Miss Universe shows us the way

Miss Universe doesn’t support marijuana legalization

“It’s been proven to prevent people from their full potentional, and I don’t think that’s a good thing for society,” she said. “If we’re trying to move things forward, a drug like marijuana does the opposite. It will slow things down.”

Olivia Culpo has a good point. We want to move things forward. And, after all, pot smokers have merely gone on to such things as becoming President, winning nobel prizes, winning olympic gold medals, creating new musical forms and developing new technologies, while Misses Universe have gone on to such societal-driving accompishments as wearing beauty products on TV and marrying rich men.

Olivia has decided not to return to college.

As the 2012 Miss Universe winner, Culpo […] received an undisclosed salary, brand new wardrobe, a limitless supply of beauty products and a luxury apartment in New York City. […]

Culpo took to the stage in a purple and blue bikini and a red velvet gown. When she was later asked by the judges about her regrets, she admitted she wished she had never picked on her siblings.

I should note that controversy has been dogging the Miss Universe contest with the observation that the past 62 winners have all come from the same planet, completely defying astronomical odds — a planet where, ironically, marijuana is heavily used.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

79 Responses to Miss Universe shows us the way

  1. Servetus says:

    Oivia Culpo’s brand new wardrobe, her limitless supply of beauty products, and renovation on her new luxury apartment in New York City might suffer delays if someone stops to burn one.

    What makes Ms. Culpo’s pot manifesto even stranger is she’s a cellist. Completely disregarding the connection between music and marijuana demonstrates a lack of dedication to the art.

    • Liam says:

      She’s 20! A more appropriate question would have been, how do you pour piss out of a boot? Her brains didn’t get her the apartment, her ass did.

  2. CJ says:

    I suggest the criteria for miss universe and miss universe contestants be changed. i suggest moving forward in order for the event and its participants to reach their full potential they ought to make sure, in the future, that all involved be mute. or deaf. or deaf mutes. only then can Miss Universe reach her full potential.

    ah well, and while im at it, regrettably, yes, i did steal the cookie (one [1]) from the cookie jar. that knowledge has lead to a life of self destruction and crime, seeing as immediately after doing such a terrible thing I knew my immortal soul was damned to hell forever. oh well.

  3. Byddaf yn egluro: says:

    Legally regulated (manufacture, distribution and consumption) of marijuana is coming to a state near you in 2013:


    “These laws just don’t make sense anymore. It’s shocking, from my perspective, the number of people that we all know who are recreational marijuana users… these are incredibly upstanding citizens: Leaders in our community, and exceptional people.”
    —Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom (preparing the way for Governor Jerry Brown to initiate proceedings to legalize and regulate marijuana through the state legislature)


    Maine’s legislature is moving on a legalization-and-regulation bill that could bring the state $8 million a year in new revenue.

    ”The people are far ahead of the politicians on this. Just in the past few weeks we’ve seen the culture shift dramatically.”
    —Rep. Diane Russell of Portland, District 120 (Occupation: Public Relations Consultant)


    “Thinking we’re not going to have it is unrealistic. It’s just a question of how and when” assemblyman Richard (Tick) Segerblom of Las Vegas, elected to the Nevada State Senate in 2012


    “We have decades of evidence that says prohibition does not work and it’s counterproductive. it’s a matter of dollars and common sense. There’s a source of revenue that’s reasonable that is rational that is the right policy choice for our state. We are going to get there on legalization.”
    —Peter Buckley, co-chair of the Oregon state legislature’s budget committee.


    Rhode Island is also expected to legally regulate marijuana through the state legislature instead of a popular referendum.

    ”Our prohibition has failed, Legalizing and taxing it, just as we did to alcohol, is the way to do it.”
    —Rep. Edith Ajello, chairs the House Committee on Judiciary and is a member of the House Oversight Committee.


    In November 2012, the state’s Democratic governor, Peter Shumlin, cruised to re-election while strongly backing marijuana decriminalization. And the city of Burlington passed a resolution in November 2012 calling for an end to prohibition – with 70 percent support.


    Most Alaskans already have a clear view of things from their own back garden. Personal use and possession of Marijuana in Alaskan homes has been effectively legal since 1975

    • Duncan20903 says:


      You seem to have forgotten that Alaska took a hiatus from sanity between Election Day 1990 and the 2002 ruling of the Alaska Court of Appeals that struck down the ballot initiative created law which purported to re-criminalize it. The result is there are lots of fun statistics using that re-criminalization law. Like the fact that the number of Alaskan youth in “treatment” for the fiction of merrywanna addiction almost tripled while the law was in force.
      (Alaska adopted their medicinal cannabis patient protection law on Election Day 1998)

      Then there’s the SAMHSA NSDUH study of the incidence of “drugged” driving which found that Alaska enjoyed a statistically significant reduction in that statistic in an 8 year study which started in the very same 2002 that was when the Alaska Court of Appeals striking down that ballot initiative generated law.

      • Byddaf yn egluro: says:

        I hadn’t forgotten, just deemed it unnecessary to mention it as doing so would have added nothing.

