UPDATE (at bottom): NORML donations skyrocket after Obama comments
Lately, it seems the 'War on Drugs' debate has been everywhere. And to think, the volume on this discussion was turned up 10 notches by a troublesome Olympian who was photographed with his mouth to a water-pipe.
Then came the California legalization bill, news that Oregon is considering a socialization of medical marijuana and, most recently, Rep. Barney Frank saying he plans to introduce federal legislation to eliminate penalties for possessing small amounts of marijuana.
Frank, who announced his intent on HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher, said he plans to call it the "Make room for serious criminals act."
And even President Obama, who flippantly dismissed a question on legalizing pot as not a "good strategy" for economic recovery, was quietly encouraging Sen. Jim Webb to move forward with legislation that would form a committee to study prison reforms and retool existing drug criminalization.
At the very least, one can say Obama's position on marijuana policy has been consistent. He has never once said he supports legalization. Let's flash-back to Jan. 21, 2004 ...
If his most recent statements sound like double-speak to you, get familiar with "Chicago politics." It's not 'say one thing but do another.' It's 'confuse your opponents by touching on common ground while your friends and associates work other avenues.' For drug law reform advocates, that's not such a bad thing. He's not a blunt progressive (no pun intended) and a second term is definitely on his mind, even this early in the game.
And let's not forget, Attorney General Eric Holder has said the only time a marijuana caregivers club will experience a DEA raid is if they're suspected to be in violation of state and federal law. After the announcement that random assaults on dispensaries would stop, California's medical marijuana patients breathed a sign of relief. But the news was followed by the feds smashing through a San Francisco dispensary. However, even here, the DOJ's argument was consistent: they were suspected of breaking state law, which likely means the DOJ thinks there was some back-door distribution going on.
And then, there's Congressman Ron Paul, the most kindly, grandfatherly elder statesman to ever advocate for the peoples' right to get stoned. (Or have unfettered access to medicine, depending on your purview and present bill of health.)
In spite of the recent string of high-profile victories for the legalization crowd, Paul's appearance on CNN yesterday, debating the 'War on Drugs' with former Congressman Earnest Istook, was not one of them.
After watching this, the first word out of my mouth was "railroaded." See for yourself:
This video is from CNN's Campbell Brown, broadcast Mar. 26, 2009.
Download video via RawReplay.com
What I want to know from you ... Was CNN's Campbell Brown fair? Did she intervene enough (or too much) when Istook continually spoke over Rep. Paul? And what's with those wonky Rand Corporation "facts"?
Furthermore, Obama seems to be playing a complex game of behind-the-scenes chess on this issue. His flippant dismissal of legalization made older conservatives feel all warm and authoritarian inside, but his mere acknowledgement of the public's growing will to see it happen may have actually amplified the discussion even further. Do you think he's changed his mind on decriminalization?
And what do you make of Rep. Paul's position that the 'War on Drugs' is unconstitutional and should be done away with? How would an all-drugs-are-legal America function?
Enlighten us.
-- Stephen C. Webster
Raw Story video by David Edwards
**Update:
Well, whadday know ...
Marijuana backers aren't laughing about President Obama's flippant dismissal of a pot-related question during Thursday's online town hall meeting — and the country's leading marijuana advocacy group, The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, has seen its donations quadruple over the last 24 hours.
Allen St. Pierre, the executive director of NORML, told CNN "our donation boxes started to flood" after Obama laughed off a Web question about whether legalizing marijuana would improve the economy and job creation. St. Pierre said traffic to the group's Web site has "increased precipitously" since Thursday.
"About half of the donation comments have a reference to Mr. Obama's comments," St. Pierre said. "As far as I'm concerned, he could show up every single day and rag on marijuana."
Istook really came off as condescending, and didn't seem to want even a fair open discussion about pot legalization.
I know someone in Istook's district and they're very displeased with Istook's actions in the state. He's going to give them a piece of their mind to see if they can't get marijuana legalized within his state, its just an idea who's time has come
We're in a depression situation here and the fact is marijuana legalization like Senator Webb has put up could make a huge difference for the realities on the ground. Both the state economy, and the other economies.
Istook's flippant disregard for facts in the face of this is a bit extreme, I say let the bud flow, its not going to put those politicians out of a job that's for sure.
I watched it and thought the same thing.
It made me really respect Ron Paul more than I already do...
Together Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are the only two politicians our founding fathers wouldnt want to execute for treason.
Ron Paul said it like it was and he isnt about to stoop to the level everyone seems to be at these days.
I watched Campbell Brown shit a brick when Ron Paul pulled his ear piece out early...
