And here, for your enjoyment, two people try to win the award for the most creative way to completely destroy the definition of something.

1. Mary Grabar over at Pajamas Media attempts to re-define libertarianism. Libertarians Need to Rethink Support for Drug Legalization

In abandoning the duty to enforce social order, today’s libertarians have made a devil’s pact with the pro-drug forces of George Soros and company. […]

[Marijuana’s] legalization is supported by the same forces that promote Kevin Jennings, one-world government, Gaia worship, and legalized prostitution. All these elements work against the traditional libertarian values of initiative, freedom, and honor. Libertarians need to rethink their position on drug legalization.

Wow. There’s no way you can re-define libertarianism and have it legitimately support drug prohibition, but she sure tries.

She also takes a walk on the wild side with her comparisons of alcohol and tobacco…

But I would argue that tradition should be a reason for [alcohol’s] continued legal status and for denying legal status to marijuana.

The sanction for alcohol use goes back to the Bible. In the New Testament, references to its use in ceremonies like the Last Supper and the wedding at Cana appear. But Jesus also warns about excessive use. In the Old Testament, alcohol is shown to cloud the judgment of Lot. The Bible, in this way, tells us when and how we can use alcohol.

This means very little, though, in the arid moral climate of today’s libertarianism.

But I would argue that it should, not only from my position as a Christian, but from my position as a citizen of a country whose foundational values spring from the Judeo-Christian heritage. The sanction for alcohol use has lasted for millennia. It has become part of our rituals at meals, celebrations, and religious services. That is a large part of why Prohibition failed.

Marijuana, in contrast, has always been counter-cultural in the West. Every toke symbolizes a thumb in the eye of Western values. So it follows that in order to maintain our culture, we need to criminalize this drug.

Ah, now we get to it. It’s the fact that marijuana has been counter-cultural that really gets her. Bingo.

2. Linda Taylor. Oh, my… our old friend Linda Taylor. Drugs Violate My Pursuit Of Happiness

Yep. She went there. She’s actually trying to claim that attempting to legalize marijuana is a violation of Constitutional rights.

I believe that Assemblyman Ammiano is violating the Constitutional rights of millions of Californians, and his own oath of office by introducing legislation to legalize marijuana. […]

While drug legalization advocates may portray themselves as victims, often espousing that they have a constitutional right to use marijuana. Our constitutionally protected right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is blatantly violated by marijuana legalization. Drug users can not insinuate that their right to use somehow trumps our right to live our lives, and bring up our children without exposing them to the shady underworld of drug use. In this instance the majority rules. I am stating that marijuana use, sales and legalization violates our constitutional right to the pursuit of happiness, under the 14th amendment.

Now, this is derangement, pure and simple.

I showed this letter to my friend George. He said:

You know, Pete, she has a point. I, for one, feel that we have the right to live our lives, and bring up our children without exposing them to the shady deranged letters of Linda Taylor. How does she insinuate that she has a right to write these letters that trumps our right to live free of her lunacy? Additionally, I find that as I think about my pursuit of happiness, it currently involves seeing Linda Taylor buried to her neck in a vat of cole slaw. Every day that the State of California fails to place Ms. Taylor in a vat of cole slaw is a violation of my Constitutional Right to my Pursuit of Happiness. At least that’s the way I understand it now that she’s so eloquently explained how the Constitution works.

[thanks, chris]
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

40 Responses to Inconceivable!

  1. allan420 says:

    yeppers… I had to send an LTE to the Turlock Journal on this one. If anyone has happened to not see Ms Taylor in action… let us know. Someone I’m sure will (not so) gladly post her YouTube stand-up comedy act in Modesto.

  2. allan420 says:

    … and as a disclaimer on the Pajama-Media piece (*cough-ofshit*), it should be noted that in Grabar’s bio-line it says she is a fiction writer. And interesting point is that the anti-cannabists haven’t changed their approach much in some 70 or 80 years. Both Taylor and Grabar qualify for the “Blame it on the Hippies” category in the Reefer Madness Redux nominations.

    Many of us have long said this cannabis war is about culture more than anything. It started with a generally accepted bigotry against Mexicans and blacks. And when race was no longer a tractable, socially approved tool they turned the hatred on… the hippies! Nixon’s contribution to the escalation of drug war Madness…

  3. SisterZombie says:

    This one?


