Send comments, tips,
and suggestions to:
DrugWarRant
Join us on Pete's couch.
couch

DrugWarRant.com, the longest running single-issue blog devoted to drug policy, is published by the Prohibition Isn't Free Foundation
facebooktwitterrss
May 2014
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Archives

Authors

The Kevin Show

Over at Huffington Post: 5 Ways to Accurately Cover Marijuana Policy Issues in the Media by Kevin Sabet

Go have some fun.

 

 

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to Reddit Post to StumbleUpon

31 comments to The Kevin Show

  • Jean Valjean

    It’s just the same old Sabet talking points that he’s been cranking out for years. Lies and half truths for the most part. Sad

  • Nunavut Tripper

    I got a chuckle out of his reference to an old study.:

    “Big Tobacco has had its eye on the industry for years. In the 1970s, a Brown and Williamson report stated:

    “[We] have the land to grow it, the machines to roll it and package it, the distribution to market it…Estimates indicate that the market in legalized marijuana might be as high as $10 billion annually.”

    ——————————————————–

    A reference to a rumour from the 70’s about a big tobacco conspiracy ?

    Pretty lame Kev.

    Doesn’t he know that medibles,oils,extracts,salves and concentrates are the rage now?
    Big Tobbaccy is waiting in the wings to take over the market with prerolled joints?

    Yah right Kevin

  • Howard

    Kevin Sabet, go huddle with Michele Leonhart. A tornado is coming your way. It’s been building for quite a while. Both of you have attracted the same swirling monstrosity for some time. I’d like to say, “Good luck”. But…

    Adios.

    • primus

      Not even ‘Adios’ which means ‘go with gahd’. Rather, ‘Don’t let the door hit ya where the good lawd split ya.’

  • STV

    I’m starting to wonder if Sabet might not be on our side. Any rational person reads the hysterical nonsense about Joe Camel(I haven’t seen these rampant weed ads, have you?) completely writes this guy off as being off his rocker.

  • DdC

    Phillip Morris Introduces Marlboro Marijuana Cigarettes
    Phillip Morris, the world’s biggest cigarette producer, announced today that they will join the marijuana legalization bandwagon and start producing marijuana cigarettes. Marketed under the brand “Marlboro M”, the cigarettes will be made available for sale through marijuana-licensed outlets in the state of Colorado, and the state of Washington when it becomes commercially legal there later this year.

    Phillip Morris Introduces Marlboro Marijuana Cigarettes u2b

    Marlboro 1950s Marijuana Commerical The Good Days u2b

    Hoax: Marlboro marijuana cigarettes do not exist

    Who or what is “Big Marijuana”? u2b
    I was going over tweets by Kevin Sabet, Organizer for SAM (Smart Approach to Marijuana) and his newest fight to keep Cannabis illegal is that its the next “Big Tobacco” Industry. I asked him who “Big Marijuana” was and he actually replied to me with Who is Big Marijuana? ArcView, Privateer, Prohib Brands, Jamen Shivley, Vicente Fox–get the idea? The ArcView Group works in the burgeoning legal cannabis industry by establishing connections between investors and entrepreneurs in an effort to meet the needs of cannabis cultivators, dispensaries, and customers. With industry experience, The ArcView Group is working to help usher in the next generation of cannabis-related businesses with the creation of The ArcView Angel Network and the MyDispensary Mobile App.

  • claygooding

    I did not even see a comments section,,he is not taking any rebuttal to his bullshit and it is in the HP he reports is only giving skewed marijuana information,,that is a big accusation from the top skewer of the nation.
    And he deserves no sharing his bullshit,,let him disappear from lack of response.

  • came out of my cave and saw this, so i chimed in on the source article. they are censoring, but i didn’t write anything that should cause them to not allow it. here’s what i wrote:

    Big yawn on this one. It is scarcely worth my time to bother rebutting this, but here are a few simple points:

    sabet: “only 39 percent of respondents chose legalization”

    the report he links to says:

    “When asked a more detailed question about marijuana use, 44% say it should be legal only for medicinal use, 39% say it should be legal for personal use and just 16% say it should not be legal at all. Majorities across nearly all demographic and partisan groups say the use of marijuana should be legal, at least for medicinal use.” p.3

    so only 16% prefer the current lunacy you champion — what a pathetic cherry-pick!

    sabet: “It is true: dying from a marijuana overdose is a rare, exceptional occurrence.”

    truth: yes, it is so exceptional that there are *zero* actual documented cases of such. with an LD50 of 40,000 to 1, it is, by definition, *impossible* to die of a cannabis overdose. put up or shut up — where is your proof?

