies! Tell them to say NO to net neutrality!Sincerely,Thomas A. Schatz
Presidenthttps://secure2.convio.net/cagw/site/Advocacy?JServSessionIdr006=xjsida0k01.app25a&cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=365Citizens Against Government Wastehttp://councilfor.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=CCAGW_homepage
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #8 posted by Sukoi on September 26, 2006 at 15:07:43 PT
Take a look at this..
Marijuana link to lethal behaviorhttp://tinyurl.com/grbqvWOW, I don't even know where to begin!!!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #7 posted by whig on September 26, 2006 at 11:02:43 PT
Propaganda: Pete's Couch
I think I posted this in the other thread but it's more relevant here:http://cannablog.wordpress.com/2006/09/26/propaganda-petes-couch/
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #6 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on September 26, 2006 at 09:57:43 PT
Toronto Prof wins right to smoke in office
Oh Canada!
http://wapurl.co.uk/?RZMTLR8
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #5 posted by lombar on September 26, 2006 at 09:33:49 PT
Sharp as a tack
I caught the end of the interview. Mason can sure speak well. Go Mason, Go SAFER!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #4 posted by FoM on September 26, 2006 at 08:50:03 PT
Potpal
Thank you. I hope someone gets to hear it. I tried but it won't play for me.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #3 posted by potpal on September 26, 2006 at 08:26:05 PT
Tvert on radio coming up...
http://khow.com/pages/shows-martino.html
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #2 posted by potpal on September 26, 2006 at 08:24:24 PT
SAFER
To ice skate stoned than drunk.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #1 posted by mayan on September 26, 2006 at 06:53:20 PT
Debate Today!
Sorry if this has been posted...Colorado Attorney General to debate marijuana activist over Amendment 44:
http://tinyurl.com/pty9fThe prohibitionists must be getting terribly desperate to want to engage in a debate. Tvert will eat the Colorado AG alive! Yippee!THE WAY OUT IS THE WAY IN...Google Caught In Terror Storm Censorship:
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/september2006/250906googlecensorship.htmGreat New WTC Science Film: 9/11 Mysteries:
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060924123729902A CLOSE LOOK: The 9/11 Pentagon TARGET WALL:
http://home.att.net/~carlson.jon/Pentagondemolition1.htmFalse Flag News - Saving the world one drill at a time:
http://falseflagnews.com/9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB - OUR NATION IS IN PERIL:
http://www.911sharethetruth.com/
[ Post Comment ]
Post Comment