cannabisnews.com: Summer of Love Had Destructive Consequences Summer of Love Had Destructive Consequences Posted by CN Staff on July 01, 2007 at 05:56:23 PT By Bill O'Reilly Source: Gwinnett Daily Post USA -- Forty years ago, the United States was a much more conservative place than it is today. Even though the civil rights movement had won some tough victories down south, and Vietnam dissension was heating up, most Americans were still tied to the traditional values of their parents.For example, in my heavily ethnic neighborhood of Levittown, N.Y., if an unmarried girl got pregnant, it was a huge scandal. Rarely was abortion even discussed because most of us were Catholic. The young girl usually got married to the father quickly and quietly. This happened to my cousin and two of my friends. An unwanted pregnancy was a major deal. Drugs, also, were not acceptable. Addicts were shunned like lepers, and even marijuana was considered way out of bounds. In 1967, while some of my high school friends were drinking beer whenever they could, nobody in my crowd was even thinking about dope.But out in San Francisco, the ‘‘Summer of Love’’ was unfolding. Young people streamed into that city and congregated in the parks, where they were introduced to pot and hallucinogenic drugs by local dealers. According to a recent series of reports by the San Francisco Chronicle, thousands of young Americans spent the summer stoned and having sex with a variety of their compatriots. This led to an epidemic of overdose situations and social disease problems.The press, however, did not concentrate on those negatives. Instead, the media immediately branded the Summer of Love crew as ‘‘hippies’’ and proclaimed the era of ‘‘flower power,’’ thereby creating a glamorous subculture. The glorification and marketing of that subculture 40 years ago swept the nation and remains with us today.Almost immediately, the music industry hopped on the hippie bandwagon, and rebellious, drug-addled pop stars soared up the charts. The names are now icons: Joplin, Hendrix, Morrison, Slick, Garcia and so on. No question, the summer of love changed America’s attitudes towards drugs, sex and rock ’n’ roll.The unintended consequences of that summer are staggering. Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix and Jim Morrison all died at age 27 from drug and/or alcohol activity. Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead lasted longer, but his heroin intake ultimately did him in. All told, the damage the drug scourge has done to America is incalculable.But you’d never know that by the media, which generally continues to glorify our permissive culture. There’s little mention that 70 percent of black babies are now born out-of-wedlock, while the overall birth rate outside of marriage has gone from 8 percent 40 years ago to 37 percent today. Single mom homes, of course, are the major driver of poverty in America.So, call me a fogy, but I’m not real nostalgic about the Summer of Love. I like the music it engendered, but you can have the acid trips and the poor hygiene. Certainly, love is a good thing in any season. But it must be accompanied by responsibility to truly flower.Veteran TV news anchor and author Bill O’Reilly is a host on Fox News. His “Radio Factor” can be heard weekdays from 1 to 3 p.m. on NewsTalk 1300 WIMO-AM. Source: Gwinnett Daily Post, The (GA)Author: Bill O'ReillyPublished: July 1, 2007Copyright: 2007 Post-Citizen Media Inc.Contact: letters gwinnettdailypost.comWebsite: http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/Related Articles:Through Rose-Colored Granny Glasses http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread23008.shtmlWelcome Back, Starshine http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22990.shtmlHippies Were Right All Along -- We Knew Thathttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22941.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #82 posted by museman on July 03, 2007 at 11:41:12 PT rchandar I think you have "Small Minded" confused with "small town."And though some of those politicans may claim 'humble roots' they are just as citified -in the most negative sense- as anyone. The values they represent may give lip-service to 'community values' but their actions prove differently. People who live in rural areas - not including the recent exodus from suburbia to the sections of the woods that got clear cut for their crappily made houses- are mostly in the lower economic strata of America, and their interests are not being repreented in any way shape or form. It is the large corporate interests that have bought the land from the working poor - though their 'address' on paper might be 'the country' their actual life is lived in the fast lanes of the cities around America and the globe.By the way there are cities in other places besides the east and west coast, and I submit that the population centers in 'middle america' or 'the cities' have more to do with influencing policy than the few farmers and smal communities that may be left. [ Post Comment ] Comment #81 posted by FoM on July 03, 2007 at 06:54:56 PT Kennedys and Marijuana Excerpt: “Jackie didn't like it when John [Jr.] drank or did drugs, but she didn't seem to care if Caroline got smashed on beer or stoned on grass. It was only when Caroline gained a pound or two that Jackie reacted,” Plimpton told the author. The book has also revealed that Caroline once ‘took the blame’, when the police found her cousin David Kennedy growing marijuana in their home’s backyard. "Although David Kennedy had harvested the plants. Caroline, attempting to protect her cousin, took the blame,” the author wrote. When Caroline received a letter from her grand mom, Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy, who wrote to her reprimanding her for hookah addiction, Jackie O did not react much. http://news.sawf.org/Gossip/39491.aspx [ Post Comment ] Comment #80 posted by rchandar on July 03, 2007 at 04:39:46 PT: museman Oh, I'm not saying life in small towns is bad per se. I've lived in many "oasis" towns where the big draws were the university and the mountains. I'm just saying that many of the politicans come from these places or smaller and don't really have a grasp of what city life and its problems are like, that they can't relate, but still act like they understand. However, few are the number of small towns in which the impact of minorities will be very much. They may be there, yes, but without any major impact on the culture. Cities are filled with problems, pollution, crime. Yet the vast majority of us live here.I guess it's me that gets so p#$sed off about MJ in Florida, for example. Miami's a city of 5 million, and we've got something like half a million potsmokers. But