  4. What Miss Olivia Culpo is missing is this:


    Is Our Republic Ending? 8 Striking Parallels Between the Fall of Rome and U.S. (at Alternet by Steven Strauss)

    “3 — Continuous War: A national state of security arises, distracting attention from domestic challenges with foreign wars. Similar to the late Roman Republic, the US – for the past 100 years — has either been fighting a war, recovering from a war, or preparing for a new war: WW I (1917-18), WW II (1941-1945), Cold War (1947-1991), Korean War (1950-1953), Vietnam (1953-1975), Gulf War (1990-1991), Afghanistan (2001-ongoing), and Iraq (2003-2011). And, this list is far from complete.”

    War prevents people from moving forward. Regulating the use of marijuana does not mean everyone should smoke marijuana. We just won’t move backwards by incarcerating our own population for their personal choices if they choose to use it.

    If we are teaching that running around in a swimsuit looking like a Barbie doll will help you reach your full potential, Miss Olivia Culpo, you surely have a head start.

    • War Vet says:

      I agree. Only through drug legalization will modern war be reduced, which will save America from crumbling on both the inside and outside. With Africa high on the drug food chain, Militant Islam threatens the Islamic world, which threatens ours. The next location for U.S. soldiers will be in Africa as evidence seen in why so many U.S. soldiers are being deployed to Africa right now. Militant Islamic Africa has the drug money it needs to keep sending bomb strapped linebackers into the U.S. (as seen on Christmas Day 2009 in America), it’s only a matter of time before one gets in, which will weaken our finances (paying for a terrorist attack), which will again increase the likelihood of another and then another (throw 100 darts at the dart board, bound to get a bull’s-eye). And with Pakistan deep in the drug game, it’s only a matter of time when the ISI (allies with the DEA as seen in the 2008 Mumbai, Terrorist Attack’s creation) takes drug money and gives it away to their brother’s in arms . . . and with Iran –the world’s leading drug consumers have adequate drug money to finance Nuclear Facilities and soon the money to fix any facility targeted by the CIA and Brits and Israelis. And with Al Qaeda supporting the down fall of the Syrian president with drug money, the Syrian people will be hard-pressed to disprove that Al Qaeda are angels sent from God, and hence will receive countless recruits who will attack Africa, Asia, Europe and North America. The CSA laws are treason and grounds for removing citizenship from anyone obeying the law, which makes it illegal for most cops to be cops since one cannot be a cop if they are not a U.S. Citizen . . . which proves that no drug offender after 9/11 ever received a trial or the right to a trial after an arrest since only U.S. citizens can be judges and attorneys. Since the removal of the CSA law removes the black market on drugs, the CSA is synonymous with the black market herself and since we are at war with radical Islam who funds their war with drugs, the CSA is logically a fatwa or a piece of Sharia Law (by legal definition of course), which makes all CSA obeying D.O.J. into paid Islamic Operatives (by logical definition only, not through one’s religious decision since Most Islamic terrorists by the CSA’s definition, cause and effect are not in fact Muslim). There is no provable difference between a CSA obeying cop and Osama Bin Laden. There was once a time when cops after 9/11 could be forgiven for attacking America based on ignorance, but the Cops and DOJ know that the CSA finances Radical Islam, which makes them by Constitutional definition into Islamic Terrorists Sympathizers.

      Is there any proof that states that any CSA obeying D.O.J. after 9/11 to not be Muslim Terrorist Sympathizers? Please tell me now. The CSA forces every cop who obeys it into a Muslim Terrorist Sympathizer . . . through obedience to the law, was the label logically and Constitutionally legal, given to them. And since most American cops are not U.S. citizens, we can logically say that the DOJ (the ones who adhere to the CSA laws) is a foreign military occupation (since the label of a non-U.S. Citizen inside of America is a foreigner). Rome allowed a German to be a general and that general allowed the tribes to enter and tear apart Rome law by law and piece by piece: proof that every American cops and DOJ official who obeys the CSA as being legally foreign to America. Can anyone prove me wrong? If I’m wrong, I want to know with a logical and valid answer.

  5. claygooding says:

    Almost every beauty pageant winner is an icon for stupidity with very few of them even having a college education and I would venture a guess that this bitch was failing in every class except fellatio.

    • Byddaf yn egluro: says:

      There were girls like her in every class I ever attended —they were always easy to spot as they usually had dirty knees 🙂

  6. claygooding says:

    PS:She was probably getting a “D” in it. And that was because the teacher was her uncle.

  7. ezrydn says:

    The funniest part is they believe there’s substance in the title. Miss Universe/Miss Back Alley. They’re still in the same place. Other than said title, what’s the highest post ever achieved by one of these airheads? Hummm?

  8. Dante says:

    Call me contrarian, but when an air-headed bimbo takes to her soap-box to pontificate about any subject, the opposing side always wins.

    Why? People know she’s an idiot. Good looking, but still an idiot. So they reject whatever she says, because nobody respects the political ramblings of a really good looking bimbo.

    So keep talking about the value of prohibition, Miss Universe, and thanks. You are helping to bring an end to it every time you open your ignorant mouth.