She knows darn well that Ron Paul supporters watch Lou Dobbs and she blew it by cutting him off and letting that douche-bag shout over him.
We are headed towards legalization and if you dont like it STFU and go drink a beer.
It's GOING to happen people. It isn't going to happen in one day, but already the SEEDS of freedom are being sown. While many of us may have been disappointed and even outraged at Obama's remarks, it is clear the real agenda of the majority party is to pursue a pragmatic path in the war on drugs. They can't ignore the economic impact of the potential regulation of cannabis, they cannot ignore the widening narcoterrorism entrenched on our borders, they cannot ignore the ever increasing support in America for decriminalization, and they cannot ignore the voices of the citizens who have forced this issue to the forefront of the debate, even in the midst of economic collapse. The Bush-Clinton-Reagan-Nixon Plan in regards to dealing with the drug war is done with, as much as the Administration does not want to openly say "prohibition has utterly failed" for political reasons, it is still clear that this is the consensus. First they will stop throwing non-violent cannabis users and sellers in prison with mandatory terms. Then they stop or at least minimize DEA efforts to disrupt medical cannabis distributors (the notion that they are following state law in raiding dispensaries is ridiculous and cannot continue to be held up indefinitely). Federal and state laws are inching towards decriminalization and this will continue until (gasp!) a positive conclusion to the drug war can occur - clearing room in the prisons for REAL criminals, ending the flow of drugs and guns across our borders and neighborhoods, and establishing a sane and responsible policy for cannabis use nationwide. Read up on Senator Webb and Congressman Frank's bills, and you will see that the chain of events is even now falling into place. Vice President Biden appears to be ready to re-engage Latin America, whose leaders have been among those most vocally calling for the US to change it's policy (no surprise considering the history of the CIA using drugs and drug money to help change the balance of power in various nations.) Consider how the debate would be had McCain/Palin had been elected. Even they would have been hard-pressed to justify prohibition in the face of mountainous budgetary problems, not to mention conflating crime and prison pops in the midst of economic depression. Just be patient, and start stocking up on those sinse seeds now - so that when decriminalization and regulation goes into effect, you can be on the opposite side of the inevitable pot tax - get your own license, and set up your own local business. The path is clear. Don't let your elected officials forget the obligations for reason that are being set in place.
TK out ~
Yeah I'd say Ron Paul was railroaded, he is absolutely right on the issue though. Like Ron Paul said, Mr. Istook has no respect for the Constitution. The Government should have no say in what we chose to put in our own bodies, it is a complete breech of Federal power.
Frankly I was pissed the other day when watching Obama's online town hall meeting when he totally blew off the number one question about the legalization of Marijuana and his only response was "No, that's not a good strategy". The topic needs to be out in the open and debated rationally by our "leaders", and if the President isn't willing to do that and just blow it off because it's politically correct not to debate or perhaps support the legalization, than F@#$ him, he needs to grow some balls. I know him and his audience there had a big laugh at the question, but it's truly not funny. It's a serious issue, tons of men and woman are getting locked up for this crap and our prison's our totally over whelmed by non-violent drug offenders. You can over come an addiction but you can't overcome a conviction, in most cases it's a stain you carry for life. Grrrrr... Gets me angry!
Thanks for the article Stephen,
Matt
What a crock. Istook doesn't know a thing. I had pot in 71 that was just as potent as anything today. Mexican pot is crap, always was and always will be. I can grow my own that will make anyone silly. The facts from Rand are bull. What do they know?
The reason that pot is illegal and the reason jerks like Istook wants to keep it that way is because of the profit and the way one can make a bundle growing or selling. Istook is so stupid and all the ones involved in marijuana selling love guys like him. Keep it illegal so they can make untaxed moola. Pot if eaten will really get you zonked. So, you don't have to smoke it and the harmful effects he spews are gone. Why doesn't he go on about cigarettes or alcohol? Far worse those two. Marinol does not work. Ask any of the ones who are on it. And if you use a vaporizer, not the same as smoking and hardly any ill effects. Anyway, I couldn't smoke enough of the weed I grew to hurt me. One toke and I'll be staring into the void as the joint goes out. One water cooled bong hit or two and your good for a while. Hell, the auto pollutes the air far worse and hurts us more. I wish Campbell Brown would let me debate that knucklehead. And she should keep her mouth shut and let Ron Paul speak. Commercial air time is all they care about. Wake up already America. Some people on this planet are so dumb.
Istook did not make one argument that made sense or couldn't easily be countered by anyone, much less Ron Paul. Yes, Ron Paul was railroaded, Cambell failed and good for Ron Paul for not degrading himself.