try and change Florida drug policy, and it's impossible because of the Tallahassee politician network. South Florida deserves a liberal social policy on drugs, gambling, prostitution. But the small-town congressmen in Tallahassee'll never let that happen. [ Post Comment ] Comment #79 posted by whig on July 02, 2007 at 23:02:56 PT FoM Some question whether it's even legal for Bush to commute like this, when there was not a proper application for a commutation of sentence and the sentence was upheld, it's like a line-item pardon. [ Post Comment ] Comment #78 posted by Wayne on July 02, 2007 at 20:26:52 PT time for more commutations I wonder if Bush would now be willing to commute the prison sentences for those two border guards, since he seems to be in such a forgiving mood now? [ Post Comment ] Comment #77 posted by FoM on July 02, 2007 at 18:52:12 PT whig Thanks for explaining. One thing I've learned from watching this administration evolve is they are for themselves and don't care about us at all. We and I mean all people in the USA seem to be more of a nuisance to them. [ Post Comment ] Comment #76 posted by whig on July 02, 2007 at 18:10:09 PT FoM Impeachment just got a lot easier, because George Bush just obstructed justice. He has the constitutional right to commute but he did so as an abuse of his authority. [ Post Comment ] Comment #75 posted by FoM on July 02, 2007 at 17:40:35 PT whig When I first saw this on MSNBC I thought it doesn't surprise me. How can he change anything that he wants? As you know I do not know anything about law but I understand that the Federal Judges were slapped in the face and I wondered if they can do anything? The man really does scare me. [ Post Comment ] Comment #74 posted by whig on July 02, 2007 at 15:57:37 PT FoM Ooookay. Time for impeachment phase 2. [ Post Comment ] Comment #73 posted by FoM on July 02, 2007 at 14:53:47 PT Off Topic: Bush and Libby Bush commuted Libby's prison sentence. It doesn't surprise me. [ Post Comment ] Comment #72 posted by FoM on July 02, 2007 at 13:01:49 PT whig No being harmed is the most important thing. If someone needed money and I had it I would share it but taking it is wrong. [ Post Comment ] Comment #71 posted by whig on July 02, 2007 at 12:53:35 PT FoM I wasn't injured at all so that's the important thing. [ Post Comment ] Comment #70 posted by FoM on July 02, 2007 at 12:43:21 PT whig I'm sorry to read that you had you wallet stolen. When someone takes something that is ours it almost feels like we've been violated and it hurts. Yes we need to fix the poverty. Poverty breeds violence. [ Post Comment ] Comment #69 posted by whig on July 02, 2007 at 12:42:34 PT OT Who cares if Norm Coleman Smoked Pot? http://minnesotamonitor.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2013Who Cares if Norm Coleman Smoked Pot? Norm Kent Does by: Jeff Fecke Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 11:49:08 AMWhen Norm Coleman was in college, he smoked pot. If his former college roommate is to believed, he smoked a lot of it.Angered by a letter from Coleman that expressed support for continued prohibition on marijuana, Norm Kent sent a letter back to Coleman and copied it to the website CelebStoner.com. "Years ago, in a lifetime far away, you did not oppose the legalization of marijuana. Years ago, in our dorm rooms at Hofstra University, you, me, Billy, your future brother-in-law, Ivan, Jonathan, Peter, Janet, Nancy and a wealth of other students smoked dope," Kent said. Kent detailed a number of alleged times Coleman smoked marijuana, including at a number of protests. And he blasted Coleman for being hypocritical for changing his tune now."How about admitting that if the Rockefeller drug laws were applied to Norman Bruce Coleman on Long Island in 1968, or to me, or to our friends, and fellow students, you, I and others we knew and loved might just be getting out of jail now?" asked Kent. "How about recognizing that for too long too many have been wrongly arrested, unjustly prosecuted and illegally incarcerated for unconscionable periods of time?"Kent's missive to his former friend is interesting for its lack of uniqueness. Many of our leaders dabbled in pot as college students, and many more had friends who did. And yet these people survived to live productive lives, instead of getting hooked on drugs. [ Post Comment ] Comment #68 posted by whig on July 02, 2007 at 12:40:06 PT FoM There is near zero violence in some parts of the city. If you go into some neighborhoods at night, you might get mugged though. I had my wallet stolen in Oakland one night because I had to get a bus home from the Greyhound station and somebody came up and asked me for money and then grabbed my wallet. There was a homeless man sleeping nearby, and then someone else was asking me for money and I said my wallet had been stolen so I walked as quickly as I could out of Oakland while calling my wife to come pick me up.Poverty causes crime, and we need to fix that too. [ Post Comment ] Comment #67 posted by FoM on July 02, 2007 at 12:11:54 PT Cities and Country Cities have a lot more violence maybe because of people living so close to each other and that needs to be fixed and then people who are comfortable in the country won't be afraid to go to the cities. I need to have room or I feel trapped. I bet there are many people who feel the same way as I do. Cities scare me. I have seen some bad parts of New York and Miami when I went along with my husband in the semi years ago. When I see lots of police and guards and doors that have bars on them it concerns me. We shouldn't have to lock our doors if we don't want to I think. [ Post Comment ] Comment #66 posted by whig on July 02, 2007 at 12:10:00 PT FoM I think you're right and if you look at human history there have always been city people and country people as long as civilization existed. [ Post Comment ] Comment #65 posted by FoM on July 02, 2007 at 12:05:27 PT Dankhank I can only imagine how nice it is. Colorado is to me one of the most beautiful states we have. [ Post Comment ] Comment #64 posted by Dankhank on July 02, 2007 at 12:00:40 PT Denver ... is a green city, many parks and such.a nice place, just got back from second visit in a month or so ... [ Post Comment ] Comment #63 posted by FoM on July 02, 2007 at 11:54:13 PT whig To make a functioning USA we need both those who love to work with the land and animals and those who use their minds to help us all. [ Post Comment ] Comment #62 posted by whig on July 02, 2007 at 11:49:27 PT FoM I know, I'm still trying to say that cities are not bad by nature, Berkeley is a city. San Francisco is a bigger city and it's not bad either though it has a lot of corporations too, the people are good. The only thing