  4. Bruce says:

    Scam LOL
    There is only one scam. Them vs Liberty.
    Smoke rings, such pretty things.

  5. Bruce says:

    Because of the dark karmic forces unleashed by the prohibitionists the energy polarities are in conflict resulting in the earths magnetic field being perturbed in such dangerous fashion as to render compasses no longer accurate.
    Suggest legalizing it over losing it. UNITE IN LOVE AND WONDER
    save the world!!!

  6. claygooding says:

    She has the freedom to think and say what she wants,I have the freedom to laugh at her.
    It shows just how desperate the prohibitionists are to have too rely on garbage like that for reasons too keep marijuana illegal. Someone needs to explain to these people that we are trying to legalize pot,not make it mandatory.
    The fact is,as I believe that marijuana blocks cancer,I truly hope none of these people use marijuana.

    “Marijuana is addictive to people the same way sex is,anything that good needs repeating!”

  7. KBCraig says:

    Linda Taylor is confuzzled.

    Either that, or she actually believes we have a Constitutional right to the preamble of the Declaration of Independence.

  8. DdC says:

    One thing when non tax paid religious nuts get print. Obviously a rag not worth reading. But it seems their gossip, if spread on loud and dramatic enough. Leads to excuses for the tax paid thieves stealing Liberty with sneaky slimy tricks. Paid by everyone and then acting on their own reefer madness delusions. Don’t they have a vaccine for these reefer wingnut traitors yet? They busted Oprah for badmouthing beef and yet these unsubstantiated airheads can spew venom and lies inciting violence on millions of peaceful tokers. There is no 404 gag rule on killing or stealing. In both cases it can be deemed justifiable. Yet not for the sick and dying using Ganja? She advocates fermented, rotting fruit because someone edited a book she worships, originally made of Hemp. Chiloms, Hookahs and Cauldrons with hot rocks vaporizing buds inside Hemp tapestry. Temple incense with traces of hashish. I think Jesus more than likely changed wheat into weed at the wedding.

    In a Dec. 14 e-mail to Chief Probation officer Robin Leaf, Arapahoe County District Attorney Carol Chambers wrote: “We are taking the position that people who use medical marijuana while on probation are in violation of federal law and must be revoked. That is true even if a judge is telling them it is not. A state judge cannot change federal law and a violation of federal law is a violation of probation.

    The Jefferson Bible
    Thomas Jefferson believed that the ethical system of Jesus was the finest the world has ever seen. In compiling what has come to be called “The Jefferson Bible,” he sought to separate those ethical teachings from the religious dogma and other supernatural elements that are intermixed in the account provided by the four Gospels. He presented these teachings, along with the essential events of the life of Jesus, in one continuous narrative.


    “I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature.
    The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus
    by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin,
    will be classed with the fable of the generation of
    Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.”
    — Thomas Jefferson, – 1823

    Scythians High Plains Drifters

    The Scythians were a barbaric group of pre-Common Era nomadic tribes who are a fascinating example of an ancient cannabis using group. The Scythians played a very important part in the Ancient World from the seventh to first century BC.

    Cannabis Culture Archives: Sacrament

  9. Duncan says:

    ‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,’ it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.’

  10. SisterZombie says:

    For the last 4 years or so, a select bunch of us lowly DWR affiliates have amused ourselves silly with Linda Taylor at The Bee Hive in Modesto:

    Please feel free to join us for the epilogue. Linda posts under activist1 & Stancoinsider

  11. Jon Doe says:

    KBCraig: Thank you! These “conservatives” need to quit confusing the Declaration of Independence with the Constitution. It makes it that much more obvious that they know jack all squat about this country’s philosophical underpinnings and it’s history.

  12. ezrydn says:

    “…and bring up our children without exposing them to the shady underworld of drug use.”

    I often wonder if anyone ever stops to think about a comment such as this one. If drugs or a drug becomes legal, there is NO “shady underworld” of usage. Would she say the same thing about alcohol or nicotine or caffine? The prohibs have become so hooked on the “shady underworld” aspect, they’ve forgotten the definition of certain words and phrases.

    Wait a minute. They must be using the same dictionaries that the President and Drug Czar use. That’s it! It evident they can’t visualize a legal relationship after an illegal one is changed.

    If they run a stop sign and get a ticket, do they then stay out of their cars due to the cars being related to the infraction and ticket/payout?