My insticts tell me that Obama doesn't care if people smoke pot or not and is chosing his battles. Of course he'll want to be re-elected in 2012, so if pot gets legalized, it probably is best for him to let those who have less to lose work on that battle. That said, I do think legalization could potentially help the economy (so how much revenue is there in Alcohol & cigaretts anyway?).
Whether it's constitutional or not, we have to look at alcohol & cigarettes with the same lense. When marjuana was made illegal, it was done so with fear tactics and a grossly misrepresentation of what pot can and cannot do. When the government fails, the people make their own rules. Prohibition was a failure and the same people who would never normally break a law broke that one. We see the same with pot. Law abiding, tax paying, contributors to society are smoking pot.
My inclination is to chastise Obama for not openly endorsing pot legalization, but TK's statement is more objective, intelligent and realistic.
It probably does need to move forward behind-the-scenes, because so much of our population is ignorant and brainwashed by the MSM scandaltainment.
Were it not for the Mute button, I wouldn't even be able to watch TV. There are also way too many ditzy women on there.
Stephen,
I have been following everything you mentioned above as it has happened. Personally I agree with you on Obama's response. He does want to be re-elected next election and could isolate himself by throwing full support behind it. But the beauty in all of this is he can "quietly" support it while his little elves in the background draw up the bills and "quietly" push the legislation for vote. It's kind of like good cop bad cop in a stretched out kind of a way.
Speaking of Cops I can recall back in 2002 taking a criminal justice class on Organized Crime. At that time we were discussing splinter cells, rising violence in Mexico, illegal smuggling, and the border issues. We as a class felt that this was an important issue and posed a great risk to America. My closing question on my final exam was an essay question asking me what I thought would solve the border issues and illegal smuggling. I simply put legalize the number one smuggled product, tax it and use a small portion of that money to fund incentives for border guards as a reward. In my opinion and also that of my professor, a former police officer, many of the guards that accepted bribes probably wouldn't have done so if there was an honest alternative to their hourly wages, incentive to do more... i.e. a bonus for turning in corrupt guards, smugglers, coyotes, or any other person trying to illegally cross the border by bribing guards. My highly conservative, former police officer / parole officer criminal justice professor, to my surprise completely agreed!
Border security is not the reason I believe prohibition should end. Nor is it the reason I believe the reason the War on Drugs needs to end. I personally feel that we are all adults and should be able to decide on our own. I was just reading that the number of active cigarette smokers have reduced to the lowest number in over 20 years (not sure on the exact figure but you get the idea). Have you ever tried to stop smoking? It's hell!! Speaking from experience I have been a heavy cigarette and pot smoker. As of 3/15/06 I have not smoked a single cigarette. It was no easy task...
When I went for a physical for a new job with a major developer in Southern California, the physician was alarmed... It was 3/30/06 and she said my blood pressure was through the roof and my health was that of a 50 year old man (I was born in 81). I told her I just quit smoking cigarettes, she replied, "that explains everything." I am 27, in amazing shape, so this came as a huge surprise. Not only was I completely stressed out and anxious for not smoking I was also in really bad health. That being said, I never smoked again, at least so far. I have continued to smoke pot.
Approximately 6 months ago I decided to not smoke pot for a few months to see if my quality of life went up or to par if it was seriously effecting me. Prior to that I can honestly say that I have been high at some point in the day since the year 2000 at least 95% of the time. I have to admit the first 2 days of not smoking were not normal. I didn't eat nearly as much as I normally would but that was really only the first day. The second day all I noticed was that it took me a little longer to sleep, but I can't say that for sure because prior to smoking I used to always have trouble sleeping, so who really knows. But the point being is all I can say is that after almost 10 years straight of smoking I felt just a little not normal for two days... I also went for a physical and this time my Dr concluded that I was in really good health (I told him I smoke pot). This brings me back to my point.... (sorry for the tangent, you'll see how it ties in now)
I as an adult, a fairly young one, was able to decide on my own that I didn't want to smoke cigarettes because they were bad for my health. The public/society helped educate me about the dangers and pressured me to not smoke. It wasn't the law that stopped me from smoking, it wasn't a cop or any other form of punishment that stopped me it was the influence I received from the public campaign (funded by cigarette taxes) to stop people from smoking. I think the same can be done with pot and if the general public wants less people smoking this may be the way to do it.