that is bad is we can have earthquakes and maybe some people don't want to chance that.I think when cannabis is legal there will be a lot of good cities. There is no reason to tear down the cities, they are just places where people like to be in closer proximity to one another instead of spread out. Some of us are not farmers, we aren't physically capable of being farmers, but we are good at other things which we can do in cities. [ Post Comment ] Comment #61 posted by FoM on July 02, 2007 at 11:46:22 PT whig You know how I feel about Berkeley. I have never been there but my spirit connects with it's spirit. It never went away. Spirits stay I believe. I remember telling you that when you were here. [ Post Comment ] Comment #60 posted by whig on July 02, 2007 at 11:43:35 PT FoM Berkeley is a city of flowers. [ Post Comment ] Comment #59 posted by whig on July 02, 2007 at 11:42:50 PT All cities are not equal Don't judge Berkeley by your perceptions of Los Angeles. Both are California cities, no doubt, but I wouldn't judge the country by having once spent time on a smelly chicken farm. [ Post Comment ] Comment #58 posted by FoM on July 02, 2007 at 11:40:43 PT museman I really liked your comment. The earth is so loved by me. In the past I liked to look at google earth and zoom in on big cities. All I see is gray and no green. We need the green to get our oxygen. We need grass and trees to help prevent flooding. The man finally came and cut our fields of hay on Saturday night and Sunday. They will bale it this week. They will be able to feed their few numbers of cows this winter with no worry and then be able to feed their growing family with the meat. I love the earth and what it does for us. I freak out in a city. I get really paranoid. I worry about getting stuck there in an emergency. I can handle an emergency in the country though. [ Post Comment ] Comment #57 posted by whig on July 02, 2007 at 11:39:39 PT museman It's the corporations that are hurting both city and country. [ Post Comment ] Comment #56 posted by museman on July 02, 2007 at 11:10:47 PT rchandar "Being from a large city, I guess that a lot of us can't relate to the social taboos of small-town, "middle America," the land where basically all the policy decisions are made today. It's an outrageous insult to all of us because we happen to be the majority."I find it kind of funny and ironic, that most of us from 'small town America' are under the impression that it is the city dwellers that decide 'policy decisions' because of the 'population majority.'As a rural dweller by choice, - I started in the city, and finally escaped in my early adulthood -notice my terminology "I escaped" I have the benefit of both experiences.For years I believed that everyone was trapped in the city, and if given the choice would pack their belongings and head for the country in a hot minute. That was because, to me, the cities are Babylon. I have learned however (though I still believe they're Babylon) that some people actually enjoy city life.Some of what you say, and the way you say it tells me that you are misinformed about 'the country.'"Middle America" as you call it, I believe you used an example of a man in Missouri who bought a parcel of land to make a political statement (albeit lame and idiotic) is not what it used to be. I submit to you that if it weren't for the corporate takeover of middle america farms, that land would probably be growing food right now. The demand of the city dweller for a vast supply of food, gave the corporate carpetbaggers the impetus they needed to successfully destroy the family farm. In the times ahead, America is going to regret that severely. We here in rural America who are watching valuable growing land being plowed under and paved over, have a different picture of 'progress.'The power in middle America, rchandar, is not the people who live there, it is the same wealth-based power elite who also have houses in the city, who came from the city, and when they are done raping the land, they go back to the city.The 'social taboos' of small towns are the same 'social taboos' of the 'big cities', there's just more social room to get away with 'breaking' those taboos in the city than there is in a small community that pretty much knows everyone in it.A rural community is no more or less prejudiced, bigoted, or possessed of some kind of comunity solidarity than a neighborhood in Queens, or Chicago, or Phoenix Arizona.Policy is made by the power elite, ultra rich, who can afford to live wherever they want to. City or country, it makes no difference. The fact that it is in the country, and the non-city areas where all the resource (besides money) is located, may make it seem like 'country folk' have some kind of political edge, because the struggle over those resources is very real, and to those of us who have been watching our government sanction and allow the trashing of treasure such as what is left of our old growth forrests, and in general taking paradise and putting up a parking lot -all for the sake of a few dollars more- can easily get attitudes. Our active protests, and environmental actions might appear to be having some effect (I hope so) in political circles, but the money bags are all creating propaganda about the people who are trying to save our resources - the same lame propaganda as prohibitionists -THEY ARE THE SAME PEOPLE-.As I drove past L.A., a couple of years ago, a good 20 miles from the city center I could barely make out the tops of the scrapers rising above the thick smog. I remember saying to myself, "How can people live in that?" Obviously not everyone who lives there feels trapped like I did, though I know that many do -particularly the less economicly fortunate-, and perhaps, at least for now the cities are an inescapable fact of modern life, however to state that the population centers should decide policy based on their 'majority' is just not considering the whle picture. Many 'city dwellers' unfortunately just do not understand what it means to 'Touch the Earth' and I really sensed that in your statement.It is not about 'betterness' of either the rural or the metropolitan culture, and your sense of 'insult' is misplaced. It is not 'the people' who make policy decisions, anywhere in the world, it is the Bush's and the Rockefellers, and others of their ilk. Just because Bush has a ranch in Texas sure as hell don't make him a cowboy. A bigoted redneck maybe, but not someone who can claim any real relationship to the land. [ Post Comment ] Comment #55 posted by Sam Adams on July 02, 2007 at 09:40:24 PT One more note O'Reilly is totally wrong about the time before the 40's as well. The whole "golden days" of conservatism were really the 40s and 50s, the truth