    “Following the Law” can mean personally following a prescribed pattern or taking action to change said prescribed pattern. Otherwise, why does the Constitution tell us HOW to “change laws?”

    Linda and her kind are quickly becoming the minority and they truly don’t like it. Maybe it’s time THEY move out!

  13. Carol M. says:

    I don’t believe anyone could read that trash and fail to realize how stupid it is.

    I couldn’t read it (I managed to skim). Something about “traditions” and alcohol being practically a religious requirement started to make me nauseous. I think I lost a couple IQ points exposing myself to this drivel.

    Please give sufficient warning in the future if you are going to post stuff like this.

  14. Chris says:

    It’s always ironic to remember that these documents she is referring to were written on hemp. There is no possible way that the writers of those documents would EVER agree with her on this point.

  15. ezrydn says:


    Thanks for the “tracker” link. I had to quit reading the comments. I was laughing to hard. At first, I thought I’d comment, then, I understood she’d delete or have it deleted, to cover her own, well, you know what I’m about to say without saying it.

    She is simply another “indicator” to us that they realize they’ve lost the fight. They realize that we won’t accept the kool-aid tainted pablum any longer. And, we’ll probably have to put up with her types AFTER legalization, for a while. However, it’s fun to keep their feet to the fire. She writes like she drives.

  16. Ethan says:

    Yeah yeah, probably too long for publication. Still…

    Dear Editor,

    Linda Taylor claims that the very introduction of legislation which would legalize and regulate marijuana in the state of California is a violation of her Constitutional rights. I suppose civics takes all kinds.

    Don’t get me wrong: she has every right to disagree in spirit with Pauline Sabin of the Women’s Organization for National Prohibition Reform, who once stated before Congress, “Women played a large part in the enactment of the Eighteenth Amendment. They are now realizing with heart burning and heart aching that if the spirit is not within, legislation can be of no avail. They thought they could make prohibition as strong as the Constitution, but instead have made the Constitution as weak as prohibition.” (Of course, Ms. Sabin’s opponents had a much stronger case than does Ms. Taylor, in that their equally futile attempts to legislate morality were made law by virtue of an amendment as opposed to creative readings of the commerce and supremacy clauses.)

    Ms. Taylor is further free to imply that Law Enforcement Against Prohibition is not a “legitimate law enforcement group,” simply by virtue of the fact that its members vehemently disagree with her. She is free to point out that “marijuana use is against federal law” and that “the sale of marijuana for profit is illegal,” as though there had never been such a thing as an unjust or ethically inconsistent law — and as though wars of words and even (regrettably) bullets had never been fought over such laws. She should go right ahead and indulge in the /cum hoc ergo propter hoc/ fallacy of the “correlation between drug use and increased crime.” Indeed, the Turlock Journal should go right ahead and publish her: finding someone this misguided is a scoop which I would never wish to deny its editors.

    All I ask is that, when Ms. Taylor states, “In this instance the majority rules,” she is willing to stand by her words on the day that the majority no longer agrees with her view that cannabis prohibition represents sensible public policy for California. Nobody who follows the polling trends can possibly doubt that this day is coming soon.

    Ethan Straffin
    Palo Alto, CA

  17. Ethan says:

    Comment added over at Pajamas…

    Dear libertarians: you’re not actually taking anything this pseudo-Christian authoritarian Mary Grabar is saying to heart, right? Just checking. I figure you tuned out the moment she expressed outrage that you might agree with Soros the Antichrist on this or any other issue — as though the notion that liberals and libertarians might be in sync on social issues (if occasionally for different reasons) is not as basic as it gets with respect to the political map.

    Still, if we’re going to convince Mary that arresting a million citizens per year on marijuana charges is a bad idea — especially in these trying economic times — we may need to turn to the Bible:

    “God said, ‘Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed which is upon the face of all the earth.…To you it will be for meat.’ … And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.” (Genesis 1:29-31)

    Compare and contrast Ms. Grabar’s words: “Marijuana, in contrast, has always been counter-cultural in the West. Every toke symbolizes a thumb in the eye of Western values. So it follows that in order to maintain our culture, we need to criminalize this drug.”

    This is God in the role of God and Ms. Grabar in the role of Pontius Pilate.

  18. Bruce says:

    ‘she writes like she drives’ LOL
    I have noticed some folks also shop like they drive.
    Helmets and gloves recommended when going to Wally World.