One thing that alarms me the most is that there are forces within the federal government that do not want pot legal. More alarming is how bad the federal government is trying to silence the debate, or was. Now they don't have a choice but a few months ago I recall a small New Mexico town threatened to not receive a bailout in response to a debate they proposed on considering prohibition. Makes you think doesn't it? It has been said the Mexican drug cartels have already infiltrated our country and government. VERY, VERY SCARY!
~Justin
Of course he was railroaded. The anti-legalization crowd are desperate now that the time for legalization is at hand. It's similar to the "god of the gaps" idea where they are fighting to believe that they can have these silly opinions justified in the narrowest possible terms. Now that social conservatives previous falsehoods about drugs fails to withstand the light of science and reason, they are reduced to the "gateway drug" and "sending the wrong message" arguments. Hell, even cops say Legalize Drugs!!
See:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icoYTCIhXGY
As a Canadian watching it last night, I found Campbell Brown to be an extremely poor interviewer in that segment, and Mr. Istook to be rude. Ron Paul, I think, did not look too happy with having to say he would debate if he wasn't constantly interrupted and then when Campbell ignored his comment and then let Istook have the last word, Ron Paul didn't give the impression, at least to me, when he was seen taking out his earpiece that he would be returning to No Bias No Bull anytime soon. If he does decline any further requests to appear, he certainly has every right to after his treatment last night. But then again, many times on this show, the treatment you appear to get depends too often on who you are or what political party you belong to. It should not depend on who is in your White House or who is the opposition, every single person should start off an interview with the same respect shown them until they prove by their comments they no longer deserve that respect afforded them.
When 100 top tier celebrities (political, sports, entertainment, medical) organize a public demonstration and use vaporizers in public the police will either have to arrest them - thereby highlighting the insanity of prohibition - or ignore them - also highlighting the insanity of prohibition.
Until then, no-names will keep going to jail for inhumane laws, and most of those will be minorities.
http://www.mpp.org/assets/pdfs/download-materials/Minorities-Brochure_1106.pdf
Where would Obama be today if he'd have gone to jail for cannabis?
Certainly not in the White House.
CNN blew it big time. A lot of Americans, not just Ron paul supporters, are in agreement with legalising marijuana, and reducing drug arrests and imprisonment. My take is that Obama's a secret sympathiser.
Istook needs to get very stoned.... and remain that way for a long time.
I don't need to watch the video -- it's CNN. They haven't been an objective network in probably 10 years. They're as worthless as Rupert's shills.
The war on drugs creates the black market for the drugs, increases violent crime, and supports the prison industrial complex, and the militarization of our police.
Legalizing pot would create an immediate alternative to using wood pulp for paper, cotton for clothing, in addition to providing a nutritious food, and alternative to most petroleum products including plastic and fuel!
I love comment 11
Simply a great idea.
Jesse Ventura
Bill Mahr
Jon Stewart
Steven King
Stephen Colbert
Sir Paul McCartney
Robert Altman
Bob Dylan
Brad Pitt
Bill Murray
Tom Brokaw
Ted Turner
Willie Nelson
Woody Harrelson
Toby Kieth
Garth Brooks
David Letterman
Conan O Brian
Matt Groening
Craig Ferguson
Drew Carrey
etc,etc,etc...
and of course our newly united iconoclasts
Cheech AND Chong.
Lets all get together and make this happen.
Perfect timing.
I think Ron Paul was definitely railroaded. Istook magically pulled some statistics out of his hat, like the 25% decrease in marijuana use among teenagers. Can we see a little fact checking here? Not to mention the broken homes, lost jobs, etc., that are all a result of drugs being illegal to begin with.
Campbell Brown intervened on behalf of Istook too much and not enough on behalf of Ron Paul. If Ron Paul had the time, he would have explained the nonsensical rationale that the Supreme Court based their opinion in Gonzales v. Raich. In that case, the Supreme Court said that marijuana that was grown and consumed in one state and never entered interstate commerce, yet it still affected the sale of Marijuana between states. Presumably, because the free medical Marijuana in some form or fashion impeded the Marijuana black market. Such a ruling is opposite of conservative thinking, and the conservative judges that made the decision were likely vying for chief justice positions (okay, I added a little of my opinion, but I'm sure Ron Paul would have something to say about it too).
Whatever the case, lets join hands and ensure marijuana gets legalized since it's clearly not going to hurt anybody and it only benefits the "private interests" to keep it on prohibition regardless, and we know the pro prohobitionists have lost this argument, lost their way, and some of them have become neo Zionists anyway.