is that before then America was very liberal & crazy.I've been reading in the sports section about how MOST pro baseball players used cocaine on a regular basis until it was banned. All the big names like Babe Ruth, Sandy Koufax, etc. It was like caffiene back then, you didn't even hide it. Sigmund Freud actually injection cocaine into his arm every morning for many of his most productive years.I know women in the 20's were very empowered, much more European, there were allowed to be sexy, they were rebelling against the Victorian age. Before WWII, prostitution, gambling, drinking in the streets, all were right out in the open & available to all. The Washington Mall actually had a prostitution district on it until the mid 1900's. America wiped out its Red Light Districts starting in WWII era and running through the 80's. Europe still has them. It's all part of the Puritan ethic - don't help people or solve problems, just drive them underground. That is our MO.Really, much of the bad stuff started around WWII. War empowers the conservatives. Why do you think they keep bringing it back? [ Post Comment ] Comment #54 posted by Hope on July 02, 2007 at 08:16:43 PT Rchandar Comment 27 A "Pilgrim suit"?That's good. [ Post Comment ] Comment #53 posted by Hope on July 02, 2007 at 08:14:09 PT Whig, Comment 39 "Diseases spread by women."Now aint't that cool?Not. [ Post Comment ] Comment #52 posted by whig on July 01, 2007 at 22:58:15 PT Bryan WhyNow? says DEA not Law Enforcement Okay, I'm copying this from a thread elsewhere, WhyNow? is a blog that I have been reading for awhile and the person who runs it is named Bryan. It turns out he is in law enforcement, and I think he is also in Miami, Florida. This is part of our conversation, in which I copied him on the article quoting Mark R. Trouville, chief of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration’s Miami office. “This ain’t your grandfather’s or your father’s marijuana,” Trouville said. “This will hurt you. This will addict you. This will kill you.” Here is Bryan's response, which you can also read and respond to at his blog: http://tinyurl.com/yuxzaf Whig, DEA is NOT, repeat: NOT, law enforcement. Those miserable SOBs should be put on a decaying submarine and left in the Marianna Trench. They get people killed for no reason. They protect murders to pursue their delusions. They are scum of the lowest sort. They are worse than the people they supposedly pursue, and they have been known to allow poisoned drugs on the street to be used for tracing.You may notice that DEA allies itself with elected law enforcement officials, i.e. county sheriffs, and sucks them in with money making schemes, like asset seizures. They are a source of corruption in law enforcement.If they are talking they are lying, and I would appreciate it if you would never, ever refer to them as law enforcement.As for grow houses - you contact the utility company and ask to be tipped off about major increases in electrical use. Then you check the houses with a thermal scanner. If the scan shows unusually high temperatures, you establish surveillance until you can get probable cause for a warrant. Slow, easy, and legal yields a good case.Of course, DEA would request a tactical nuclear strike, and find out they had the address wrong from their worthless lying informants.There is no reliable scientific research that supports the claims made by this idiot regarding a doubling of THC, even if it occurred, and there is plenty of research being carried on outside of the US.Marijuana has been in the top three of Florida’s cash crops for the last three decades, according to the Florida Agriculture Department [and yes, the Florida Ag Department tracks it], so that’s not very surprising. We also produce an awful lot of moonshine, but no one tracks that any more. Original comment permalink at WhyNow? [ Post Comment ] Comment #51 posted by gloovins on July 01, 2007 at 22:41:18 PT another drunk saves the day in the UK... OVER 36 HOURS... THE TIMETABLE OF TERROR1.25AM Green Mercedes packed with 13 gallons of petrol, gas cylinders and nails left outside Tiger Tiger nightclub in central London's Haymarket.Paramedics treating a drunken reveller spot smoke in the car and call police who defuse the bomb with minutes to spare.2.30AM Blue Mercedes found illegally parked on nearby Cockspur Street and is ticketed.3.30AM Second Mercedes is towed to a car pound in Park Lane where employees notice a gas-like smell. See everyone, alcohol can save lives!That is if you've drank yourself to death nearly & you are out on the street in a country with socialized medicine...Opps, I left that out. Sorry. :) Rest of article re: UK bomb plot [ Post Comment ] Comment #50 posted by Wayne on July 01, 2007 at 18:18:21 PT Re: rchandar #48 You'll surely appreciate this one, being a fellow Floridian and all. Here is an article that was in the Palm Beach Post this morning that made the front page. A two-page spread about "Drug Free Zones". It's actually a very excellent article that points out the blatant racial disparity in the drug-free-zone enforcement where I live.Unfortunately, it seems to have fallen on deaf and ignorant ears. While the trend in other areas of the country is for cities and council members to start questioning these laws, Florida keeps going full steam ahead. And to go along with this article, about 10 pages of racially charged comments. God I love living in the South. Drug-free zones target blacks unfairly, critics say [ Post Comment ] Comment #49 posted by ekim on July 01, 2007 at 17:34:04 PT Max do you have any info on upcoming trial We are looking for anyone seen by Dr. Fry and Dale Schafer in 2001 or earlier who viewed the video that was being shown in the office regarding medical marijuana. http://www.docfry.com [ Post Comment ] Comment #48 posted by rchandar on July 01, 2007 at 16:47:19 PT: museman PS--I'm not black, but I admire their determination to be heard. I wish I could picture it more clearly: their message to whites seems to be, a lot of times: just where do these people get off deciding these things? Who the HELL are they, anyway? What the HELL do they know about anything that I go through? What I admire most is that they're confident in stating their complete incomprehension; it's a force that has often been the "crutch" that disillusioned urban citizens have needed. [ Post Comment ] Comment #47 posted by rchandar on July 01, 2007 at 16:43:11 PT: museman I guess it was "a major deal". No, I'll venture that many societies haven't come as far; ostracism is common for unwed mothers in India. Still, I'd say it would've taken considerable courage to survive the "Ozzie and Harriet" years in such a circumstance.Being from a large city, I guess that a lot