  19. Dudeman says:

    I wonder if Grabar would be amenable to letting cultures and countries with centuries of cannabis use back out of the Single Convention if tradition is really what matters.

  20. Duncan says:

    Well Ms Taylor gave this site a plug and linked it in the comments to her article.

  21. Maryjane Hempfield says:

    Excellent point Dudeman.

  22. Just me. says:

    “In abandoning the duty to enforce social order, today’s libertarians have made a devil’s pact with the pro-drug forces of George Soros and company. […]

    [Marijuana’s] legalization is supported by the same forces that promote Kevin Jennings, one-world government, Gaia worship, and legalized prostitution. All these elements work against the traditional libertarian values of initiative, freedom, and honor. Libertarians need to rethink their position on drug legalization.”

    I hope like hell Soro’s and his NWO isnt behind this fight , if so, I’ll have to re-think how I fight this fight. I will NOT support anything along the lines of Soro’s and the NWO ilk.
    I’ve always thought prohibition was part of the “Progressive/communist” movement. A way of destroying the family unit, inner cities , individual rights and freedom , the constitution. Have I not done my research?

    As for the rest of these asshats. Since when was alcohol not part of the drug world? Alcoholics beating the wives and kids are not part of this”shady underworld of drug use”? I guess it legal status seperates alcohol from other drugs in their minds. What a wonder fantasy world they live in.
    So if it could be proven that Christ used cannabis , what would these people do then?

    “In abandoning the duty to enforce social order”
    Quit the opposte in my veiw. We are trying to restore social order, restore civil rights , freedom ,justice. Many people are harmed by these laws even thought they dont use drugs of any kind.

    It seems to me these author’s are falling into the NWO mind set just by trying to legislate every aspect of people’s lives. Having legal cannabis WILL bring about an awaking of the corruption behind it all. Those looking for total control will have to give up the laws they have in place and find new ways to control.

    Lets see…what new laws could they use to get more control over the masses? Healthcare? cap and trade? copenhagen treaties? Patroit act? bank take overs?
    Talk about abandoning social order.

    This fight for drug reform is 10% of the ice berg, the other 90% is an ugly issue, issues that will surface as we remove the top 10%(prohibition).

  23. Paul says:

    This is why I am a Libertarian and not a Republican. They find it strange when we agree on economic issues, but then suddenly and inexplicably disagree on matters like immigration and drug policy.

    With drugs, the obvious moral position to hold is for legalization. How justice and morality is served by locking up dope smokers (and everyone knows some, even if they never inhaled themselves) I will never understand. Jail should be reserved for genuine crimes.

    Politics makes for strange bedfellows. I have no problem cooperating with Soros on legalizing drugs, even if he really IS the goddamn Antichrist. I’ll not be sending his organizations any money, of course, but I’ll cheer their legalization efforts on, absolutely. More money, more people, more votes. That’s how we win. We part ways when he begins talking about socializing medicine and raising taxes, and that’s just fine by me.

    @Duncan: I liked your Humpty Dumpty comment. That pursuit of happiness thing probably illogic probably has some analog somewhere in the Alice books.

  24. Hope says:

    KBCraig? Is that you KCraig, from the old DrugSense chats?

  25. Tim says:

    Many of us have long said this cannabis war is about culture more than anything

  26. Tim says:

    Oops, let’s try that again:

    Many of us have long said this cannabis war is about culture more than anything

    The Prime Minister of Canada agrees.

  27. DdC says:

    “A popular government, without popular information,
    or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue
    to a Farce or a Tragedy – or perhaps both.
    Knowledge will forever govern ignorance,
    and a people who mean to be their own Governors
    must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”
    ~ James Madison

    Poverty? Dubya Says Blame the Hippies! 12/02/03
    His book, The Dream and the Nightmare: The Sixties’ Legacy to the Underclass (Encounter Books, 1999) argues that the radical transformation of American culture that took place in the 1960s brought the underclass into being. Changes in beliefs and values at the top of American society produced catastrophic changes in behavior at the bottom. President-elect George W. Bush told the Wall Street Journal that it was the most important book he’d ever read after the Bible, and Bush strategist Karl Rove calls The Dream and the Nightmare a roadmap to the president-elects “compassionate conservatism.”