Personally, I see no reason to listen to anything they say and to not be intimidated by their stupidity either. Lets legalize it, be done with prohibition, and then shed light on a much more pressing issue that should be of concern to all americans.
http://www.ronpaul.com
The Federal Reserve, ladies and gentlemen, is a private Federal Bank which has not ever had to show its official operations to anybody, not even the Congress. We hear barely nothing more than a whisper about what happens with the Federal Reserve.
HR 1207 would create a full nation-wide audit of the secretive Federal Reserve, and allow all to finally see "what is actually going on" behind this cloak of secrecy, which regardless of who you are I'd imagine should be very important to you.
The very fact this institution has not ever had to answer to any real audit, any real full scale investigation, should be troubling and shocking to most if not all people.
It's as if they came into our country owning the media, promoting wars through deception, and legislating a whole "Police State" mentality without ever even asking any of us for permission nor allowing us to see why it has this control.
Open the books of the Federal Reserve, support HR 1207. Lets bring freedom back to this country once and for all.
Read 'Cocaine Politics' or the amazing 'Dark Alliance' and you'll realize why this will never happen and who is makiing the money on prohibition.
I was watching Larry King tonight and Tavis Smiley was the guest host talking with Montel Williams. He stated that your US Govt. for the past 30 years has been growing, and delivering marijuana to 30 citizens, which now over the years and due to passings is down to 5 people. They have been doing this every month for 30 years. So if your govt. can do this already, how come they get away with it and for what reason????
RON PAUL!
Istook is bsing competely; the RAND corp. 's job isn't to say "we don't know," and yet pulls out completely nonsensical factoids about 25% of high school students, etc. What a tool; it's no coincidence he's on CNN to stifle Ron Paul.
The war on drugs has wrought untold suffering on the world, ably described recently by the Economist (a far cry from High Times.)
http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=13237193
"The United States alone spends some $40 billion each year on trying to eliminate the supply of drugs. It arrests 1.5m of its citizens each year for drug offences, locking up half a million of them; tougher drug laws are the main reason why one in five black American men spend some time behind bars. In the developing world blood is being shed at an astonishing rate. In Mexico more than 800 policemen and soldiers have been killed since December 2006 (and the annual overall death toll is running at over 6,000). This week yet another leader of a troubled drug-ridden country—Guinea Bissau—was assassinated."
Sen. Paul was run over, but that's the nature of these forums. He should go on a civilized show like GPS, or get more aggressive (I'd prefer the former!)
Ron Paul's reaction at the end says it all.
I hate it when people interrupt others...
This guy is rude
Legalizing pot is going to be a second term action if Obama is re-elected. He can not risk doing it in his first term as it may jeopardize his chances for a second. If he doesn't win, maybe he will do some Bush style midnight regs before he goes. Just relax everybody, we can't have EVERYTHING just yet.
I hate MSM, it needs to be legalized.
I just hope if they do regulate and tax, that they don't come out with "Marijuana Light" I rather they just let you grow a certain amount of plants for personal use and just impose a tax on that.
My 2 super inflated cents
Bam's gonna legalize it 3 months into office?
get real.
(i predict full decriminalization by the end of his second term, Monsanto will be growing your "medicine")
Here in Pennsyltucky, where the hillbillies are scared and their wives chew tobacco, we still have State Stores to sell liquor (interesting since we live in a Commonwealth. Whatever.) Only beer can be purchased in a competitive market, and that only through state-certified beer distributors. Or, if you want to pay bar prices, you can buy a six pack over the bar for whatever they're getting for a beer, times six.
State Stores in the 21st century? Why? To keep demon alcohol out of the hands of our precious children. Now that's a goal I can agree with, but State Stores have nothing to do with it. They use the draconian as a ruse to maintain control of the profits by eliminating competition. The ruse works because the typical Pennsyltuckian just loves draconian authority.
That's why in Pennsyltucky, you can be busted for carrying cigarette papers. Never mind that you actually roll your own cigarettes. It's "paraphernalia" and you can tell your sob story to the judge before they lock you up.
The chances of these ignorant hayseeds ever agreeing to decriminalize pot are zero. A trip to the 19th century would be liberating compared to this keystone of utter ignorance.
Ron Paul was railroaded here. He was railroaded as a presidential candidate. He gets railroaded practically everytime he appears on TV. The people don't own the TV networks, our government does.
Alcohol is a thousand times more dangerous than marijuana.....SO WHY IS "ALCOHOL" LEGAL?
What is getting in the way of legalizing marijauna and subjecting it the SAME LAWS AS ALCOHOL??