of us can't relate to the social taboos of small-town, "middle America," the land where basically all the policy decisions are made today. It's an outrageous insult to all of us because we happen to be the majority. Not much of any importance or modern circumstance happens in Gwinnett, Georgia. There are a lot of these stupid, worthless backwater places in America where policy is made for the "ignorant" masses in the larger cities. One example is Cape Girardeau, Missouri, where some noble citizen bought a plot of land and erected 4400 crosses to mark the deaths of unborn children through abortions in Missouri. Another is Forsyth, Georgia, where until recently nonwhite citizens were forbidden to live. Lynchburg, TN: The Jack Daniels factory is there; curiously, it's a "dry" county. If we're ever going to have a legitimate government in America, it will have to come from the cities. Even if we elect another President from the South (God forbid), he/she should be from a city, should be able to touch base with all kinds of people--not as a newcomer, and not as an obvious racist. At the upper levels of political culture, there's a frightening lack of this ability to manifest a true point of reference with what's really a diverse body of people. [ Post Comment ] Comment #46 posted by The GCW on July 01, 2007 at 16:14:50 PT About the Ledger article from MikeC, COPS WILL KILL YOU!Cannabis will not. [ Post Comment ] Comment #45 posted by museman on July 01, 2007 at 15:51:57 PT rchandar My mom was an 'unwed mother' for the first five years of my life. In the 'glorious '50's.' Fortunately for me the tenets of the Dark Ages had begun to crack by the time anybody really noticed. [ Post Comment ] Comment #44 posted by whig on July 01, 2007 at 14:41:26 PT Sam Adams #9 I think you're right. [ Post Comment ] Comment #43 posted by whig on July 01, 2007 at 14:33:14 PT rchandar #32 Back in the "golden age" of the 1950s, television was more sanitized.Of course, if you weren't one of the golden people, it was a dark age.Bill O'Reilly pretends he speaks for the golden people, but he is speaking only for trash. [ Post Comment ] Comment #42 posted by whig on July 01, 2007 at 14:19:25 PT Personally I think property in ideas is absurd, as it serves no useful social purpose. People who have good ideas should share them and benefit everyone. I think that there should be a way that people who have good ideas are encouraged to keep sharing them. I don't think that encouraging people to keep information proprietary and secret helps anyone. [ Post Comment ] Comment #41 posted by whig on July 01, 2007 at 14:14:43 PT Software freedom The GPL version 3 is a new constitution. To the extent that anyone recognizes copyright in software, or property in ideas, the General Public License should bind you if you accept software under its provisions. [ Post Comment ] Comment #40 posted by whig on July 01, 2007 at 14:08:49 PT goneposthole #31 Great article.You should read the transcript of Eban Moglen's recent talk.http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070630094005112 [ Post Comment ] Comment #39 posted by whig on July 01, 2007 at 13:58:26 PT VD is an obsolete term VD means "Venereal disease" which refers to Venus, or diseases spread by women.STD is the proper neutral term. [ Post Comment ] Comment #38 posted by whig on July 01, 2007 at 13:53:51 PT Antibiotics I think the real irresponsible use is feeding them to animals that will be slaughtered for food. It increases short term profits to the corporate farmer at the expense of causing resistance to spread through our own diet. [ Post Comment ] Comment #37 posted by FoM on July 01, 2007 at 13:44:14 PT MikeC From the article: "This ain't your grandfather's or your father's marijuana," Trouville said. "This will hurt you. This will addict you. This will kill you."Oh My! [ Post Comment ] Comment #36 posted by FoM on July 01, 2007 at 13:38:18 PT Dankhank You do care. You just dont car if the sppelins right! LOL! [ Post Comment ] Comment #35 posted by FoM on July 01, 2007 at 13:37:02 PT MikeC That's perfect. [ Post Comment ] Comment #34 posted by MikeC on July 01, 2007 at 13:35:17 PT FoM Not sure if I am posting/linking this incorrectly or not so my apologies if so. I found this "editorial" with comments from a DEA agent that I found downright laughable. Especially the comment about the "%200" more powerful marijuana and claiming that marijuana will kill you. Wow...Here is the link to the reefer madness:http://www.theledger.com/article/20070622/NEWS/706220375/1004 [ Post Comment ] Comment #33 posted by FoM on July 01, 2007 at 13:33:31 PT goneposthole What a great article. Thanks! [ Post Comment ] Comment #32 posted by rchandar on July 01, 2007 at 13:25:22 PT: Museman "Back then, an unwanted pregnancy was a major deal."I just wish Mr. O'Reilly could see places like where I live, where there are dozens of unwed mothers who take up the responsibility of raising their "unwanted" kids. Just once. A "major deal"? Meaning today, mothers don't love their children. Lessee. "Major deal"--I hate these lame, all-too-easily constructed little platitudes that seem to summarize something with voice, with conflict, with promise and peril, so easily. A lot of these Republican politicians talk like this--they use some trite phrase or language to summarize and condense out of seriousness real moral and social issues that cause suffering and are part of the development and modeling of young citizens. People are dumb enough to think that they're "telling it like it is," that they're "talking straight", whatever that really means. In reality, they're completely trivializing our experiences.I don't think O'Reilly ever had to confront the real personal and social demands of an unwanted pregnancy, never had to "take responsibility" for something that inevitably does happen when people have sex. I also don't think that foregrounding moral prohibition as being in the past does anyone that good--young people inevitably conclude that parent generations are "out of touch," that they never experienced it, that they are isolated and hopeless prudes who have no concept of what it feels like. A lot of youths have to act and talk and feel like it's their generation that "invented" sex, and O'Reilly better shut up because he knows there's no truth to the implications of his statements. People, EVERY generation in the HISTORY of CIVILIZATION had its renegades, its dissenters. To shadow them like this does no one any justice or true service. Anyone remember Nathaniel Hawthorne's "The Scarlet Letter"? Long, long ago, in very Puritan and Gilead-like times, transgression posed a complex and challenging set of problems which people struggled with mightily. O'Reilly makes it sound like everything in "those days" was peaches n' cream: decisions were made easily, prosperity was won without struggling, America was pure and unfettered. No historian of any political stripe can honestly support O'Reilly's visibly thin moral rhetoric. It's only the brain-dead servants of society who will passively view these statements and acquire some directionless moral courage from something that, deep down inside, they always know was far from true.