    cops and doctors oppose legalization? so! they don’t own the plant kingdom either.

    you see, the basic problem with your kind is that NO ONE can make laws about the plant kingdom — let alone punish people over what they do to themselves.

    love to debate you some time kev … but you better bring something better than this d-minus effort. bring your a-game — you still have no chance

  • darkcycle

    I got to point number one and had to stop myself. I was reading it with entirely too much glee.
    Seriously.
    “Stop treating legalization like it’s inevitable.”
    He’s RIGHT. If you treat it as inevitable, you’re at least two years behind the times. It’s a fact.
    BWAH-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

    • Nunavut Tripper

      And the usual confirmation that police organizations everywhere are firmly against legalization but he just leaves it at that with no explanation or discussion as to why they oppose it.

  • N.T. Greene

    Why, I don’t remember Christmas being this early in the year.

    That Kev-Kev, always bring us gifts of happiness and wonder. It’s as if he wants the other side to win, serving up these softies. If prohibition was so important to these people, you’d think they’d send in a relief pitcher already.

    • primus

      They don’t have ANY relief pitchers, because there aren’t that many stupid people around who want to have a bull’s eye painted on them.

  • NorCalNative

    I got nothing.

    Although a line I heard by controversial author Norman Mailer, on television the other night seems like it might be appropriate.

    One of his daughters said that he would wake them up in the morning by yelling “Drop your cocks and get out of your fart sacks.”

    So, in order to honor accuracy in journalism….
    Mr. Sabet, “Drop your cock and get out of your damn fart sack.” America will thank you for it, and your Masters won’t miss you.

    • Windy

      Hubby says when he was in boot camp the sarge would yell in the morning, “Drop your cocks and grab your sox, it’s time for Reveille.” There was also the “That is my weapon and this is my gun, one is for shooting the other for fun.”

  • OT
    Homicides Down Over 52% Since Beginning of Legal Cannabis Sales in Denver
    http://tinyurl.com/mrs7347

  • kaptinemo

    “A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.” – Winston Churchill

    Fits ol’ Kevvie to a ‘T’, hmmmm? He seems unable to do either.

    They simply are incapable of understanding. The audience that they need to cajole/browbeat/indoctrinate/intellectually insult in order to keep the gravy train going is wise to their modus operandi. Said audience is crossing its’ arms with an increasingly irritated look on its face, patiently waiting for these monomaniacal idiots to shut up and go away.

    But patience has limits…and we’ve reached the end of ours.

    The prohibs have got no more tricks to pull out of their bag, just stale old gags that fall flatter than sheets of paper – and have about as much depth, too. It’s almost too embarrassing to watch…

  • Jean Valjean

    There’s not not much about Michele Leonhart that causes pleasure, but this photo of her standing next to Holder with a face like a smacked arse is a joy to behold:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/16/michele-leonhart-dea-sentencing-reform_n_5319085.html

    Most of the comments are calling for her dismissal…

    • jean valjean

      oops. my bad. the pic was from 2009 not from her recent visit to the woodshed with Holder. guess she just has a sour expression generally to match her personality.

  • Howard

    Kevin says;

    “The group I co-founded with former Congressman Patrick Kennedy, Smart Approaches to Marijuana — SAM — rejects both incarceration and legalization as optimal marijuana policies; we want to see more emphasis on prevention, treatment, and awareness.”

    —————

    I suppose he’s substituting the word “awareness” for, “If you don’t succumb to forced treatment and stop your cannabis use, incarceration is the next step for you”.

    But he’s too big of a coward to come out and say it.

    I remember a post from Pete a while back where someone asked (or tweeted) Sabet, “What about those people who do not exhibit problems or issues with cannabis use?” And Kevin never responded. Which of course suggests, according to him, there are no such people. Even though the overwhelming majority of people who are cannabis consumers function just fine, day in and day out, for their entire lives.

    Kevin will continue to rehash the same lame garbage. But I’ll bet his only receptive audience is The Society of Forced Rehab Professionals. Such a stellar group.

  • Crut

    Still trying to sell that third way nonsense. There is no third way. This is as black and white as issues come these days. Let’s define them, shall we?

    Prohibition – Illegal, you are a criminal and will be forced to do something you don’t want to do. (i.e. Pay a fine, go to Jail/Drug court/Treatment, become an Informant, or even get killed in your own home)

    Legalization – Legal, you are NOT a criminal. Have a nice day. Oh, and by the way, are you having any problems with substance X that we could help with or talk to you about?

    SAM — rejects both incarceration and legalization as optimal marijuana policies; we want to see more emphasis on prevention, treatment, and awareness.

    Incarceration and Legalization are NOT the two policies. Prohibition and Legalization are the two policies.

    Prevention, treatment, and awareness are noble goals that can support EITHER policy. You are still supporting prohibition if you are forcing people into these programs with the threat of, um, what’s that word you used? oh yea, incarceration.

    Are you seriously suggesting that every Cannabis connoisseur has a problem that needs treatment, or has no awareness of their drug of choice? Does the idea of a Cannabis enthusiast clash so much with your view of society that you can’t think straight?

    If someone doesn’t have a problem with a drug, why does SAM support forcing this someone to do something that they don’t want or need. Prevention, treatment and awareness are significantly more effective in a LEGAL arena.

  • allan

    OT but prolly of interest to many:

    http://edca.typepad.com/files/schweder-4-22-14-order.pdf

    Responding to the government’s motion to the extent it seeks clarification, the court provides the following. An evidentiary hearing on a motion to dismiss an indictment may be held when the moving papers “allege facts with sufficient definiteness, clarity, and specificity to enable the trial court to conclude that contested issues of fact exist.” United States v. Cano-Gomez, 460 F. App’x 656, 657 (9th Cir. 2011) (quoting United States v. Howell, 231 F.3d 615, 620 (9th Cir. 2000)) (alteration to original omitted). Here, defendants’ moving papers set forth facts with sufficient specificity, supported by declarations, showing there is new scientific and medical information raising contested issues of fact regarding whether the continued inclusion of marijuana as a Schedule I controlled substance in Title 21 of the federal statutes passes constitutional muster.

    • allan

      “… regarding whether the continued inclusion of marijuana as a Schedule I controlled substance in Title 21 of the federal statutes passes constitutional muster.”

      That’s big. A federal court hearing on whether cannabis belongs on Schedule 1. Also heard Paul Armentano is on the witness list.

      Meanwhile the Kettle Falls 5 are still gagged.

  • DonDig

    .
    ‘At least two deaths have already been attributed to legal marijuana cookies in Colorado,… ‘ (snip)

    A death is truly a tragic result.

    How many deaths have resulted from it being labelled illegal? Many tens of thousands.

    How can he posture as advocating for better public policy (ostensibly having a Ph.D. in it, no less) and rationalize that a few deaths from a legal substance is a greater societal malady than many tens of thousands of deaths as a result of it being labelled illegal?

    If he is looking for a ‘third way,’ does that mean he’d accept thousands of deaths as a result of continuing the black market?

    • thelbert

      hell yes, he would.

    • N.T. Greene

      “Attributed” is a null word. It seems to imply a cause-and-effect relationship, but attribution isn’t proof. If anything it sounds like number-fluffing to me. They need deaths to make a point, right?

    • Duncan20903

      .
      .

      Gee whiz, how many spouses get murdered by their drunken S.O.? Yes sweet pea, the only fact that they needed was to find the presence of cannabis somewhere in the general vicinity. No need to wait for the toxicology report before jumping to conclusions. It’s just par for the course.

      Something else that goes unmentioned is that if we just figure the average according to the CDC, somewhere in the neighborhood of 29,350 people died from the acute effects of drinking alcohol during the first 4 months of the year. I’m not sure if that includes the victims of drunken murderers or not.

      Death from drinking alcohol abuse, fatal overdose or idiots’ misadventure is so common that it isn’t even news. …and people wonder why we call it hysterical rhetoric.

  • Duncan20903

    .
    .

    Big addictionology isn’t any threat to our very way of life on a macro societal level? Not to mention our dictionaries because those damn Dumptys keep redefining word after word to suit their agenda.

    I must admit that I never have had clue that Kev-Kev might try his hand at comedy. He should partner up with Bill Maher and make a yin/yang style comedy team. You know, like G Gordon Liddy and Timothy Leary did but make the show a comedy instead of contrived debate.

    Of course Kevin will be the stooge. He’ll easily make everyone laugh extra hard when they see he doesn’t have even a clue that he’s being ridiculed in the extreme. Bah hah ha, ROFL, that should be even funnier than a one legged cat trying to bury his poop on a frozen pond.

    But after reflection perhaps it shouldn’t be a surprise. The title of most amusing prohibitionist really is a toss up between Kev-Kev and Stupid Patrick. But that’s a lot like trying to decide whether Stan Laurel or Oliver Hardy were the funniest. Together they re more than the sum of their parts.

  • Tim

    Meanwhile, this guy (who, frighteningly was elected head of the Canadian Medical Ass.) hit the media saying medical cannabis is “quackery” and “snake oil.” Project much, “Dr. Lou?” I suspect Kev has him on speed dial. Poor Harold Kalant is pushing 90.

    http://www.drlou.ca