    “Facts need not get in the way–they can be (and are) marshaled to suit the moment. Myron Magnet’s The Dream and the Nightmare is no exception. In his chapter on “Victimizing the Poor,” he cites twenty-six “real” men (and one fictional [man]) as evidentiary elements of his central argument that poor people have been victimized by being said to have been victimized. Not a single female is called upon to prove a point. Yet the chapter is largely about people on welfare–94 percent of whom are single mothers and their children.”
    ~ Theresa Funiciello

    Canada’s Supremes Cower Under DEAth Threats 12/24/03

    Stephen Harper and The End of Days
    (of Canada as We Know It)

    Hypocrite Harpo’s just playing the blame game to maintain border crossings. A mere puppet lapping up world trade orchestration droppings…

    Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Yo Yo Ma. U2b
    Part of Canada’s National Arts Centre Orchestra’s Gala Oct 3, 2009 Surprise Appearence by the Prime Minister in “With A Little Help From My Friends. Mmm,I get high with a little help from my friends?”

    The only cure for ignorance is information in common terms based in physical reality. This prohibition flavor of the month decade or century is still only a prohibition. A product sold like any other. People buy it, they stay in business it has nothing to do with smack crack or buds. It has more to do with burlap than XTC. But could just as easily be potatoes or spherical planets.

    Booze Prohibition removed home stilled Ethanol from the farmers. Al Capone directed the sheep into a pasture and fed them the untouchables. No one had a problem with a few beers and outside of the raped and pillaged south, that the KKK cleaned up after the war years, not racism it has been led too. Alcoholism wasn’t a devastating problem. The gang cops in the larger cities threw them in the drunk tank. Only the Women’s Christian Temperance League sipping their Laudanum Tea was raising hell about demon rum. In a few states with no real political clout. Not until the gang of fascist bought the 18thamendment, and the same gang repealed it with the 21st in 1933. After the infernal con-bustion was spewing fossil fools and as long as the farmers couldn’t grow any more gasoline. To this day.

    It was Temperance the women advocated, not Prohibition. Same Rockefeller Crude Oil and Dupont Chemicals, Monsanto DDT Agent Orange or Green now dropped on Colombian kids. Booze Pharmaceuticals Timber Paper Meat Dairy and Plastics not having to compete via the Nixon lie CSA. With the same Hearst Yellow Journalism Faux News and the alphabet channels. Tinsel-town plastic carney’s and geeks, censoring, by ratings today. And the sheople bowed and prayed to the sliver screen gods they made.

    Same Tricky Dick shell game, don’t look behind the Watergate Curtain, while a brand new bouncing baby CSA was fabricated, without science or his own damn tax paid Commission.

    Including RxGanja and Hemp, not included in the 1937 Marihuana Tax Act, Timothy Leary had overturned by the Supreme Court in 69. Scam, Madoff’s getting 150 years. What about these World Trade Orchestrations and IMF Banksters causing prohibition? Crude oil polyester vs burlap and canvas. Crude cellulose vs Hemp cellulose plastic. Booze in Bars or Joints at Home. Fear of the streets over acting like an American. Usually the ones wrapped up in the flag burning the Constitution, all with haircuts, cursing about the poor in the name of christ, cigarettes dangling and a bottle of beer tween their legs, and the men are far worse.

    The only reason ever in the History of humans for prohibition of any vice people enjoy was to collect tariffs, sell war toys and jack up the price of the contraband. Its a war Dear, Incrementalism is giving a few shelter from the storm while perpetuating the storm. Including all drugs. What the foolish drug worriers don’t get is that throwing the baby out with the bath water is a real harsh way to obtain a goal or prove a point. Especially agains millions of your own citizens. Censorship provided a means of perpetuating the profits of the Ganjawar. Now that has been threatened with the internet and occassional attempts by the mainstream corporate media and free speech community based TV. Now its shooting fish in a barrel and the Linta Taylors are ending the war with their own ridiculous madness.

    Thank God for Hippies

  28. this has always been a religious war — it is important to keep that fact in focus.

    and there is one other thing that everyone needs to understand: it’s all or nothing. the idiots waging the war seem incapable of comprehending the simple fact that alcohol, above all else, is a drug!!!

    and those on “our side” need to recognize that they indulge the same asinine mind set as the prohibs with their own attitudes about cannabis.

    shame on every one of you talking out both sides of your mouths about pot versus “the hard drugs” — you are all as spineless and feckless as those who who consider their drug of choice “sacred” and paint all others as “evil.”

    this is not about pot — it’s about human rights. we all have the absolute right to do with ourselves as we wish — and no one has the right to punish you for doing so.

    we have all the facts to counter every argument posed by the prohibs — we just need to remember not to act like them.

    every single one of you playing the “let’s just legalize pot and see what happens” game are as useless, dangerous and completely ass-holy as those who use the phrase “drugs and alcohol.”

    get your shit together and we can actually win. keep playing games about which drugs are “okay” and which are not and we continue riding the merry-go-round from hell.

  29. Richard Steeb says:

    I have enjoyed Cannabis daily for forty one years. Keeping cannabis illegal while tobacco and alcohol are dispensed freely is murderously stupid. There is no controversy there.

    I do NOT understand why anyone here wants to tie the legalization of Cannabis to that of the “hard” drugs, Brian, e.g. because there are sound reasons for restricting Fentanyl to prescription.

  30. DavesNotHere says:

    Sorry, Brian, this has not always been a religious war. You have to go deeper than religion, to what religion represents and provides, which is power. Hearst wasn’t religiously motivated, he was motivated by greed and profits. Anslinger wasn’t much of a Christian in his daily living, he was just mean and power hungry. Sure, they all use religion as justification, but then they use government power to enact their religious dogma.

    Was Lisa Madigan motivated by religon when she argued a drug dog sniff isn’t a search? What does that have to do with religion? How about Barack Obama’s efforts to outlaw the ephedra plant, is that religiously motivated? Nope.

    Modern liberals don’t believe in individual rights, they believe in collective rights. If the collective doesn’t want cannabis or whatever, then the collective will outlaw it. THAT is what we are fighting. Government power over individual rights. We are fighting to get our individual rights back from the collective mindset that liberals have used to get the religious on their side in this war.

    Ms. Taylor illustrated perfectly my comments a few days ago about religious people leaving their “conservative” principles behind to join the liberal, collective mindset when it comes to drugs. “In this instance, the majority rules.” This shows pretty clearly that liberals have gotten the religious folks to join their collective side of the drug war.

    Do modern liberals lock us in cages because of religion? No, they do it for “the children”. You see it in most of their policy proposals. Individual rights must be taken by government and given to the collective, “for the children”. Now, “for the children” is really code for the government employees and unions and their pensions and benefits. Follow the money.

    Do we need religion on our side? Yes, we do. As long as we’re operating under collective rules, we need a majority along with the politicians in power. Will we automatically win if religion admits defeat? Nope, the war will just begin then. Then we have to fight the unions and entrenched bureaucrats who provide the most campaign cash to keep politicians in favor of prohibition. State of Illinois prime example. For the past 20 years I bet, the biggest campaign donors to BOTH parties have been unions that include huge numbers of government employees. The money is NOT coming from churches, especially to the Democrats with complete control of the state.

    This is NOT a religious war. This is a war for individual rights against collective rights. Which is perfectly illustrated by the fact that so many liberals are willing to legalize cannabis but not other drugs. IF they believed in individual rights instead of collective rights, they would automatically see the need to legalize all drugs. Is it because of religion they think cannabis is ok but LSD is not? Nope, its because of collective rights, protecting children, government union jobs, and the simple belief that government knows best what individuals should be able to.

    Mr. Steeb, what is the sound reason for locking a human being in a cage that possesses Fentanyl without a prescription? Protecting them from themselves?

    Brian, do you think Mr. Steeb here is religiously motivated, or liberally motivated by the notion that government needs to protect people from themselves and government knows best?

    No personal offenses intended.

  31. SisterZombie says:

    Brian; you just darn stole my heart away:

    “this is not about pot — it’s about human rights. we all have the absolute right to do with ourselves as we wish — and no one has the right to punish you for doing so.

    we have all the facts to counter every argument posed by the prohibs — we just need to remember not to act like them.

    get your shit together and we can actually win. keep playing games about which drugs are “okay” and which are not and we continue riding the merry-go-round from hell.”

  32. Pingback: “Libertarians Need to Rethink Support for Drug Legalization” | 420 Tribune

  33. allan420 says:

    Yep, I’m with brian… it’s Prohibition we’re fighting and more importantly it’s our freedom we’re really fighting for.

    Prohibition is chaos and those who profit from mayhem and social disorder are given the keys to the chaos-mobile. But in a regulated market… there is a friendly checker (who is making a tax-paying wage and who spends his/her wages in the community) willing to take my cash or card for that 6 pack of Fat Tire and a pouch of American Spirit tobacco. And this is all done in public! No mayhem, no back alleys…

    And if I want to grow some ganja or some poppies why not? Now if I want to grow acres of poppies… why not? Why DON’T we grow our own poppies here? Considering how much pot in a year the tens of millions of us potheads consume, there is employment there, there would be derivative businesses that spring up to meet the specific needs of those who would farm our herb, our poppies.

    heck, we’ve got farmers in the Dakotas doing civil disobedience with hemp seeds – and he’s no hippie. But this war has hurt our farmers too… if we grew hemp again our timber industry would be healthier… the list goes on….

    But it won’t matter, if Big Bro’ wins.If you don’t think the Wash DC-Pharma-Wall St-military-industrial-corporate-incarceration complex (Big Bro’) isn’t poised to lock our asses down… ya ain’t payin’ attention.

    And thanks, once again, to LEAP for their work… they are on point with their message – End Prohibition (again).

    It’s a simple one.

    And what’s the word with Howard W? He’s been quiet for awhile… ez…?

  34. Pete says:


    Howard’s on top of things at Citizens Opposing Prohibition. Check it out.

    I’ve also offered him an opportunity to guest post here, but I think he’s too busy with the new site.

  35. ezrydn says:

    Be sure to get on Howard’s mailing list. He usually mails every week or so.

  36. hi davesnothere — actually i think that perhaps you need to go a little deeper to see where this all came from: it predates hearst by about 100 years, as the roots of this nonsense extend to at least the mid 1830s. the religiously motivated started their crusade against alcohol, then systematically added all of the other known intoxicants one by one.

    thus, the basis of prohibition remains the fear of eternal damnation whether or not any individual crusader of today fully comprehends that fact. while i agree with you in toto that the primary reason this is all WRONG is that it is an unforgivable usurpation of individual rights, we must be clear about why it happened in the first place. that “why” is clearly fear of eternal damnation.

    certainly what drives people to continue supporting prohibition in our current day and age is not always driven by religious belief on an individual basis. indeed, i would surmise that most people today who continue supporting prohibition do so mostly due to a simple lack of knowledge — which can be “cured.” meanwhile, the chorus of screaming harpies dominating the debate from the prohibitionist side over the past several decades do remain primarily motivated by religion.

    hi rick steeb — fentanyl is already available by prescription, as are cocaine and methamphetamine. thus, when we approach the scenario of legalized availability of recreational intoxicants, we would be well advised to delineate how something is intended to be used in order to create coherent legal structures within which these things can be effectively regulated.

    i honestly do not ever see the development of a market in recreational fentanyl. however, there clearly would be a market for recreational opium products. if opium is available for recreation, my assessment is that the vast majority of people who are attracted to the effects of opiates would use opium rather than doing something like taking vicodin to catch a buzz as they do in the current regime of “illegal” opium and “legal by prescription” vicodin, morphine and fentanyl.

    we cannot allow ourselves to succumb to baseless fears about heroin being sold to children in vending machines — that scenario is prohibitionist fear mongering with precious little basis in reality.

  37. DavesNotHere says:

    Fair enough Brian, so how do you explain China’s war on marijuana if it is rooted in religion? Has it always been a religious war for them also?

    No, its not a religious war and never has been as is perfectly illustrated with China today. What motivates it in China? The State is God and government knows best. One group of people wanting to use government to have power over and control another group of people. Power, as I said.

    Sure, they used to use religion to control “other” groups of people, but now they use government. That is the root of this Brian, one group trying to control another group, regardless of an excuse like religion.

    Tobacco Nazis are doing the exact same thing and it is not rooted in religion either. The State owns you and if you smoke you harm yourself and the state so its bad.

    This isn’t a religious war at all. We can get them on our side to fight the State. China bans drugs and religion to help us better see who we are fighting. Liberal statists that want ever more government power.

  38. davenotshere — i don’t try to explain anything about what china does as they have nothing to do with having started the “war on drugs,” nor are they responsible for waging it against the rest of the world on a daily basis.

    the US started it all — and religious motivation is the root cause. i guess we should be glad that at least drug users are not being lit on fire.

Comments are closed.