--rchandar [ Post Comment ] Comment #31 posted by goneposthole on July 01, 2007 at 12:47:40 PT 'We Owe It All To The Hippies' http://members.aye.net/~hippie/hippie/special_.htm [ Post Comment ] Comment #30 posted by museman on July 01, 2007 at 12:42:41 PT pure right-wing lies I really don't know where to start. Some of the obvious obfuscations have already been mentioned in this thread.The essential claim that 'the summer of love' and the various movements, events, and results that followed was the cause of 'drug abuse,' 'sexual imorality,' and 'unwed mothers.' First of all, the term 'drug abuse' did not really come into play until the US government got involved in becoming our unwanted Big Brother, and it was directly related to the protest against the VietNam war, and nearly completely focussed on cannabis. The 'drug addled' rock stars were victims of a polgrom by the CIA, the FBI, and other unknown agencies created to infiltrate and instigate illegal actions, for the purpose of discrediting the role models of a generation. I believe that some of the prominant investors in the music business lent a hand in that crime. Heroin, cocaine, and speed, are all contributions of our illustrious (not) government meddling in places they have no business being. The truth revealed during Reagan-Bush concerning the unconscionable activities of the CIA in arranging a sure election for Reagan, ought to be enough in itself to convince logical truth seeking people as to what was /is really going on.Out of the 'sexual revolution' came liberation. Did everyone take their new found freedom responsibly? No. But centuries of moral double standards were spotlighted, and the truth about one natural aspect of life here on Earth was brought out of the closet of fear and ignorance, into the light of unabashed discussion. The influx of STD's has more to do with the carefully managed ignorance of the various false religions, and the social disempowerment due to poverty, than the 'summer of love.' The rash of broken families is a direct result of the white dominant society exclusion of minority and sub-culture from access to resource, and has absolutely nothing to do with 'hippies' or the 'revolution.'I think that Mr. Oreilly has a secret regret that when he had the opportunity to participate in the many wondrous events and happenings of our youth, often referred to as 'the 60's,' he was too busy trying to 'make his niche' in high society, and missed out.Good. He didn't deserve to get what we got, if this is his attitude now. [ Post Comment ] Comment #29 posted by rchandar on July 01, 2007 at 12:38:43 PT: FoM, others interested... FoM, the 50s were nothing like what O'Reilly remembers--and I wasn't even there! I guess stupid people want to believe what they want to believe. Fundamentalism is fundamentalism, whether your Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, anything. There's no basis for this guy's argument, and he's sitting in a chair at CNN preaching to ignorant people willing to believe anything.I'm going to go out and get "The Handmaid's Tale" on DVD. I won't come to this site to listen to self-righteous Drug Warriors like O'Reilly without a true point of moral reference again. [ Post Comment ] Comment #28 posted by Dankhank on July 01, 2007 at 12:32:18 PT STDs STD is the catch-all term to collect all of the Sexually Transmitted Diseases.Get it?STDso VD, Gonnerea, HIV, Clomiddia, whatever are all STDs.I failed to correct my spelling mistakes because I don't care.And yes .........O'Reilly is an evil old man .... [ Post Comment ] Comment #27 posted by rchandar on July 01, 2007 at 12:25:35 PT: PS, to O'Reilly's BS Screw 'im, man. Jimi Hendrix was a GENIUS who revolutionized the guitar. Jerry Garcia was a GREAT musician who brought people together. To tell us this outrageously stupid BS is insulting. Screw 'im. Okay, let's return to the pristine times when music was the mark of prostitution and sin. Notice how America had no diverse or sophisticated music culture until jazz and folk music--meaning, Bill Monroe and Charlie Parker--created complex, evocative music styles. We do not want to return to the days of the Puritans, O'Reilly. We like our rock music, we like our jazz, we like freedom. I'm not going to go out and buy a Pilgrim suit, and I'm not interested in reading any of your Bible catechisms. Diversity and freedom are there because people wanted it, not because they were stupid people that don't know what they're doing.Seriously, O'Reilly. We'll take our chances on this "new world." --rchandar [ Post Comment ] Comment #26 posted by rchandar on July 01, 2007 at 12:19:04 PT: My God This is about the stupidest, most thoroughly worthless synopsis of the 60s that I've heard in a long time. O'Reilly is clearly out of touch not just with the real dynamics of society, but history as well. So many things are omitted from this portrait of the LSD culture and its "craziness" that it almost makes me shudder. What business does this guy have to preach this BS? The War on Drugs is really a war on minorities, mostly black men; 1 out of 3 black men serve time by the time they're 21, and 1 in 20 are murdered in their lifetime. The War on Drugs is a required success?And what about the deracialized world that the hippies were responsible for helping create? Seems to me that ol' O'Reilly savors the finer essences of Jim Crow, lynchings, the KKK, white-on-black violence. Listen, folks. We make a huge mistake when we romanticize the past and assume that its moral "purity" was not achieved at a high price. Poverty drove blacks into cycles of depression, violence, hard drug use, prostitution, as early as the 1910s in the major cities. That I was born in 1970 makes no difference; the REALITY is that the "pure" and "virtuous" moral universe of pre-acid rock generations was hardly that if you were poor or discriminated against. O'Reilly, PLEASE. REMEMBER what it was like then, before you criticize the moral decline of today. Like it or not, stupid, you live in TODAY'S world and resurrecting the past like it was the second coming of Christ bears many miserable consequences for dozens of millions of AMERICANS. The trouble with you, O'Reilly, is that you've earned a gift-audience of Reaganites who accept the War on Drugs without question, who live under