I so sick of snickers and jokes every time pot is mentioned. When Obama did this, it was a letdown, as I thought he would seriously confront the issue. You don't hear any drunk driving jokes, don't hear to many smokers telling lung cancer jokes, but every time pot comes up it's little snickers and and laughs all around. That shows you how stupid the case against MJ is. Enough!
Congressman Earnest Istook appears to be a loudmouth who makes his points by shouting over his opponent. His smug and condescending attitude was annoying, and I don't think I could ever stand to be in the same room as this fat arrogant shill.
Kudos to Ron Paul and his proven ability to suffer fools, I would have walked out long before him.
Obama is a politician to the core. He's not a true progressive. However, his administration is light years ahead of the previous one on every single social issue. Politically, Obama feels he must move slowly and behind closed doors in loosening the criminal laws for marijuana. I'm fine with that as long as the legality of medical marijuana is turned over to the states (where it belongs), the criminal penalties for marijuana possession are greatly reduced, and hemp production are legalized. Those are all eminently reasonable public policy positions that the American public are ready for. Obama does not want to personally spend political capital on them ... but he can use the weight of his office to encourage others on the Hill to make it happen. I'm waiting to see how it goes down.
Much to my surprise, I ended up agreeing with Dr. Paul. If the pot that people smoke is grown in this country and its of good quality, why would people want to get it from the foreign drug cartels who are making lots of money and draining it out of this country's economy? If there is no demand for the foreign product, then the dealers will not have the incentive to try to smuggle it in. It is the same with energy. If we produce our own, we won't be held hostage to middle eastern countries whose policies often not pro American security. Just as we need to get off of their power grid, so too should we get off foreign cartels' power grid. If this country encourages self-reliance, why should the moneyed interests encourage imports. Oh right, I forgot, Money.
What Istook didn't say is the most effective drug to combat the side affects of chemo are not available to everybody. Most insurance companies will not pay for more than nine pills!! The state insurance will not pay for one! My sister died of a rare and agressive form of cancer. The chemo left her so weak and miserable she didn't have the strength to fight the disease. It was marijuana that bought her an extra year of life. Those that deny the dying the only thing that makes it comfortable to live, are the devil themselves and should rot in hell! We shouldn't have to stand on street corners, talk to our children, or friends in order to find relief for someone we love. This should not be illegal!
Folks, please concentrate on the real issue re: legalization. Money. The businesses that have been created in the last 20 years have a huge stake in this fight. The "Drug War Complex" that includes everything from piss testing to radar equipment to private prisons to night vision goggles to more prosecutors, judges and defense lawyers to law enforcement grants etc. has a very big stake in this discussion. Imagine if just MJ were legalized. Prison guard layoffs, lab tech layoffs, aircraft manufacturing plant layoffs, and so on. The war on drugs is estimated to be a 250 billion dollar a year industry in the U.S. alone. Does anyone think that the Heritige Foundation really opposes legalization on moral grounds? They represent the Drug War Complex and all of it's members. As long as the polititions are bought buy the folks who make the real money from the War on Drugs, it will never be legalized.
Milk is a gateway drug. How many times do we have to hear the lame "gateway" theory? Its been disproven. I thought i was watching reefer madness.
And unless there is interstate transportation, what right do the fed have to infringe upon a states right to regulate MJ, or anything else, as they see fit?
Railroading is an over simplification. It was rigged from the get go, and Brown was complicit in the ruling elite's desire to paint a false picture. That fucktard Istook was talking over Paul just about _every_ time Paul was making valid points, and Brown was content to not let him answer (granted, Paul was taking the long way around, and "news" today is all about 30 second sound bites with "facts" taken out of context to make a "feeling" on matters instead of informed enlightenment..)
The war on drugs makes little sense when you include Cannabis. Don't want Meth being made in the house next to yours, or in the apartment below yours? Reasonable. But there is _nothing_ reasonable in our Cannabis laws as they stand today.
Perfect example, Istook said "broken homes and lost jobs" from pot.. But, that is ONLY because it is ILLEGAL. If WE made it LEGAL, those jobs and homes wouldn't be all fucked, now would they. So, we're saying 5% of the population can go fuck off and risk everything for (cheap) medical use (or non-harmful recreational use)?
Another thing that fucktard said was "we have THC from the pharmaceutical companies".. correct.. and it is NOT as effective as smoking pot, is a LOT more expensive, and PROVES that THC HELPS! .. hence, medical cannabis IS A VALID ARGUMENT, and is a LOT CHEAPER than buying SYNTHETIC DRUGS from a FOR PROFIT COMPANY. Yet, that wasn't able to be addressed.
I keep telling my kid that when we're discussing things, we don't lump 10 points all together because that precludes covering all points. Everything will be point at a time, one at a time, until resolved. The same should go for these "discussions" they have on TV. Instead, they try to overwhelm people with simply too much info (much of it disinformation or distortion) and hope they revert to "knee jerk reactions".
disgusting.
"The people don't own the TV networks, our government does."
false, corporate interests own our networks. They have their reasons for keeping people from "checking out" of their shows, their commercials, their brain washing.. Cannabis will put a LOT of people in a state of mind where they simply don't care for that LOUD and ignorant crap on TV.. That would hurt advertising revenue, wouldn't it.
Pot is the easiest substance to produce out of all of em.
Any pot smoker can simply plant the seed and watch it grow.
Sure it takes some skill to produce quality herb...but for the most part thats all there is to it. You plant it.
Now even with what in my mind is the next least harmful drug that people commonly use-cocaine, there is a lengthy process of converting and concentrating the drug into a powdered form. (I am not condoning cocaine...I just see it less harmful than meth)
Meth and Heroin..Well, I dont know but Im sure one could google it and find out how to make it but those are drugs that require multiple steps to create the high its users become zombies to.
Even Alcohol is a lengthier process...but its the second most naturally occurring high as wild animals even get drunk on rotting fruits and berries.
So...Cannabis is not a drug that needs to be concentrated or converted into anything else to be an effective mind altering substance.
Any totally stoned person...I mean absolutely blitzed! Is very capable of putting a seed into some soil and watering it!
Now could you say the same for any other high?
Sen. Paul was treated exceptionally bad. The former Rep. is a completely ignorant corporate authoritarian sycophant. Towing the status quo line despite the obvious harm prohibition does our taxpayers and country. Ron Paul was there to speak truth and that lousy biased supposed news person tried to tilt the whole thing in the direction of ignorance. Shameful.
Obama had obviously not digested the comments by senior lecturer in Economics at Harvard University, Jeffrey Miron, who, the very same morning, had a commentary published at CNN.com entitled "Legalize drugs to stop violence".
Part of the article by the 'economic' expert from Harvard was, surprise, surprise, an economic argument - not just an anti-violence argument which should suffice in any normal society:
" Prohibition is a drain on the public purse. Federal, state and local governments spend roughly $44 billion per year to enforce drug prohibition. These same governments forego roughly $33 billion per year in tax revenue they could collect from legalized drugs, assuming these were taxed at rates similar to those on alcohol and tobacco. Under prohibition, these revenues accrue to traffickers as increased profits.
The right policy, therefore, is to legalize drugs while using regulation and taxation to dampen irresponsible behavior related to drug use, such as driving under the influence. This makes more sense than prohibition because it avoids creation of a black market. This approach also allows those who believe they benefit from drug use to do so, as long as they do not harm others."
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/24/miron.legalization.drugs/index.html
It seems someone has decreased these figures:
"In 2005, Miron published a study titled, "The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition" (PDF link), funded by the Marijuana Policy Project. Over 500 professional economists, including Milton Friedman, signed on to the report, which was sent to then-President George W. Bush.
Miron's report found that "marijuana legalization would save $7.7 billion per year in state and federal expenditures on prohibition enforcement and produce tax revenues of at least $2.4 billion annually if marijuana were taxed like most consumer goods."
He also discovered a potential for $6.2 billion or more, were marijuana taxed similarly to alcohol and tobacco. "
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Harvard_economist_Legalize_all_drugs_to_0324.html
Miron himself writes that there would be a budget surplus of $77 billion whereas this article only mentions 13.3 billion !
TK out: " start stocking up on those sinse seeds now "
Sorry to nit-pick (OK, actually I love to...) but that's kind of an oxymoron, since "sinse" actually means seedless, so if you saved seeds it wasn't really sinse.
Unless of course Monsanto has patented a new terminator cannabis strain that never sets seed. That could well happen once the legal cannabis market grows, so we need to get the intellectual property law on the side of natural life forms and stop the looting of a very old biological commons that we all depend on.
Istook is the typical Republican bully. Shout over people, disrespect them and then say nice things about them is really what makes a Crap Republican. I'm not a fan of Ron Paul and I don't either like or dislike him, but I do dislike Istook for being a bully.
[...] darthchaosofrspw @ 8:16 PM The railroading of Ron Paul by Cambell Brown at CNN will be televised http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/03/the-railroading-will-be-televised/ UPDATE (at bottom): NORML donations skyrocket after Obama [...]
As others have pointed out, a lot of the strategy for making pot seem dangerous hinges on conflating it with other, genuinely harmful substances. In fact "conflation" is a popular strategy for fooling people about all kinds of things, e.g. Saddam and 9-11, but in the drug war it plays off the quite justified public fear of meth, heroin, etc. Simply by getting placed in the same legal category as these others, the same stigma is made to apply.
But from a public health perspective they are worlds apart. In the literature on harm reduction (not a popular concept in out lock-em-up culture of punishment above all else) it is clear that cannabis actually helps mitigate the social and individual harms caused by alcohol and the opiates, and has no measurable harm when used by itself. Not sure how cannabis interacts with tobacco addiction in terms of reducing use, but Tashkin's study indicates that it lowers the risk of lung cancer in tobacco smokers.
One more plug for Guy and Whittle's book Medicinal Uses of Cannabis and the Cannabinoids. It's actually chapter 4 that discusses the evidence for the coevolution of the cannabis plant with the human cannabis receptor, a fascinating theory that implies a formative role of that coevolution on the development of human culture and language over the last 100,000 years.
Ron Paul was treated very poorly in this segment. He seems to not be the type to try to talk over the other person ...where as the other gentelman was very comfortable w/ that approach ... Ron Paul has good things to say and we all need to hear his thoughts.
It's important to "get it" about the "big picture" here:
• cannabis is good for you. I say again - cannabis is good for you.
• the federal government is a vast soul-crushing bureaucracy
• unless and until some person is wronged ( a "plaintiff" ) no crime has occurred, yet hundreds of thousands of Americans rot in jail for growing a plant ... a plant which is GOOD FOR YOU !
It's the "war on you" ... which side are you on ?
*** boycott mockingbird media ***
I thought both Brown and the other guest simply stomped all over Ron Paul and he was obviously annoyed by it, as he yanked off his earplug and stalked off at the end. Don't blame him. I think Campbell Brown is severely unqualified for her position.
I'm so tired of these holyer-then-thou buttwipes imposing their beliefs over what is logical and a states rights issue. What is it with conservatives that want to control aspects of society and frame everything as a moral imparative and try to back it up with phony facts? phuck'um
And another thing this is the reason why I changed my party from Republican to Independent. so phuck'um again.
Why do good people keep going on these tv stations like CuNN TV with these bubble brain bleached blondes/brunettes just to get shouted down or talked over. That POS that Ron was with looks like a he just put down 6 shots of whiskey and went to a hair dresser. NEVER TALK TO A NARCISSIST.
Campbell Brown was merely following the script.
Wow! New blogging software? I'm thrilled! I hope the difference is more than just cosmetic. Ah — too bad — no preview.
Anyway, read The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade by Prof. Alfred W. McCoy. Check out my street placard, NARCOTICS behind the great fortunes that the CIA was created to protect. They need the War on Drugs because it keeps the price up, and they can pay for their wars, e.g. Iran/Contra (courtesy of Clinton's watchful eye at Mena airport).
But Obama's "dissing" of potheads was no more serious than Joey Bishop dissing Dean Martin by making fun of his drinking. "I don't know what this says about the online audience . . ." That was a ribbing and a chuckle for his base and he meant by it, "these are the people in the know, and we are now in charge — but we're not stupid, so we are playing our cards in the smartest shrewdest way, and the tyranny will defeat itself by its own stupidity, just like Ed Henry smacked himself in the jaw in the East Room".
Wow! Excellent, you guys. Instant posting, final appearance FIVE STAR, text entry window very clear and readable, neat giant quotemark assisting presentation and reading clarity, and no complaints about my two links!
The absent preview I can live with by testing in Windows Mail.
Thanks, Raw Story!
Istook was elected! So where does the problem really lie?
We will win!!
We will because we have to!!
This is not the only area where Obama is wrong. He is Bush all over again, totally against the rights of the individual, going in totally the wrong direction in the economy, war, marijuana and guns.
But the upside of all this is that we on the Campaign for Liberty, Libertarian Party, etc. side are now motivated to act!
Read my blog. One of the things that we must all act on is to study our economics, and on the blog I have reviewed some Murray Rothbard works, with more to be added in April.
Time to send Istook a tea bag. That worthless jerk must go. What can I say the bimbo moderating? This is why I get my news off the internet instead of the idiot box.
Railroading?
The Heritage Guy uses all the old discredited hokum about gateway drugs, broken homes, etc.
When Ron Paul was allowed to speak he made a lot more sense, if you understand the issue. I would acknowledge that Istook made great sensationalist arguments that make sense to the majority of Americans who couldn't pass a seventh grade history exam and are sitting on their asses in front of the TV eating Cheetos.