  9. TieHash says:

    FWIW, at least the local Miss Dallas competition the interview question only counted for 5% of the overall score. I saw it live this year and one girl was asked if Texas should SECEDE from the union. After hearing the question twice she said that Texas is succeeding and that organized labor is bad for the economy.

  10. War Vet says:

    I wonder if diet pills messed with her thinking? She sounds like a speed freak -of course marijuana will slow you down in comparison to Dexadrine and Phen-phen. Oh, Lord Jesus, I pray that this young woman remembers to take the toothpick out of her martini or umbrella out of her Singapore-Sling before she drinks it and chokes on it.

  11. ezrydn says:

    I see nothing in those shows except “meat on the hoof.” Who tunes in for intelligent comments? NO ONE! It’s no different than a cattle auction.

    • claygooding says:

      I have known several very beautiful women that had as much or more intelligence than good looking men like me and my couchmates,,however,,knowing them makes the stupid ones easy to spot because none of the intelligent ones sound like these bimbos on network news and beauty pageants wannabe egomaniacs.

      I can forgive a stupid person for being stupid but can’t forgive a person for feigning stupidity for a living.

      Prohibitionist Handbook 101 for sale in the lobby!

  12. claygooding says:

    PS:comedians exempted!

  13. Duncan20903 says:


    Didn’t Arnold win the title of Mr. Universe back when he still chose to enjoy cannabis from time to time?

    ———- ———- ———- ———- ———-

    …and now for something completely different. A scientific study from those wacky Dutch people at the Have Your Cake And Eat It Too Institute saying that not only does cannabis cause psychoses but also that psychoses cause merrywanna. I myself blame the bisexuals. Make up your perverted minds and go one way or the other!

    The Marijuana-Psychosis Connection Goes Both Ways In Teens

    In the new study, the authors followed over 2,100 Dutch teens, asking them questions about their mental health when they were 14, 16, and 19. The teens were quizzed about their pot use over the years and tested for “psychosis vulnerability,” which included questions about their social relationships and feelings of loneliness, attention, and thought problems (for example, “seeing things that other people do not see”). Variables like alcohol and tobacco use, as well as their parents’ mental health and families’ socioeconomic status, were removed so as not to influence the results.

    The team discovered that in fact the marijuana-psychosis link worked both ways: Kids who at 16 smoked pot were more likely to have psychotic symptoms at 19, and kids who at 16 showed psychotic symptoms were more likely to smoke pot at 19.

    So researchers conclude that the “self-medication” and the “damage” (that is, brain damage) hypotheses both hold water – and they both make sense intuitively. For example, the authors say that a person with psychotic symptoms might use marijuana to “improve their mood or to control one’s feelings, boredom, social motives, improving sleep, anxiety and agitation.” Of course, they do add that these individuals might just smoke pot for the same reasons that “normal” people do – “‘to get high’, relax and have fun.” On the flipside, pot smoking could also damage the developing brain, since the teen-age is a “particularly vulnerable period for the effects of cannabis.”

    Say, when does the SCOTUS hear oral arguments in Chicken v Egg? We need to settle this millenia old controversy once and for all.

    • Duncan20903 says:


      I would really like to find historical data in the year by year incidence of psychoses from a reputable source. Just the yearly rate not mucked up with any other agenda trying to prove causality.

      Reputable means that ad hominem attacks are very difficult for the enemies of freedom and their associate nutcake friends to sustain. E.g. like the screed written by one of those nutcakes calling Willie Nelson a “loser” simply because he chooses to enjoy cannabis from time to time. Even that prohibitionist was belittled by his fellow nutcakes for being that stupid.

      I know that data is out there but there’s so much nonsense noise on this issue that I haven’t been able to find it using standard search techniques.

      • Byddaf yn egluro: says:

        John was the partner of my first long-term girlfriend’s sister. He was also fairly psychotic, a typical loser, and a non-stop smoker. One Christmas, I was invited to stay over at his father’s house. John’s dad was totally introvert; he said practically nothing all weekend except shout at his dog while incessantly poking the open fire. Fifteen years later, poor John, while homeless, was fatally kicked in the kidneys by a cop who “mistook” him for a pile of rags. Both his grown up sons 35 and 38 have been diagnosed as schizophrenic, both have always been very heavy tokers, and the oldest has been hooked on heroin for the last ten years. Just 18 months ago, I visited John’s ex (the mother of his 3 children) Laying on the couch, for hours, inside the house, and refusing to come out and join us on the sunny patio, was the extremely introverted 10 year old son of John’s daughter. Chicken or egg? I think I may know the answer!

  14. Maria says:

    It’s probably bad form to poke bees nests before new year…

    On one hand I’m all for riding the bash the uneducated inaneness bandwagon. But… I’m a little surprised at the level of comment language for this one. I’m not a bug fan of the Miss Universe or beauty pageants in general but the reaction here just doesn’t seem proportional to her sin.

    It’s a rare thing when one of these young women breaks ranks or goes beyond fluff. They have too much to lose. Not that this is reason enough for such thoughtless docility because they are, after-all, supposed to be “strong role models” for young girls.

    The organizers should do away with these questions entirely. Or they should spend some effort to make sure contestants possess at least the level of conversational ability that high courtesans used to, and often still do; most of the contestants do not appear qualified to talk about current affairs, social issues, or politics at any depth.

    In the end, with some notable exceptions – there are a handful of PHds, lawyers, nurses, and post-grads – most of the young title holders end up working in a media/entertainment role or in modeling. They travel the world, get married, and often they continue as charity figureheads or charity founders well after their mandated contracts have expired. Here, begrudgingly I’ll admit, they do some good good in those bestowed roles. And that’s the thing. They play roles. They are actresses.

    That said, I don’t think that her silly comments warrant describing her as brainless meat, a bitch, or only good at sucking cock.

    She could be all that but these are often the types of descriptions reserved for hard core prohibs or people that have done real harm in this war and not for some young woman who said an inane thing to try and win her year of a hundred lifetimes.

    Hell, maybe it’s time for some of our charities to reach out to these pageants and educate the girls? 😉

    • allan says:

      indeed… *clap*

    • claygooding says:

      I suppose the knee jerk reaction was inappropriate however I would like to watch one major beauty pageant where the contestants could answer questions with more than a moronic answer,,as stated I know some ladies just as beautiful and as capable at constructing sentences as well but it seems that all of them would not consider competing in a contest on their looks,but would kill for the chance to be on Jeopardy.

      well put Maria.

      • Maria says:

        “I would like to watch one major beauty pageant where the contestants could answer questions with more than a moronic answer”

        Same here Clay. Same here. The sponsors want and get these docile, rapt, highly focused, mold-able, perfectly vanilla, groomed, young things. Most of their answers are so utterly banal as to mean nothing. It doesn’t matter where they are from, what they look like, or what type of background they have; they are pretty much the same woman.

        Hell, the only interesting one in my recent memory was 2002’s Oxana Fedorova, and that’s due to her past rather than anything she said during the contest. And, she ended up being decrowned because she wasn’t quite playing ball.

        …aaaand that’s seriously way too much talk about beauty pageants for one day. 😉 Happy holidays!

    • Duncan20903 says:

      Who said that Miss Universe doesn’t have a speech writer?


      I dunno. Maybe it was the kidney kicking kop’s fault. Here’s a study that says that kidney transplants following renal failure is a cause of psychosis:
      Hospitalized psychoses after renal transplantation in the United States: incidence, risk factors, and prognosis

      Ooops, I didn’t read closely enough. Apparently the kidney kicking cop cured the man’s psychosis rather than causing it. Dead = no worries

  15. Francis says:

    Mitchell Williams, HuffPost Live producer, asked Culpo if she had ever smoked pot and whether or not she believes it should be legalized.

    Culpo, who will give up her Miss USA crown to ascend to Miss Universe, avoided answering the first part of the question.

    Maybe she blames her own past pot use for preventing her from reaching her full “potentional.” (Yeah, that was probably just a typo on the part of article’s author, but would it surprise anyone if it weren’t?)

    And this quote sounds almost too much like a parody of a beauty pageant answer.

    When asked about gun control, Culpo said the recent Sandy Hook tragedy shows that the issue of guns in America needs to be addressed, though she wasn’t sure how.

    “What happened recently goes to show that something does need to be done,” she said. “Exactly what, we don’t know. But at least we know there needs to be some sort of progress because the overall well-being of society is definitely our number one priority.”

    She’s gotta be in on the joke, right? I mean, no one could be that vapid.

  16. kaptinemo says:

    Aristotle was right: if you don’t get involved in politics, you run the risk of being ruled by your (mental and moral) inferiors. The DrugWar is a perfect example.

    So are instances where beauty contest winners are recruited to become government functionaries based upon the status quo-supporting answers they have given to questions of societal importance. Look to see her in an Administration position regarding illicit drugs soon.

  17. Opiophiliac says:

    “It’s been proven to prevent people from their full potentional, and I don’t think that’s a good thing for society,” she said. “If we’re trying to move things forward, a drug like marijuana does the opposite. It will slow things down.”

    I get so tired of the notion that drugs are only bad, that the good things they do are transitory or that seeking pleasure or respite from pain through pharmacological means is somehow immoral or depraved. Will we ever see the day when someone like Michael Phelps doesn’t apologize for their drug use? When they will stand up and say, “yeah I use drugs and also rose to the top of my profession, so what? It’s nobody’s goddamn business what I put into my body as long as I do no harm to others.”

    When I was in college I was a member of the local drug reform organization, we didn’t have a SSDP chapter but something similar that pretty much focused just on cannabis. To raise money they were selling a bumper sticker that said, “Drugs are bad, the drug war is worse.” The first part of that bumper sticker always annoyed me. There is this notion that people cannot use drugs, especially “hard” drugs, in positive and responsible ways. When drugs have nothing but blanket negative connotations, legalization and regulation becomes a hard sell. I think the Greeks had it right with their dual meaning of pharmakon, every drug is both a medicine and a poison. Whether it functions as a medicine or a poison depends on the circumstances (the individual, the dose, set and setting, ect.)

    Cannabis reformers discredit themselves, IMHO, when they claim that cannabis is harmless, or that cannabis is not a drug but an herb (by that definition so are opium poppies and coca leaves). Just because a drug cannot kill you does not make it harmless. There are people out there who probably should not smoke pot, this of course is not a reason for a total prohibition on adult use (I am, after all, a member of the opiate minority in the drug reform big tent who says legalize heroin). There are positive and negatives attached to all drug use, whether one outweighs the other depends on the individual circumstance.

    The creation of a drug free society is a fantasy. A rather dystopian one in my view, but a fantasy nonetheless. We cannot have a drug free society, our only choice for drug peace is to make the drugs as harmless as possible. This can be done in a number of ways, by utilizing pharmacological science to develop safe drug delivery mechanisms, by promoting plants over powders and developing cultural norms around the responsible use of psychoactive drugs, to name but a few. None of these things are possible under a prohibitionist regime, which uses pharmacological science to makes drugs more toxic (by adding liver destroying tylenol to low dose opioid medicines or formulating “abuse-resistant” pills that can lead to fatal complications when injected), promotes powders over plants and fosters a culture of drug hate which causes drug users to hide their use and prevents any cultural norms around responsible use from ever forming.

    • Duncan20903 says:

      Who is Willie Nelson?

      • Opiophiliac says:

        I assume that’s a reply to:
        “yeah I use drugs and also rose to the top of my profession, so what? It’s nobody’s goddamn business what I put into my body as long as I do no harm to others.”

        I wasn’t really thinking of artists when I wrote that. In some ways artists are expected to use drugs. I was more thinking along the lines of Carl Sagan and Barack Obama. But fair point, there are a number of artists who admit to using drugs, although, with the exception of marijuana (and perhaps some entheogens), the drug use is usually interpreted in a negative light. I find this interesting especially compared to some of the literature from the 19th century, when drug use was viewed differently.

        • Duncan20903 says:


          The only reason that we hear artists promoting common sense drugs regulation is because they’re not at risk of losing their livelihood, particularly the most accomplished elite artists. This security allows them to speak their minds. I realize that the Know Nothings want to discount their opinions but I disagree that we should join them in that opinion. Why in the world wouldn’t choosing to enjoy cannabis not ruin the lives of artists if they’re going to argue that pot does that? I can name dozens of artists who have monkey wrenched their careers with booze, cocaine, even LSD. They’re either immune or they’re not.

          Your unwarranted conclusion is very similar to that of the Know Nothings who argue that nobody goes to prison for cannabis after all of those who do are excepted.

        • Opiophiliac says:

          I don’t know what you mean by “unwarranted conclusions.” I agreed that many artists use drugs and have phenomenally successful careers. I never claimed to discount their opinions. Some of the best jazz ever performed was done so under the influence of heroin or cannabis, although how much those drugs contributed to the music is an open question.

          What I mean by interpreted in a negative light is when
          people (the media especially) start blaming Kurt Cobain’s death on his heroin use when he committed suicide. Or blaming Jerry Garcia’s death on heroin when it was heart failure, more likely due to being overweight and smoking heavily than heroin. There are countless books written by celebrities where 95% of the book is tales of drug use , sex and debauchery followed by a concluding chapter where they get “clean.” Compared to the writings of say Charles Baudelaire or Thomas de Quincey, you get a very different picture of the use of opiates and cannabis.

        • Opiophiliac says:

          It occurred to me that you take exception to the assertion that artists are expected to use drugs. Is this a stereotype, and like all stereotypes probably unfair? Absolutely. Having said that is anybody shocked when some actor(ess) or musician goes to rehab/jail over drugs? Our society has a fascination with watching our celebrities self destruct. Dr. Drew has even been able to build a career capitalizing on this.
          Artists don’t have the same credibility as, say a member of LEAP or Ethan Nadelmann. Are the views of drug users less credible than those than enforce prohibition? Yes. Is this fair? Absolutely not. After all, drug policy affects people who use drugs more than anyone else, yet coming out as a drug user (more so for the “hard” drugs) ironically discredits you as having a valid opinion.

        • Duncan20903 says:

          Ooops, I forgot to toodle!


    • Servetus says:

      Another Greek word, pharmakos, means ‘scapegoat’, which is a way of saying the substance in question absorbs the demonic entities causing pain, or whatever, and miraculously spirits them out of a person’s body. It’s much like Jesus dying on the cross for people’s sins. Early religious interpretations by Christian cultures equivocated disease with sin, in some cases making diseases such as leprosy punishable. Drug disease is still a commonly manipulated sin meme used by prohibisites; the wages of sin being death, or a stint in jail.

      • Maria says:

        Yeah, the “They must have done something wrong (sinned) because they are sick” meme is strong. Many of the religious and moral arguments for punishment and prohibition go way beyond the reach of reason, fact, or empathy.

      • Opiophiliac says:

        Excellent section in “Ceremonial Chemistry” by T. Szasz on the pharmakos and modern scapegoating.

  18. Duncan20903 says:


    Mendocino Fights Feds on Medical Marijuana Subpoena
    By Chris Roberts
    Dec. 26 2012

    A year ago, the federal Justice Department took aim at legal medical marijuana in Mendocino County. The feds warned that the county’s novel cannabis plant licensing program, which generated cash and kept sheriffs patrolling the rural area, violated federal law and needed to go; otherwise county officials would be sued. The county rolled over; to take on the federal government would be to enter into a David vs. Goliath situation, one supervisor said.

    In October, U.S. Attorney for Northern California Melinda Haag came knocking again. This time, she led a federal grand jury to issue a subpoena demanding the county hand over all documents relating to the licensing program, including names and addresses of any legal cannabis grower in the county.

    David, meet Goliath.

  19. Byddaf yn egluro: says:
    • kaptinemo says:

      So, there’s a correlation between heavy drinking and cannabis? Most cannabists I know don’t touch alcohol. The ones that do, the majority do so moderately. But the claim is made that heavily-drinking cannabists will screw the pooch for re-legalization.

      As Bill Cosby used to sardonically say in one of his comedy routines, Riiiiiiiiihgt”

      Dancing Angels! Pins! Irrelevancy! “Dogs and cats, living together, mass hysteria!

      I’m too old to be spooked by boogeymen, anymore, and it’s downright insulting to anyone’s native intelligence that an adult would try.

      • darkcycle says:

        I just had to put my two cents worth in. Kleiman. What a hand wringer.
        Hiya Mark!

      • allan says:

        I drink less than a six-pack of beer a year. I had 2 shots of vodka at niece’s xmas day get-together. And haven’t the statistics shown less alcohol consumption, DUIs and other alcohol related abuse dropped in states w/ legal mmj?

        • darkcycle says:

          I spent twenty two years as a total non-drinker. Only in the last year or so have I decided that I might be depriving myself of something. So I now occasionally have a glass of red wine. Egads! Does this prove Kleiman right?? Hell Noes. Society has not suffered a dime’s worth. And the red wine makers of Washington weren’t hurt, either. Nor have I become a raging alcoholic, two glasses being enough to cause me a raging headache instead. All in all, I am thoroughly unimpressed by society’s “drug of choice”. But I find that true of most cannabists.

        • Windy says:

          dc, I have a girlfriend who gets migraines when she drinks red wine, but no problem with drinking a white, including white wine made from red wine grapes. My favorite wine (I usually have one glass with dinner) is Beringer’s White Merlot. If you are interested in having two glasses of wine occasionally, you might want to try that one. I also like to have a drink of home made coffee liqueur with half and half on Friday and Saturday nights. I figured out my limit for drinking when I was very young ( very young compared to my age today, meaning just over 21). I got drunk once as a teenager while staying with a friend while she was babysitting her brother’s kids at his home. WE tried just about everything in his liquor cabinet, I got so sick I never drank again until shortly after my 21st birthday. Again, I got very sick after 4 drinks. The next time I got drunk was in Monterey, CA while hubby and I were on a motorcycle vacation, almost immediately I knew if I didn’t go to sleep I would be puking shortly, so I crashed at 9:30 (very early for hubby and me at that age and still very early for me). Since then, I never have more than 3 drinks over an entire evening. I do not like the sensation of drunkenness, and I hate the puking. I’d rather smoke a bowl and enjoy the high.

        • darkcycle says:

          Actually, I discovered quite by accident that red wine calms my IBS. I used to take “Librax”, which is Librium and an anti-spasmodic, but the red wine works better, believe it or not. So now, after a big meal, I enjoy a glass of red, instead of a little red pill. And as in my opinion, one ounce of alcohol is a perfectly acceptable alternative to a dose of Benzodiazapine. It’s harm reduction.

        • Windy says:

          DC as you know I am not a doctor, but IBS sometimes is caused by an intolerance to gluten. Have you tried a gluten-free diet? If not, you might give it a try and see if it solves that little problem. It’s not an easy diet to follow, but gluten free foods are (finally) getting tastier. I have some experience with this since my daughter is gluten intolerant and her 13 yo son has full blown celiac disease (so does his father).

      • Duncan20903 says:


        The only conclusion I can take away from those who seem to think that heavy drinking and choosing to enjoy cannabis go hand in hand is that their observations were made at the frat house. That’s the only place of which I’m aware that heavy drinking and cannabis can be found hand in hand.

        One of the most genuinely pathologically stupid and morbidly amusing parts of this controversy is how people that have never been inside our world present a view that in no way resembles our world and insists that their point of view is actually real. Now why do they believe that? Because that’s what a cohort of self anointed “experts” who have also never been inside our world assure them that it’s true.

        So from time to time some cannabis law reform advocates will include some bible thumping in their arguments, with Genesis 1:29 being one of their favorites. Personally I prefer the Jainist parable of blind men describing an elephant.

        linky Hey, isn’t that Kev-Kev on the far right?


        No Prof. Kleiman, 12 year old potheads don’t qualify as part of our world.

        • War Vet says:

          And at Biker Bars and in gang cribs: heavy drinking and heavy weed smoking . . . but then again, a lot of heavy drinkers who won’t touch pot do a lot of meth, so maybe Kleiman might find the correlation that suggests alcohol and meth go hand in hand . . . for the sake of the children, we must close down Nappa Vally, Coors, Samual Adams etc unless we be riddled with meth lab explosions in areas that have access to alcohol . . . drunks are far more likely to get a little wet on a Shake and Bake -that ain’t no good.

        • Duncan20903 says:


          I find it impossible to believe that the cohort of main stream citizens to whom I referred would have, any contact with that stripe of biker club.

    • Opiophiliac says:

      In my experience there are classes of drugs that complement one another and other drugs which are antagonistic to each other. Cocaine and alcohol get along pretty well, while opiates and alcohol can’t even attend the same party. Think of the differences between a bar and an opium den. most cannabis users I know drink occasionally if at all.

      I think there is a difference between an addict and someone who self-medicates. Basically an addict is never satisfied (Gabor Mate’s calls them Hungry Ghosts, from Buddhist psychology), and so an addict will combine drugs until they reach they desired state of consciousness they are looking for, usually oblivion. My guess is the true addicts are responsible for that correlation.

      I say true addict because many people who self-medicate, who are often unaware of an underlying condition (they only know they drug makes them feel “normal”), are misdiagnosed as addicts. With opiates for example, someone in pain will display all the same behaviors as an addict (lying, stealing, drug-seeking behavior), but once they are properly medicated those behaviors disappear.

  20. Duncan20903 says:


    I learned a new word yesterday. The word is “infantilize”.

    verb (used with object), in·fan·til·ized, in·fan·til·iz·ing.
    1. to keep in or reduce to an infantile state.
    2. to treat or regard as infantile or immature.

    Used in a sentence: Those who prosecute the war on (some) drugs seek to infantilize the population.

    • kaptinemo says:

      And there you have encapsulated the mindset of those who favor prohibitions. With the tacit assumption being that those who favor prohibition are somehow superior to those they seek to impose it upon. Whitebread’s Iron Law of Prohibition again: prohibitions are formulated by an easily identified ‘US’ to be visited upon an easily identified ‘THEM’. It is only when the children of the ‘US’ group are harmed by the prohibitions aimed at the ‘THEM’ group are they eliminated. And we’re starting to see that now.

      • Duncan20903 says:


        Back in the early to mid 1990s when I was doing volunteer work down a National NORML HQ Dick Cowan was executive director and often spoke of what he called Cowan’s Iron Law of Prohibition. Apparently not the same as Mr. Whitebread’s submission, Cowan’s Iron Law of Prohibition was “the harder the laws of prohibition, the harder the drugs available”. Pretty simple, a contraband smuggler would prefer to import a pound of pure heroin rather than whatever the equivalent weight of raw opium.

        I think Francis needs to run down to the USPTO and trademark his law before somebody modifies it.

      • War Vet says:

        According to the legal language of the law: the mindset of those who favor or practice prohibition are those who seek to destroy the Separation of Church and State as evident in the practice of drug prohibition: to remove the CSA law is to remove the drug black market . . . to create the CSA or U.N. Single Law is to create the drug black market which means that the CSA is the physical body of the drug black market. A trillion official and unofficial sources from around the world proves that Militant Islam would be nothing without the CSA’s and U.N. Single Pact’s protection of the drug black market . . . 9/11, 1993 New York City Bombing, Iraq, Afghanistan, 1996 and 2012 Embassy bombings, U.S.S. Cole, Somalia, 2009 Christmas Day terrorist attempt in Detroit etc proved that. We know that the CSA protects Radical Islam by giving it enough money to technically keep the U.S. and allied troops with all our money and equipment in a war zone longer than 11yrs. We know that the goal of radical Islam is to force their version of the Islamic religion on their targets, given they succeed in victory (as seen in Africa with the spread of Islam in regions that battle radical Islam), therefore any officer, politician and other DOJ/DOC entities who adhere to the CSA laws are forcing the religion of Islam down the throats of Americans by giving our enemy during the time of war, the money it needs to attack us (since the CSA is the drug black market) . . . though quite unintentionally, the fact still remains that American Cops and other drug warriors who obey or promote the CSA are defaulted allies with Al Qaeda, Taliban, Al Shabab, Hamas, Hezbollah and the hundreds of other drug dealing/smuggling/growing terrorist outfits found worldwide. Of course this makes the 1961 U.N. Single Law illegal since it’s illegal for the U.N. to force any religion down the throats of any nation as seen in Russia, India, America, Spain, China (2008 Olympics), France, Germany, Canada, Philippines, Israel, Pakistan, Turkey, The United Kingdom, Japan (though for the Aum Shinrikyo religion), etc where the U.N. protects the rights of Radical Islam to finance war against their targets for the goal of spreading Islam their own way . . . just like the DOJ protects the rights of Radical Islam through direct funds from the CSA law (hypothetically speaking: if radical Islam destroyed America, we would be hard-pressed to not find thousands or millions of new converts who converted to Islam to protect their lives . . . such a victory only comes from the Department of Justice’s CSA laws, which proves an active plot [plot: because they know terrorist deal drugs, but choose not to stop them by legalizing drugs, proves culpability] to seek the religion of Islam . . . on top of that, any law that directly threatens National Security is already validly illegal).

  21. Duncan20903 says:


    An amusing political cartoon from The South Florida Sun-Sentinel:
    Florida poll says “no” to legalizing pot (December 27, 2012)
    By Chan Lowe
    December 27, 2012

  22. Peter says:

    Glenn Greenwald has this in the Guardian about our “radical liberal” president and uber drug warrior Feinstein curbing our civil rights even further:
    ” Obama successfully relied on Senate Republicans (the ones his supporters depict as the Root of All Evil) along with a dozen of the most militaristic Democrats to ensure that he can continue to eavesdrop on Americans without any warrants, transparency or real oversight. That’s the standard coalition that has spent the last four years extending Bush/Cheney theories, eroding core liberties and entrenching endless militarism: Obama + the GOP caucus + Feinstein-type Democrats. As Michelle Richardson, the ACLU’s legislative counsel, put it to the Huffington Post: “I bet [Bush] is laughing his ass off.”


  23. Peter says:

    So much for the theory of cannabis as the gateway drug…study here shows it may in fact be the “exit drug…”

  24. n.t. greene says:

    You gotta love it when an incoherent piece of eye candy feels as though she has the ability to make a social mandate.

    …wait. This sounds like a lot of people when you remove the eye candy bit. Incoherent describes a fair number of movers and shakers who would be better fit for, I don’t know, waiting tables at Denny’s.

    Ironically this is the sort of job you qualify for when you don’t have a college education. oyoyoy.

  25. allan says:

    a good and informational read: The inside story of how marijuana became legal in Colorado

    The morning after this year’s election, Troy Eid, the former U.S. Attorney for Colorado, was making his way through Denver International Airport when he ran into former Gov. Bill Ritter.

    Their conversation turned to Amendment 64, the marijuana-legalization measure that passed the night before, and soon Eid was dialing former Gov. Bill Owens, as the three men — all of whom opposed the amendment — laughed about the diminished weight of their endorsements.

    Though Eid said none of the men was crestfallen by the initiative’s passage, the metaphor that morning was lost on none of them: A new day had dawned in Colorado.

    “We were surprised,” Eid said. “Bill was surprised. Bill Ritter was surprised. I was surprised. It was such a dramatic shift from where we’d been.”


  26. “I’d say the No. 1 lesson we learned was that we need more resources to get the message out that the only alternative to current policies isn’t legalization,” Kevin Sabet, a former White House drug-policy adviser who was against Amendment 64, wrote in an e-mail. “To be against legalization surely is not to mean that you are OK with the status quo.”

    Sabet said the legalization victories in Colorado and Washington have “rudely awakened” marijuana opponents, who are now working to form stronger organizations to fight back against legalization.

    “Time will tell if legalization will follow the same crash-and-burn course,” Sabet wrote in an e-mail, “or if it will succeed to a greater degree in other states and nationally.”


  27. I was just thinking that the use of Federal funds to take sides in a political issue such as the legalization of marijuana would be an illegal thing to do, wouldn’t it?

    • kaptinemo says:

      Of course it is.

      And, of course, that’s just what happens.

      But when a supposedly neutral government watchdog agency is captured and politicized and neutered by a political party, as the GAO was in the Bush Too (not a typo) years, it becomes nothing more than a rubber stamp, as the latter link proved. No help from them.

      But this is the kicker:

      “”The government does not spend any money fighting ballot initiatives,” said Calvina Fay, the executive director of Florida-based Save Our Society From Drugs. The organization was the biggest single donor to the No on 64 campaign, giving about $285,000.

      Oh, really?

      Then what about this? White House Had Drug Officials Appear With GOP Candidates

      The entire purpose of the ONDCP is to propagandize against illicit drugs…and to use taxpayer supplied funds to do so. Period. But, like any rogue agency without effective oversight, it slipped its’ leash and became something much more dangerous, a loose cannon. It has engaged in acts that, if not insulated from their illegal actions by special interest-derived law(!), would have led to prison sentences at best, and executions at worst in some places I’ve been, where the locals take f-king with democracy more seriously, due to them not having much leeway, survival-wise. A point which we, here in America, are fast approaching…

  28. kaptinemo says:

    Anyone who wants to know just how crooked the ONDCP has proven itself to be, almost from its’ inception, all you have to do is google “ONDCP effectiveness scandal”.

    How such a Fed agency could have gone on for as long as it has, producing scandal after scandal after scandal, is just amazing. Lying to the public was only the seed of this fully-grown poison tree.

  29. kaptinemo says:

    Came across this online discussion between notable reformers (Steve Rolles, Matt Elrod, to name a few) and Sabet while investigating ‘ONDCP effectiveness scandal’. An excellent example of just how oily Sabet is. Pity he’s a B’hai; he would have made a great Jesuit.

Comments are closed.