a halo of pure moral pretension. Honestly, O'Reilly, I do not--no, MOST of us do not, pro-legalization or not--wish to return to a time when drug users were "shunned like lepers." I think any kind of treatment program even would be shocked at your unfiltered approval for such a society of repression and dehumanization. We are human beings. We deserve a chance at success and happiness even if people like you do not see any reason for it. See, Mr. O'Reilly, there is no modern moral covenant that requires or encourages the excommunication or humiliation of our citizens. The simple fact that many drug-free people commit senseless crimes, and many "drug addicts" commit none, destroys the hopelessness of your evil argument. You cannot turn back the clock. Sorry, Mr. and Mrs. America, accept it. There will NEVER be a time in our future when all drugs will be wiped out; even the most draconian/totalitarian societies in the world have found this out. You are making a huge mistake in assuming that we are as stupid and worthless as you think we are.This is 2007, Mr. O'Reilly. You need to wake up and remember that your "pure" moral universe was won at the cost of the misery of millions within your borders, that people suffered and were not heard. Make no mistake about it, we have no plans to return to that world, ever. If you wish to do something about the drug problem, then open a clinic and do your best to treat people with RESPECT. Otherwise, stop poisoning the minds of innocent, hardworking people who obviously are more realistic and honest than you are.--rchandar [ Post Comment ] Comment #25 posted by goneposthole on July 01, 2007 at 12:17:33 PT Oh really? Bill the sexual harasser (remember the woman co-worker who he was harassing for sexual favors?) wants it both ways. He wants to be a moral authority as long as it is someone else who has fallen from grace.What a complete hypocrite.He ain't no old fogy, he's a dirty old man.http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1013043mackris1.html [ Post Comment ] Comment #24 posted by FoM on July 01, 2007 at 11:29:19 PT Hope I agree that antibiotics are good but they have been so overused that now we have more powerful viruses to deal with. One thing I do know is Bill O'Reilly hasn't left the mindset of the 50s. He didn't get the 60s and he is so miserable and angry. It could have helped him if he had been apart of the 60s instead of hating it. [ Post Comment ] Comment #23 posted by Hope on July 01, 2007 at 11:18:21 PT FoM 16 "I wonder if all the antibiotics that people were and are given helped make superbugs."They apparently did. I've heard and read that they did. [ Post Comment ] Comment #22 posted by Hope on July 01, 2007 at 11:15:23 PT Come to think of it... I may be wrong about VD as opposed to STD. Thankfully, by Grace, I'm not an expert. [ Post Comment ] Comment #21 posted by Hope on July 01, 2007 at 11:04:12 PT "Old Scolds" http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v07/n776/a06.html?397I love this! [ Post Comment ] Comment #20 posted by Hope on July 01, 2007 at 10:53:02 PT Well... Actually. It's Bill's own fault that STDS and Venereal Disease should be mentioned in a discussion thread about him. [ Post Comment ] Comment #19 posted by Hope on July 01, 2007 at 10:47:15 PT STDs FoM..."Sexually Transmitted Diseases" is just another way of saying "Venereal disease". Actually. [ Post Comment ] Comment #18 posted by Hope on July 01, 2007 at 10:45:12 PT Old guys like Bill died like flies in the old days with venereal disease.Penicillin... it will save both the just and the unjust...the sexual and non sexual.An antibiotics have saved more than a few lives. A good percentage of us wouldn't be here if it weren't for some antibiotic treatment or other at some time in our lives. [ Post Comment ] Comment #17 posted by Hope on July 01, 2007 at 10:37:22 PT What? Bill O'Reilly never had sex? [ Post Comment ] Comment #16 posted by FoM on July 01, 2007 at 10:36:18 PT Hope Yes then came STDs. There always was VD but it did spread because of the freedom to sexually experiment. I wonder if all the antibiotics that people were and are given helped make superbugs. Viruses want to survive too so they adapt. [ Post Comment ] Comment #15 posted by Hope on July 01, 2007 at 10:36:18 PT Women Woman [ Post Comment ] Comment #14 posted by Hope on July 01, 2007 at 10:35:30 PT Sam Shall we say the women has, or had, amazing and admirable hormonal fortitude and conviction? She actually spoke to us. [ Post Comment ] Comment #13 posted by Hope on July 01, 2007 at 10:31:46 PT Venereal Disease became more controllable. Then came Herpes and AIDS. [ Post Comment ] Comment #12 posted by Hope on July 01, 2007 at 10:30:41 PT Bull's Eye! "It was the pharmaceutical companies developing the birth control bill. It was only a matter of time no matter what. Fear of pregnancy stopped people before the birth control pill." [ Post Comment ] Comment #11 posted by Sam Adams on July 01, 2007 at 10:29:44 PT hope the drug-free kids website is gone, we can only hope she is too. [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by Hope on July 01, 2007 at 10:24:21 PT I'm referring of course, To our old friend, Joyce. [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by Sam Adams on July 01, 2007 at 10:24:05 PT ah yes the prototypical hater yes, the great days when women and kids were forced to live with brutal men that beat them with no hope for divorce. That's really what Bill and his people want, to go back to the dark ages. Date rape didn't exist. What's to stop a guy? Who's the girl going to turn to? Her father? The police? Knowing what police and DA's are like today, it's hard to even imagine what they must have been like in the Dark Times of the 40's and 50's. We know they killed & tortured black kids in the South.You know how the haters love to tell liberals to just pack up & leave if they don't love this country. Well, that's what haters like this should do if they don't like it now. And where would Bill go, where on this Earth do the dominating political, religious, and social paradigms match that of O'Reilly and Limbaugh? That's easy. The Muslim Arab world. Saudi Arabia perhaps. Women live as house slaves to the men, and homosexuality and cannabis use is punishable by death. So get going! Flights leave today!Bill is burning with hate/anger; he can't acknowledge his own homosexuality because of his family upbringing and culture without destroying himself. So instead of acknowledging what he is, and living a happy, fulfilled life out of the closet, he devotes himself to a campaign of hate against those that do what he cannot.Take a closer look at his feminine eyes/brows and tell me I'm wrong. Think about it: what happens when a staunchly Irish Catholic boy starts feeling gay urges toward other men? What's going to happen? Due to the brainwashing, he's overcome with feelings of guilt and self-loathing, making it simply impossible to come out.The reason for my theory is that this is exactly what happened to one of my best friends from high school. His attitute and background match O'Reilly's perfectly. He's slowly self-destructing over the years from within. [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by Hope on July 01, 2007 at 10:23:41 PT Today All this, I'm supposing, got me to thinking of our sister in humanity and, used to be, fellow commentater here at C-News. I hope she's ok. [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by Dankhank on July 01, 2007 at 09:59:58 PT oh yeah?? birth rate outside of marriage has gone from 8 percent 40 years ago to 37 percent today.By his, O'reilley's, admission, it is not possible to accurately count unwed births 40 years ago, 1967, because it was hushed up.Given the hyperactice fondness we, as a species, view the "reproductive" act, I submit that rampant sex and unwed mothers have always been with us, just not known for some of the reasons Bill cited.Get a life Bill, even you have sexually harassed an employee. You are not exempt from the "fondness," either. [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by whig on July 01, 2007 at 09:54:34 PT FoM Bill-O is a dinosaur, wishing for the days before those stupid mammals. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by FoM on July 01, 2007 at 08:48:15 PT Summer of Love I remember going to Catholic school and one girl silently disappeared and rumor finally told us that she got pregnant and had to get married. It was a big deal back then but it wasn't the Summer of Love that caused free love to take a hold. It was the pharmaceutical companies developing the birth control bill. It was only a matter of time no matter what. Fear of pregnancy stopped people before the birth control pill.Also the Summer of Love was really symbolic since most people never made it out of their home town but felt a connection with the ideology. I believe half of the total U.S. population was our generation. Why did we have to think and follow our parents values? We saw what I called plastic people living in a plastic world. It's true we lost musicians and that was very sad but it also reminded many that drugs can and do kill so be sensible. Many learned but some didn't. We don't forbid people from climbing big mountains even though people have died trying to climb them. If we could go back to the 50s mentality how would that settle with the young generation now? I don't think they want to go back to those days before the Summer of Love.Nothing stays the same. That's life but we can learn and grow and understand what was shunned if only we would open our hearts more then our eyes. [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by charmed quark on July 01, 2007 at 08:37:53 PT Great time to be a teenager What a wonderful time it was. The shackles were broken. It seemed like anything could be possible. We had an infinite number of choices.It was also a little tough. We realized we didn't have our future thought out for us and would have to invent our own. Some people didn't like that sort of uncertainty piled on top of the chaos of adolescent. Not to mention the specter of getting drafted and shipped overseas. And with the cold war going strong, the threat of nuclear annihilation. This made up the background of what we were trying to get away from.Still, it was a great time to grow up. [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by John Tyler on July 01, 2007 at 07:54:25 PT different view Strange isn’t it how different people can see or experience something and draw different conclusions. I saw and embraced the emergence of the Summer of Love (for lack or a better term) as a way to break the shackles of rigid social conformity of the 1950’s and early 1960’s. What these people learned in school, in church, and from other social setting didn’t fit the reality they were seeing around them. What they had been taught wasn’t working for them and they needed something else. I think of that time as a search for meaning. They were social pioneers looking for new frontiers. Great numbers of them looked within themselves and found that meaning. It emerged as peace, love and understanding, you know, like they learned in Sunday school, but were never allowed to employ, and stripped of its Sunday school verbiage. With that simple idea they/we without realizing it changed society and the world. Sure, there were problems. Life is always messy, but progress was made. Too bad Bill R. doesn’t understand that. Maybe that’s his Karma, to rant without understanding or compassion and appear the fool. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by HempWorld on July 01, 2007 at 07:22:10 PT "This led to an epidemic of overdose situations and social disease problems." Yes, Bill and you are one of them... Now I could call you moron but that would be cheap. Truth is that the "summer of love" was one of the best things that ever happened to this planet but this is something that you, Mr. Bill O'Reilly, will probably not comprehend in your lifetime due to the limited experience that you have and demonstrate over and over again. Also, in the above article you somehow try to correlate trend of increasing out of wedlock births to drug use and "the summer of love." But, ... where is the relationship? Ooh, it's because 'the media' (not counting Fox) is glorifying this permissive attitude? Ok, that make's sense blame 'the media.' And Bill, what you call 'drug activity' is normally called a heroin overdose due to the illegality of the substance and not because of the substance. I could go on but I'm wasting my time on a sack of shit like you. Nobody can stop this! [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by charmed quark on July 01, 2007 at 07:22:00 PT Pot and overdoses? I don't think the use of pot and LSD led to many overdoses! The author is probably referring to the heroin and speed problem. Most of that was the result of people who were already abusers showing up in SF. The drug abusers were already in the US, their concentration into SF just made them visible. These abusers essentially drove out the "Summer of Love" folk, ending it.I think there were probably some unfortunates who went from pot to harder drugs (but not in the space of a summer!). But this could be better blamed on our purposeful ignorance of drugs. The government had demonized pot for so long that when people found out it was relatively safe they ignored the warnings on other drugs. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment