Open Thread

I’m in New York all week with my students, so posting will be sporadic. Check the comments here as the couchmates will likely keep you well informed, if I drop the ball a bit.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

101 Responses to Open Thread

  1. Wow says:

    Reefer madness:

    The Isle of Man (UK) just spent $7,500 to prosecute a man for possession of less than $2 worth of marijuana

  2. jean valjean says:

    The Ferguson report reveals the level of corruption and racism involved in local and county government in just one US city. I wonder how many more Fergusons there are around the country. Less prominent in the reporting is the role of the drug war in Ferguson’s attacks on its black and Hispanic citizens. With the KKK still active in St Louis maybe they think they don’t need to justify their racist policies under the guise of enforcing drug laws, as is the case in more “liberal” cities like New York. The picture with this article of a grinning Officer Darren Wilson with his arm around one of the fired corrupt clerks is priceless

    Take a look too at the corrupt Ferguson judge Ronald Brockmeyer. Hairstyle courtesy of the Sopranos:

    • claygooding says:

      Perhaps this will eventually expose that city managers and mayors also influence the law enforcement agency to become a revenue source in the false belief that they are saving their city property taxes when the grants and military surplus are all tax dollars.

      • B. Snow says:

        Clay – I’d love to think that’s possible…

        But, I’m afraid that would be giving them way too much “benefit of the doubt”, or something like that (=?)

        We would have to believe that they’re really more miserly than they are classist and/or racist… I suspect that if it were really about the money – they’d have *seen that light* – long ago.

        The remaining options for Ockham’s razor are:
        A. They don’t understand the relative fungibility of such taxes involved (local vs federal), the standard ‘military surplus’ scams/schemes, they can’t comprehend the perverse incentives inherent in the Byrne Grant program, etc.

        B. They don’t care about “law & order” political policies, Nope, They just LOVE themseleves a game of “Punch the Hippy”, a trillion dollars and 40+ years worth of it.

        Let us not forget:
        C. They can’t admit nor cope with the levels of disquiet they’d be sibject to if they faced the cognitive dissonance & realized that they gotten yanked atound by a big game based on Nixon’s “crazy/paranoid/racist/homophobia” and the twisted rationale he had going = wherein a person getting drunk is “for fun”, but a person smokes marijuana (or does any other kind of *dope* – “to get a charge”…

        A “concept” that he repeatedly ties to vague remembrances of flaming gay junkies & “dopers” from SanFran in the 60’s, the Jewish cabal of psychiatrists out to get/kill him, the fall of The Roman Empire (because they were all sorts of queer, and at some point after Constantine(?) “the Popes were laying the Nuns”.

        AND, given the 50th anniversary of Bloody Sunday – let us not forget his ramblings about= *quote* “the problem with the blacks” *unquote* which seemed to refer to the civil rights movement.

        Plus, lest we forget: tack-on all the anti-war commies & hippies raining on his totally not gay parade in Vietnam!

        Yet, Somehow he was cool with China? I never really got that how he squared that bit into his world-view. I suspect that was just pure politics.

        I wasn’t born yet, so any related ‘logic’ gets fuzzy for me – I was way too young to get the David Frost interviews, until the movie about those interviews came out a few years ago, it was intriguing but still odd in my eyes.

        Whew – that got away from me a bit (open thread indeed), My point was – in order for that to work Clay, we have to hope that the majority of the country doesn’t say, “Well this isn’t Ferguson, Missouri – our cops/local government aren’t that bad…”

        And then deny that those same problems extend beyond the state and/or neighboring state lines
        They must realize that the problems there are systemic & after 40-something years worth of the 1961 Single Convention (of Crazy/Racist Nixon Lies) Treaty = this crap is worldwide.

        And although it IS really *especially* atrocious in some places, its rotten to it’s “common core” = pretty much everywhere. Ironically an education guideline they all hate (Now), that rhymes with “drug war”.

        Ya know – Because something like a minimum *standard reading level* is “evil big gov/edu”… Yet, odds are they’re probably still totally cool with “D.A.R.E.” & “Abstinence-Only” Sex-Ed!

        • Servetus says:

          “…the Popes were laying the Nuns”. It was worse than that. The official building code for monasteries mandated that the monastery not be built too close to the donkey stables.

        • kaptinemo says:

          Nixon was already seriously warped by the time he attended a Bohemian Grove meeting. After that, as far as I am concerned, he must have went bleedin’ bughouse crazy.

          But Nixon was actually quite typical of the average supporter of the DrugWar back then: ignorant about drugs, fearful of those who they thought used them (the Blacks, the Hispanics, effete intellectuals and all young people), and intent upon viciously punishing them for going against what they considered immorality. While an undeclared war was going on, killing innocent locals and young American draftees. America, then as now, was a seriously schizoidal place.

          Nixon may have extended the Viet Nam War for much longer than necessary by sabotaging the Paris Peace Talks. A lot of names on that black wall in DC are there because of ol’ Tricky. ‘Immorality’? Listening to Nixon disparage others for their supposed immorality is like hearing the Devil quote Scripture.

        • claygooding says:

          The kicker is that federal tax dollars takes twice as much tax dollars to do the same job,,by the time it goes through each bureaucracy to get to you it has burned half of it up paying federal workers.

          If cities pay taxes to fund their police instead of depending on those grants,,which must be spent on more drug war,,the homegrown taxes would equip officers with what their city felt like they needed and not what some bureaucrat is pushing.

          The city regains control of how the funds are spent.

  3. Duncan20903 says:


    Dubai? Seriously?? The times just keep getting more and more interesting.
    Sentence overturned for woman prescribed medicinal marijuana in Dubai appeal

  4. kaptinemo says:

    Hope alerted me to a bit of Freudian slippage I believe perfectly illustrates the mindset we are up against.

    The more they talk, the weirder they get; from Anti-Pot Sheriffs File Lawsuit Against Colorado Legalization:

    ” Sheriff Burton Pianalto of Sherman County, Kansas, said Colorado’s reforms have burdened his department, too.

    “I do not want or need any more drug dealers or illegal drugs in my county,” he said. “There are more prisoners in my bastille, my jail, and higher costs for arrests.”

    “Il est BON d’être Le Roi!”, or “It is GOOD to be the King!” (Ahem) And we’re all Marie, this time.

    Well, perhaps His Majesty King Pianalto should take a hint from another fellow who also had a Bastille. Keep using his badge and position to justify ‘Marie-ing’ people, and he’s liable to lose his political head.

    • kaptinemo says:

      Courtesy of venerable ol’ Monty Python, How to handle such autocratic arsenlochen

    • kaptinemo says:

      One more thing, When you compare Pianalto’s statement with that of Botticelli’s…

      “: “As a person in recovery, I don’t want to be walking down the street and smell marijuana smoke. I don’t want to be walking down the street and see one more temptation because there is a marijuana dispensary down the street. We are already inundated through every vehicle in this society about issues around substance use and using drugs. I, as a person in recovery, don’t want more of that. I want less of it.” (Emphasis mine – k.)

      …you find a disturbing degree of similarity, no? Almost as if they had a script, hmmm?

      I’m sorry, but I could not let this pass. Mental image: grown Mikey and Pianalto in diapers, stamping their feet, waving fists impotently, shouting in unison in time with the emphasis, “I don’t want that! I don’t want that! I don’t want that! (pointing to prohibition) I want this!”

      Hyperbole? Not when dealing with frustrated control-freak prohibs. When their Inner Officer Jack Boot is thwarted, out pops their Inner Loonie to take it’s place. What else do they think it looks like to the target audience?

    • jean valjean says:

      Here is Pianalto’s handy dandy Bastille. I’m not sure whether this is one of those money spinning opportunities for Sheriffs that they tend to favor in Louisiana (Sheriff has a strong financial incentive to put as many people in jail as possible, and then personally bill the county) but a quick look at the current residents shows all but two are in for drug charges or probation violation (almost certainly for an original drug conviction). If so, he has some gall to then sue for “hardship.”

  5. Irie says:

    Couch mates,maybe I’ve gotten a bit daffy in my way of thinking, but I see this “house of cards” situation as a positive in this war on drugs. I’m thinking this has a great probability of back firing on these so called law enforcers and the government finding it’s footing (with the recent poll out that says 52% want legalization) that maybe,just maybe,it could be rescheduled (cannabis that is). I think it will force the Fed’s hand in this deal and blow up in the neighboring state’s face, any thought on this? Curious to hear ya’all’s take on this line of thinking.

    • Duncan20903 says:


      I think it’s endgame. These idiots are filing lawsuits which have zero chance of being heard much less ruled in favor of these idiot prohibitionists. There’s already a ton of case law which have ruled that Federal preemption isn’t in play.

      I am predicting that in a few months we’re going to have a Roe v Wade moment when the SCOTUS tells Oklahoma and Nebraska to pound sand. A significant part of the arguments from those on the other side of the table are predicated on their false understanding of the relationship of Federal law to State law that the entire house of cards collapses when the SCOTUS says those States don’t have standing. I’m hoping that they’ll deliver some reasons why rather than just saying “rejected” but that’s the most likely ruling.

      With enemies like that, we just don’t need any friends.

      • kaptinemo says:

        IMHO, this won’t get anywhere near the SCOTUS.

        If it did, they would be forced by sheer public pressure, by all the research done before it and since, to invalidate Raich, which would finally overturn Wickard, and then it is open season on questioning the Constitutional validity of all Fed agencies created after FDR’s gelded SCOTUS passed Wickard in 1942.

        That’s why they ruled against Raich; to preserve the Federal colossus from a small-‘f’ federalist onslaught. WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE NOW BEING CONFRONTED WITH, IN THE FORM OF STATE-BY-STATE RE-LEGALIZATION.

        These stupid lawsuits are going to force that issue right back in their (SCOTUS) laps again, and this time, it would not only leave a stain but burn right through their robes, it’s so hot a topic. And they know it…and fear it.

        I wish they could hear my mocking laughter; they are, like a dog that keeps making messes in the house, having to face the possibility of having their noses rubbed in their own Statist judicial fecal matter (their ruling on Raich and its buttressing of government power over individual rights) in a very public way. To eat that much crow they would need a ton of ketchup. Each.

        The SCOTUS is almost all Statist; they’d never want this piece of kryptonite to get anywhere near their Federal Superman’s Achille’s Heel. They’ll send word down the grapevine that they’ll refuse to hear it. The word has probably already been sent, and out of ‘being nice’ to the clot-brains that dreamed it up, and trying to avoid public judicial temper tantrums at this waste of taxpayers money and the judge’s time, are going to let this stupidity die quietly in lower court.

        Either that, or the entire judicial system dines on crow when the (racist and prejudiced) origins of drug prohibition will come out in the hearings. Explaining how drug prohibition was allowed to go on for as long as it did when this information was in the public realm, easily available to any SC Judge courtesy of supposedly able staff, is not something I would like to explain to an increasingly angry public.

        • B. Snow says:

          Kap you talked about

          prejudiced) origins of drug prohibition will come out in the hearings. Explaining how drug prohibition was allowed to go on for as long as it did when this information was in the public realm, easily available to any SC Judge courtesy of supposedly able staff, is not something I would like to explain to an increasingly angry public.

          That’s the catch though, they won’t have to explain it to the public!

          The public increasingly knows damn well what’s going on = That is why they are mad as hell!

          After the Ferguson Report came out – showing that cops were stopping blacks and ticketing them for “Manner of Walking on Roadway”, along with a ridiculous (iirc) average of 3 other citations – for largely ethereal nonsense like “Failure to Comply”
          Here’s an illuminating visual reference, and a brief summary of the news story

          When the totallity of this gets out to the general public, and it sinks in fully… I imagine that the increasingly angry public response will look more (a bit more) like a classic film example of a person’s “Failure to Comply” – to the demand of providing answers to fairly simple questions.

          Although, the roles may be somewhat reversed here = Say What Again! – I suspect that level of anger among many working in the Justice Department (specifically AG Holder) *might have approached* the level of anger in that clip.

          Not like this sort of *targeted racist policing* is a complete surprise = But, After hearing some of the details, like these Cops were competing for most citations written in a single stop

          Or, some of the stuff reported here: Ferguson Increased Revenue by Targeting Blacks

          The most shocking part IMHO is:

          The Justice Department reported that, Ferguson police omitted critical information from the citations, making it impossible for a person to know what offense they are being charged for, “the amount of the fine owed, or whether a court appearance is required or some alternative method of payment is available,” the report said.

          “In some cases, citations fail to indicate the offense charged altogether; in November 2013, for instance, court staff wrote FPD patrol to ‘see what [a] ticket was for’ because ‘it does not have a charge on it.’ In other cases, a ticket will indicate a charge, but omit other crucial information. For example, speeding tickets often fail to indicate the alleged speed observed, even though both the fine owed and whether a court appearance is mandatory depends upon the specific speed alleged.”

          Not only did Ferguson police officers submit incomplete citations they also gave people the wrong dates and times for court appearances, increasing the likelihood that they would face additional fines for failing to appear at the correct time.

          Can you imagine asking a cop, “why did you stop me”, “Am I being detained?” – and they add something that equals “being a smart-ass”, or citing you for “questioning the authority of a peace officer to write phony tickets in order to keep the lights on in the local PD office.”

          Which (to be clear) is exact what they’ve been doing for at least a few years = there’s proof of it…

          And expanding on this as an example: Who knows what else they – and their peers in Police Departments around the country have been doing – although *you’d think* much less blatantly, then again after seeing this mess = who knows?

        • Duncan20903 says:


          Aren’t we talking about Nebraska/Oklahoma v. State of Colorado? The only place that action can be heard is by the SCOTUS. There is no lower Court when it’s State v. State. Google “original jurisdiction” for details. It appears to me that we’re seeing this thing the same but you’ve missed that detail. It’s for precisely the reason that you think that the SCOTUS would want to keep it in a lower Court. I’m certain that they might very much desire that, but it just isn’t an option.
          But god help us all if they accept the action because it appears that it takes the better part of a decade or even longer to settle these State v. State actions. One thing that could monkey wrench my analysis is if the Petitioners withdraw the action. With the right spin I suppose that they could keep the cadaver of prohibition animated for a little while longer. But I won’t even venture a guess what might make that happen.

          I’m serious when I say that I think that just the case being dismissed will cause the wall to collapse in a heap of rubble. It’s the “supremacy” of Federal law that’s keeping the entire scam running. When the sycophants of prohibition find out that isn’t real it’s Wile E. Coyote realizing he’s past the edge of the cliff time. Beep beep indeed..

        • kaptinemo says:

          Then I stand corrected with regards to the hierarchy…but not WRT the ultimate threat that this poses to the Federal machinery as it has become.

          The Fed Juggernaut of today – that has caused so much damage to those it was supposed to ‘serve’ – is held together with lynch-pins stamped with ‘Wickard’ on them. Pull those, and it’s political Jenga time. Raich was ruled against to prevent that.

          Wickard was all about consolidating power centrally in order to carry out FDR’s economic Brain Trust ideas, which were challenged by the Supremes right up to 1937 (a year that lives in infamy for drug law reformers) when FDR threatened to pack the SCOTUS with his appointees by increasing the number of Judges.

          They rolled over and played dead for him after that, and Wickard was their Oath of Fealty…and tipped the balance of government power/rights of the individual in Gub’mint’s favor, and we’ve been suffering the ever-worsening after-effects ever since.

          If the SCOTUS refuses to hear it, you can bet that they are hoping that you will not hear the knocking of their knees in fear, or drops of their cold sweat hitting the floor. Despite Scalia’s ignorant bravado about Raich, they all know they dodged a Constitutional bullet, that day. OK/NE, if heard, would be the one with their collective names on it. It’s a ‘poison pill’, and they know it.

        • kaptinemo says:

          B. Snow, as this goes on, it will lead to more and more (ahem) ‘revelations’ amongst the L/MSM as to how the DrugWar ‘suddenly’ has seemed to corrupt American LE! (reported in aghast, scandalized tones by some wide-eyed, blow-dried buffoon of a noozreader).

          We told ’em. Drug law reformers warned as far back as the 1980’s of the inevitable corrupting influence of forfeiture on LE organs. Nobody listened back then. Behold the result. No surprise for us.

          But we also predicted that as the present economic times worsened, you would see a corresponding attempt by police forces to augment shrinking budgets with aggressive enforcement geared to revenue replacement. Yea, verily and forsooth, it hath come to pass. Again, no surprise to us.

          Our eyes might be red, but they’re also open…as are the minds they belong to. We saw this coming long ago.

          After all, it was the Feds that encouraged forfeiture, and takes a cut with each haul. This is like the pot calling the kettle ebony. Different word for the same color, but doesn’t fool anybody. If they weren’t so close to the taxpayer teat, the Feds would be doing exactly what they accuse Ferguson of doing.

          This is a classic case of the old saying that for every finger you point at someone, you have three pointing back at you. Ask the Feds why they didn’t arrest the HSBC banksters and instead chased the likes of Kim Dotcom?

          The Feds aided and abetted what happened in Ferguson, including the very same racially disciminative aspect they damn Ferguson for, courtesy of the financial incentive that accompanies DrugWar-sired corruption. The Feds are no less complicit.

          With the Ferguson Report, the DrugWar is being dissected, but the ones doing the dissecting don’t realize they are slicing themselves open to reveal the underlying corruption that runs from the top to the bottom of American LE.

          Pots and kettles…and hypocrites. Oh, my! (Sorry, Dorothy)

        • claygooding says:

          When anyone builds a policy on lies and fear mongering that policy is corrupted from it’s enactment and every time it is challenged the costs to recover become larger and the lies become bigger,,1937,,banned marijuana,,est Federal Narcotics Bureau,,1942,,AMA was promised in 1937 that the MTSA would not effect the medical use of cannabis,,to remove it the FDA was created,,this still left it listed in the US Pharmacopoeia as a medicine but the FNB convinced them to remove it in 1946,,that still left it legal in other countries and doctors all over the US were illegally importing hash oil,,1961,,the US authored,bullied and bought the SCT into existence in the US to end worldwide productiion,

          Every bit of it built on corruption to remove the hemp plant from mankind because with that plant mankind doesn’t need as many manufacturers to produce the fibers,food,medicine and recreation to exist,,without it we depend on their industries and pharmaceutical companies,,,and the same rich basturds own both.
          And now they own the black market and are making money from both ends and we are trying to end that,,,it ain’t over until they remove marijuana from Schedule 1,,and that still hasn’t happened.

  6. Will says:

    If you’re a losing prohibitionist in your own country, might as well yell and point, “Hey, look over there!”;

    Soros-Funded Study in Uruguay Finds Voters Oppose Legalization (Even Users Think It Won’t Work, and Their New President Isn’t a Fan Either)

    I’d bet this is one of Kevin’s favorite quotes to live by;

    “It is a mistake to suppose that the whole issue is how to free man. The issue is to improve the way in which he is controlled”.

    -B.F. Skinner

    • claygooding says:

      All the poll shows is that when the govt tries to regulate marijuana the pressure they put on the choke points is directly proportional to the price at the cash register and the state plan did not allow an industrious grower the opportunity to earn his income growing marijuana.
      So the poll just showed the voters in Uruguay were not happy with the presnt legalization platform and not the legality of the weed itself.

  7. kaptinemo says:

    Here’s a poll that I bet nobody has ever attempted to make, and yet if performed this way, can lead to only one conclusion:

    Question 1) Did anyone ever ask you if you wanted a War on Drugs?

    Question 2) Did anyone ever ask you if you wanted to pay for a War on Drugs?

    Ask everyone you meet, and I would wager that you will not find a single person answering “Yes.”

    Then ask them Question Number 3: “Do you want to continue to pay for a War on Drugs you never asked for, don’t want or need?”

    Put this way, to every person receptive to reform, and there’s only one possible rational conclusion: a demand to “End the DrugWar that we didn’t ask for!” from those it was foisted upon – and will make it plain to their representatives that they are no longer willing to do foot the bill tax-wise by pressing for reform legislation and passing re-legalization.

    Occam’s Razor applied a la the Socratic method has a very sharp edge, using both Lord Occam’s and Socrates’ principles. Long past time it is applied in the public arena by asking those questions…

    • Duncan20903 says:


      Did anybody promise you a rose garden? Why didn’t they warn you about all the pricks?

      • darkcycle says:

        No. Nobody promised anybody a rose garden. Nobody promised anybody anything, except that godamned pony. Who has completely fu*ked up my livi ng room.Next time I get a gift horse, I’m definitely looking him in the mouth. Right over the sights of my hi-power.

        • kaptinemo says:

          Oh, we were…‘promised’…alright.

          More correctly, we were ‘promised’ to be drug free by those who sold the DrugWar to our grandparents. Newt Gingrich even used to give deadlines as to when Amurikah would be ‘drug free’. (Note the dates, then look at the calendar. We were supposed to be ‘drug free’ 20 years ago.)

          But like his Gub’mint contractor friends, he kept missing the deadline, with the subsequent cost overruns. ‘Costs’ that included innocent lives,as well as our rights.

          Nobody asked us whether we wanted to be lab rats in their experiment, of course.

          Now, the prohibs are automatically assuming that we want to renew our grandparent’s subscription for their vile pron rag called the DrugWar…when over half the country wants cannabis legal again. No time like the present to let them know that we’re cancelling that subscription by letting pols know that we don’t want to pay for it.

      • kaptinemo says:

        And, if I wasn’t clear, then I will restate it: the targeted generation was supposed to be a PRODUCT, a THING, a ‘GOOD’ (as in ‘goods and services’), a Human version of Silly-Putty, to be molded into DrugWarrior specifications and sold as being 100% pre-programmed, heavily indoctrinated worker bees (like so many of their grandparents that supported prohibition were, and thought they should be) who’d never dare challenge any management functionaries for fear of losing their livelihood thanks to a convenient false positive piss test.

        That’s why I said ‘promised’…as you would contract to deliver a project.

        In short, an entire generation was supposed to be a socially engineered class of worker drones whose life outside the hive would be no different than that within it: controlled to ensure maximum productivity during its life-cycle by preventing any absorbing of non-approved stimulants or depressants…or consciousness-expanding psychoactives. Especially the latter.

        Needless to say, consciousness-expanding ideas were equally unwelcome.

        But now, the balance of power is shifting back to the people. The majority want cannabis legal again. This is posing enormous problems for the real power behind the thrones. The control mechanism they used before with such ease and usefulness is going to become unusable from the sheer numbers involved.

        The political backing for authoritarianism (a hallmark of the generation that supported both prohibitions) is literally dying off by the thousands every day, and they are not being replaced, save with those who are now a distinct, microscopically small minority amongst their own generational cohort (significant look at Kevvie and Co. direction).

        The only reason we hear from them at all is because our tax dollars are paying in no small part for the sound system that is making nests of squeaking mice sound like a pride of lions. Shut off that juice, by hammering them with the Hatch Act as they should be, like what happened in Oregon with SAM’s abortive propaganda effort, and you can barely hear them.

        So…that which was supposed to stay in its box of being good, subservient little wage-slaves and never dream of real freedom of bodily (and therefore, social and political) sovereignty and not ‘trouble’ its ‘betters’, is cutting its way out of that box. And if the pols don’t understand what is happening, and keep standing in the way, that box-cutter being used will morph into a political bayonet. Two down (Dwight Holton and that forgettable city Councilwoman), more to go.

        • Windy says:

          It wasn’t only that one generation, kap’n, when the Prussian model of schooling came to America it was specifically for he purpose of creating that “socially engineered class of worker drones whose life outside the hive would be no different than that within it: controlled to ensure maximum productivity during its life-cycle by preventing any absorbing of non-approved stimulants or depressants…or consciousness-expanding psychoactives. Especially the latter.” They are still trying to create that world of worker bees, all you have to do is look at what is (and is not) being taught in public schools to see this, clearly.


          Using the basic philosophy prescribing the “duties of the state”, combined with John Locke’s view (1690) that “children are a blank slate” and lessons from Rousseau on how to “write on the slate”, Prussia established a three-tiered educational system that was considered “scientific” in nature. Work began in 1807 and the system was in place by 1819. An important part of the Prussian system was that it defined for the child what was to be learned, what was to be thought about, how long to think about it and when a child was to think of something else. Basically, it was a system of thought control, and it established a penchant in the psyche of the German elite that would later manifest itself into what we now refer to as mind control.

          The educational system was divided into three groups. The elite of Prussian society were seen as comprising .5% of the society. Approximately 5.5% of the remaining children were sent to what was called realschulen, where they were partially taught to think. The remaining 94% went to volkschulen, where they were to learn “harmony, obdience, freedom from stressful thinking and how to follow orders.” An important part of this new system was to break the link between reading and the young child, because a child who reads too well becomes knowledgable and independent from the system of instruction and is capable of finding out anything. In order to have an efficient policy-making class and a sub-class beneath it, you’ve got to remove the power of most people to make anything out of available information.

          This was the plan. To keep most of the children in the general population from reading for the first six or seven years of their lives.

          Now, the Prussian system of reading was originally a system whereby whole sentences (and thus whole integrated concepts) were memorized, rather than whole words. In this three-tier system, they figured out a way to achieve the desired results. In the lowest category of the system, the volkschuelen, the method was to divide whole ideas (which simultaneously integrate whole disciplines – math, science, language, art, etc.) into subjects which hardly existed prior to that time. The subjects were further divided into units requiring periods of time during the day. With appropriate variation, no one would really know what was happening in the world. It was inherently one of the most brilliant methods of knowledge suppression that had ever existed. They also replaced the alphabet system of teaching with the teaching of sounds. Hooked on phonics? Children could read without understanding what they were reading, or all the implications.

          In 1814, the first American, Edward Everett, goes to Prussian to get a PhD. He eventually becomes governor of Massachusetts. During the next 30 years or so, a whole line of American dignitaries came to Germany to earn degrees (a German invention). Horace Mann, instrumental in the development of educational systems in America, was among them. Those who earned degrees in Germany came back to the United States and staffed all of the major universities. In 1850, Massachusetts and New York utilize the system, as well as promote the concept that “the state is the father of children.” Horace Mann’s sister, Elizabeth Peabody (Peabody Foundation) saw to it that after the Civil War, the Prussian system (taught in the Northern states) was integrated into the conquered South between 1865 and 1918. Most of the “compulsory schooling” laws designed to implement the system were passed by 1900. By 1900, all the PhD’s in the United States were trained in Prussia. This project also meant that one-room schoolhouses had to go, for it fostered independence. They were eventually wiped out.

          One of the reasons that the self-appointed elite brought back the Prussian system to the United States was to ensure a non-thinking work force to staff the growing industrial revolution. In 1776, for example, about 85% of the citizens were reasonably educated and had independent livelihoods – they didn’t need to work for anyone. By 1840, the ratio was still about 70%. The attitude of “learn and then strike out on your own” had to be broken. The Prussian system was an ideal way to do it.

  8. UKnews JN possible says:

    … “But they failed to reach verdicts this afternoon.

    Sullivan and McKenna deny producing the Class B drug at Haystone Villas, Haystone Place, Stonehouse, between December 2012 and February 2013.

    McKenna, of Carlton Road, Torquay, has alone denied growing cannabis at an address in Tarraway Road, in Paignton, between April and July 2013.

    The court heard during the week-long trial that passing police smelt drugs from the street outside the three-storey Victorian building in Stonehouse.

    Officers discovered 64 mature plants and 100 small plants in several rooms.”


  9. United States Senators To Introduce Historic Medical Marijuana Legislation

    “On Tuesday, March 10, at 12:30pm EST, Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ), Rand Paul (R-KY) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) will host a press conference to announce sweeping bipartisan legislation that will end federal prohibition of medical marijuana, and allow patients, doctors and businesses in states with medical marijuana laws to participate in those programs without fear of prosecution. The press conference to announce the details of this wide-reaching bill will take place in the Senate and will be attended by patients and advocates, as well as the Senators.” …

    • claygooding says:

      It also removes marijuana from Schedule 1 so research can be done and banking regulations can be enacted..


    • Will says:

      ‘Kettle Falls Five’ outcome may mean changes for federal drug prosecutions

    • Mongo says:

      In the WeedBlog comments is a link to the senator’s teleconference which just went live. Interesting stuff

    • Will says:

      I missed the first 15 minutes of the CARERS press conference. But, for one, to hear Kirsten Gillibrand invoke The Children as a reason for lifting certain federal obstacles regarding medical cannabis was, well, surreal (in a very good way). Two, the navy veteran’s very impassioned plea for the VA to be able to at least discuss medical cannabis will — or I should say should — cause even the most steadfast pro military/anti cannabis anything folks to shift uncomfortably in their seats. And last but not least, the two MS patients whose plea to be able to alleviate their suffering without being considered criminals, should move even the most ignorant prohibitionists.

      If this bill does not pass — and there’s no reason to think it’s a slam dunk to pass — there needs to be an accounting of every ‘nay’ vote. Any congress worm who gets in the way should be forced to pay, in any ways you think of the term ‘pay’. Dearly.

      • Will says:

        To be clear: Using the word should in my post above, I’m not being intentionally naive. I realize perfectly well that a lot of people will not be swayed by any amount of testimonials or positive results in any setting. Nor will certain people be moved from their calcified position no matter what’s discussed or presented. Today’s CARERS press conference had all the grim pomp and circumstance of a typical politician’s presentation. But one rabid prohibitionist has already thrown his idiot hat in the ring regarding the CARERS bill;


        Dr. Kevin Sabet;

        “It’s like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut,” he said by e-mail. “Why not start work with scientists to incentivize research rather than open the floodgates to Big Marijuana? Most major medical organizations oppose smoked pot as medicine because the risks outweigh any benefits. This bill just isn’t supported by the science, plain and simple.”



        • DonDig says:

          Maybe we should start characterizing Dr. Sabet as being in favor of ‘Big Bad Double Ugly Prohibition,’ or ‘BBDUP’ for short. Add a side of control freak as garnish to decorate the plate. CFBBDUP.

          Sorry, just venting, trying to be funny, and sometimes it doesn’t work, but his comment is just a little too screwball (and dishonest) to be coming from someone who presents himself as a learned doctor.

          It’s about as funny as prohibition, and as useless as a screen door in a submarine.

        • kaptinemo says:

          I’d like to see Kevvie stand in the middle of a ring of happily stoned people facing him, all trying to pronounce DonDig’s acronym.

          He’d probably drown on dry land from all the laughter and resulting spittle. Not a better ending for control freaks, to die hearing the happy laughter of those they sought to harm with their prohibition, while being pelted with contemptuous saliva.

      • Duncan20903 says:


        Things are a little different this year. If you look at things from an outsider’s point of view there’s not just a majority of States with “medical merrywanna” laws, it’s a supermajority which either is getting close to large enough to ratify a Constitutional Amendment.

        I’m not interested in arguing about whether the States with those any kind of exo-cannabinoid medicines as long as it isn’t delta-9 THC laws are “true” medicinal cannabis. That’s a question of reality and we’re discussing politics. When I read about the debates in those Legislatures it’s obvious to me that those lawmakers haven’t got the brain capacity to differentiate. As a practical matter all organic exo-cannabinoids are in schedule I on the Federal naughty lists. There are States with some skin in the game who wouldn’t even have considered authorizing a law to protect medicinal cannabis patients in the past. Even Idaho appears to be considering jumping on the no THC allowed medical merrywanna bandwagon.There are at least 4 States which are sponsoring research because they’re tired of waiting for the Feds to initiate that research. Colorado isn’t much of a surprise but the other 3 are Georgia, Minnesota and New York.

        BTW it does appear that I’ve got limits to the restrictions I can tolerate in the name of progress toward re-legalization. I’m kind of stumped because so far I’ve been unable to argue in favor of the proposed Ohio law from the “Responsible Ohio” cartel of carpet baggers. Well at least they’re going to give the prohibitionists some significant conniption fits because they’ve already got $36 million in the bank.
        [“So Mr. Prohibitionist, is it your contention that with enough dollars to spend on advertising that NAMBLA could talk the voters into legalizing kiddie diddling?]

  10. thelbert says:

    this might be good news:

    [Open in new window]

    • NorCalNative says:

      thelbert, thanks for letting me know what’s going on in my hometown of Santa Rosa, CA.

      My local rag, the Santa Rosa Press Democrat couldn’t be bothered letting me in on this bit of news.

      I’m not a big fan of ANY state legislator stepping into this mess UNTIL and AFTER California voters get a chance to LEGALIZE in 2016.

      Check out and help California figure this out by next election. I want a voter-directed and approved legalization rather than one that fits politicians and their desire for tax revenue.

      • thelbert says:

        i hear you NorCal, i don’t think i need that much regulation in regard to plants in my yard.

    • Common Science says:

      How apropos. In your first link Windy the poll’s heading at first glance looks like it’s really a subheading under; ‘Assess Your Heart Attack Risk in Seconds, Take This Test.’ That DIY health tip should have been above Bill O’Reillys’ poll 6 months ago for the FOX site as the results are just about identical.

  11. Will says:

    Gary Johnson: pot prohibition is outrageous and ’criminal’

    This part where Gary calls bullshit on certain elected officials;


    Smell the Truth: You just got out of CPAC, and it was astounding to read Paul, Rubio, Cruz, Jeb, and Christie are all talking soft on the war on weed, under which about 700,000 Americans will be arrested this year.

    Johnson: I gotta tell you, what I picked up at CPAC is they’re towing the line that’s been towed all this time: ‘Leave it to the states, but I think marijuana is a horrible product and I would never have voted to legalize marijuana in Colorado.’

    That doesn’t cut it. There’s a general perception that Republicans are softening, but when it comes to elected representatives — it’s just as much bullshit as ever.[emphasis added]


    Good on ya Gary. But this criticism could be extended to many Democrats as well. We’re all tired of our so-called representatives uttering the same nonsense, regardless of party affiliation, “While I personally don’t agree with the voter’s decision, the states should be able to decide”. Guess what politicos, we don’t give a burnt log what your ‘personal’ opinion is. When Debbie Wasserman Shulz was attempting — badly — to explain her position against mmj in Florida, she made a statement something like this, “When my opinion differs from my constituents, I’m not afraid to let them know”. Debbie, Debbie, Debbie, your ‘political’ opinion is dictated by your constituents. Based on your job, it’s the only one that matters. Your ‘personal’ opinion might as well be yelled into a septic tank (this goes for you too, Ted ‘Sleaze Lizard’ Cruz). Okay?

    • kaptinemo says:

      See the imperiousness? Like they’re effing Kings or something.

      Well, the real kings behind them are worried. The Big Money Boys behind the Republicans have gotten rich in no small part because of union busting…and the DrugWar.

      Both represented a loss of power on the part of the people and an accruing of power on the part of Capital. Which, as usual, has screwed things up thanks to its greed (I suggest that readership seek out the works of Dr. Ravi Batra; he explained the process very well a long time ago).

      But now, with the majority wanting cannabis legal again, the gravy train is coming off the rails in slow motion. The control mechanisms, that depended upon only a minority of cannabis users being affected (and tyrannized, with the fear of loss of income serving to terrorize non-users with false positives), now faces numbers that will overwhelm them.

      Socially, that means more and more challenges to management’s authority in the workplace…and challenges against its unwarranted but de facto intrusion into a worker’s life via the drug laws. It’s going to come down to the employers bending to suit the workers, or face a resurrection of the Labor movement, one whose members understand the technology underpinning modern commerce better than the merchants. The Anonymous people gave said merchants just a taste of what could happen.

      Besides, pissing off over half of America isn’t good for a profit margin, now, is it? And if a sizable portion of that >50% decides to boycott their arse because of support of prohibition? (Shriiiing, shriiiiing sound of economic butcher knives being sharpened.)

      Big, big changes in store for society in the very near future.

  12. Servetus says:

    Great optimism continues to emerge for marijuana legalization throughout the country. Yet there is one group that always gets left out of this enviable legal solution, federal employees. Because Ronnie Reagan signed an executive order in September, 1986, many federal employees are subjected to random drug testing to detect cannabinoids. These individuals include the military and DoD employees. This situation must change.

    It’s no wonder grumpy old prohibitches like San Francisco’s U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag believes the splinters on her broom stick are there due to other people’s marijuana consumption. A little marijuana medicating on her part would go a long way toward treating her pain. No need to discriminate. All federal employees should be able to benefit from cannabis legalization and consumption, otherwise why should they care if anyone else has the right?

    • Windy says:

      Correct, especially since government employees, at this point, equal or (in some cases) outnumber private sector employees. Of course I am including federal, state, and local government employees in that assessment (and most, if not all, of them are being tested even in States with legal MMJ, and even legal recreational).

    • claygooding says:

      I wouldn’t let Linda Haag lick the sweat off a rabbits nuts after he was eating on my marijuana crop.

  13. claygooding says:

    The bill, which activists describe as a first for the Senate, would end the federal prohibition on medical marijuana and implement a number of critical reforms that advocates of both medical and recreational marijuana have been seeking for years, according to several people familiar with the details of the proposal. It would reclassify the drug in the eyes of the Drug Enforcement Administration, allow for limited inter-state transport of the plant, expand access to cannabis for research, and make it easier for doctors to recommend the drug to veterans and easier for banks to provide services to the industry. “snip”

    The press conference is over,,now waiting on the media spin.

    Removal too Schedule 2 releases research,,allows banking regulations and allows use of any marijuana for research instead of the govt’s low grade weed.

    Check and soon checkmate.

  14. IrishNews says:

    Government fuck-up means many drugs in Ireland are now legal, if only for a couple of days.
    My link won’t get past the spam filter so you’ll have to google it.

  15. B. Snow says:

    Did my second [admittedly long] reply just get filtered?

    I’m on my phone, so saving it as text is a pain (so I didn’t) and I don’t think I can re-create it fully.

    Great, the spam filter is going crazy with unchecked power = See, that’s what happens when Pete leaves it home alone & in charge!

    • IrishNews says:

      I made several failed attempts here yesterday to post a UK jury nullification story. I eventually gave up.

      • Pete says:


        Please let me know when that happens. I don’t have time to read all the thousands of emails caught up in the spam filter, but I sure can go in and rescue any if I know they got swept up. Doesn’t happen all that often, but now and then… the price of dealing with spam in an automated way.

  16. Mr_Alex says:

    I am surprised despite Straight Inc aka Partnership for a Drug Free America which have been caught starting and running anti cannabis groups like No2Pot, Parents Opposed to Pot, Auntie Cannabis is Anti Pot, Cannabis/Marijuana Makes You Violent and etc. I am surprised that Betty and Melvin Sembler have not been prosecuted for the 50,000 abused at Straight Inc

    • DdC says:

      Bush made Sembler an ambassador instead.

      • Mr_Alex says:

        Bush making Melvin Sembler a ambassador is truly a insult to the survivors of Straight Inc aka Partnership for a Drug Fre e America, I reckon Straight Inc changed its name due to guilt

        • Mr_Alex says:

          Also I fully believe the Semblers should be prosecuted, 50,000 abused is pretty serious

        • Servetus says:

          “Sembler’s Drug Free America Foundation continues to campaign for hard-line drug policy. Former Governor Jeb Bush of Florida, the brother of President George W. Bush, Former Drug Enforcement Administration Administrator Karen Tandy, and Congressman Dan Lungren of California are on the advisory board.”

          Add presidential candidate Jeb Bush to the list.

        • Mr_Alex says:

          I believe Jeb Bush needs to be prosecuted as well, he may know something about the 50,000 abused at Straight Inc aka Partnership for a Drug Free America

          I also saw a documentary called Fix My Kid the other day on the internet, the stuff that happened at Straight Inc aka Partnership for a Drug Free America is pretty serious

        • kaptinemo says:

          It was also an insult to the Australians, who must have known what we were sending them had blood on its hands.

          The Aussies (a BIG shout out to the good people of Nimbin!) have been amongst the best allies this country ever had, despite the crap we’ve pulled on them…which formed the basis for the real-life events in the movie “The Falcon and the Snowman”

          And we sent them that. To represent America. Like nothing had happened, and his orgaizations hadn’t caused untold misery. Any wonder why a significant portion of the world thinks this government is dangerously psychotic?

        • Mr_Alex says:

          When I read about Straight Inc aka Partnership For A Drug Free America being behind or running or setting up front groups like Cannabis/Marijuana Makes You Violent, No2Pot, Auntie Cannabis is Anti Pot, Parents Opposed to Pot, CADCA and etc, it’s time to reveal the magnitude of abuse that happened at Straight Inc aka Partnership for a Drug Free America to the Cannabis reform and activism movement, I believe this is being done so no one will find out about the abuse that happened at Straight Inc aka Partnership for a Drug Free America

        • Mr_Alex says:

          I suggest imploding the Anti Cannabis movement is a must, exposing Straight Inc aka Partnership for a Drug Free America running the Anti Cannabis groups like Marijuana Makes You Violent, No2Pot and etc by asking moral questions is needed like:

          1. Do the groups mentioned agree with forced rehab a so called addict against their will?

          2. Do the groups mentioned agree with the torture and physical abuse and emotional abuse where to the point the so called addict will committ suicide?

          3. Do the groups mentioned condone abuse and sadistic acts being committed on so called addicts at so called rehab?

  17. Will says:

    Hmm, the timing of the CARERS press conference. Something to do with an interesting election in a little over a year and a half? Perhaps?


    Rand Paul: “Senator Grassley, you’re going to vote for the CARERS bill, right?”

    Grassley: “No”.

    Paul: “Look, you shriveled up corn cob, do you want even a slim chance to see a Republican voted into the White House in 2016? I just gave a press conference where a 4 year old had a seizure during the presentation. Her mother rightly believes cannabis could help her. And two middle-aged-to-elderly MS patients are tired of being treated like criminals for using the only thing that helps them: medical cannabis. AND a Navy veteran — a VETERAN! — weighed in as well. If the Democrats ‘evolve’ quicker than we do, that damn young person voting bloc will take notice and vote accordingly!”

    Grassley: *shrivels up and blows away — poof*


    Meanwhile in an office not far away…;


    Kristen Gillibrand: “Senator Feinstein, you’re going to vote for the CARERS bill, right?”

    Feinstein: “No”.

    Gillibrand: “Look, you brain dead abalone, do you want even a slim chance to see Democrats keep the White House in 2016? I just gave a press conference where a 4 year old had a seizure during the presentation. Her mother rightly believes cannabis could help her. And two middle-aged-to-elderly MS patients are tired of being treated like criminals for using the only thing that helps them: medical cannabis. AND a Navy veteran — a VETERAN! — weighed in as well. If the Republicans ‘evolve’ quicker than we do, that damn young person voting bloc will take notice and vote accordingly!”

    Feinstein: *faints, then shrivels up and blows away — poof*


    Ah, yes, the humble cannabis plant is just getting started making certain politicians squirm — and not because they got the wrong hemorrhoid pillow. Some self obsessed politicians will evolve faster that a generation of fruit flies. The others? See above regarding Grassley and Feinstein…;).

  18. claygooding says:

    Now there are calls to charge the 47 (R)’s that signed the letter to Iran with treason,,this normally wouldn’t be a discussion on the couch but Grassley,Cruz,Cornyn and Sessions,,all devout prohibitionist signed the letter,,could we be so lucky as to get rid of these four so easily,,check the list to see if I missed one you know of.

    • DdC says:

      That would be a first…
      We prefer clean History books to reflect our infallible governments. Truth is a rare item to be found. Justice even more scarce.

      SIGN THE PETITION to prosecute #GOP #47Traitors for violation of the #LoganAct! ➡️

      if the American people ever find out what we have done,
      they will chase us down the streets and lynch us.”
      George H.W. Bush

      Nixon’s Treason
      The Iran-Contra Affair 25 Years On
      Bush Treason

      • DonDig says:

        (DdC, you always have all of this cataloged, how do you do that? I mean seriously, software, long time logging?)
        Thanks, by the way.

        • claygooding says:

          I save my links in a folder in my browser,,easy to copy/paste at articles from the bookmarks.

      • kaptinemo says:

        We’d have to dig up FDR, too.

        His secret meeting with Churchill to create the Atlantic Charter, plotting to have America enter the war without any input from Congress, was also a clear violation of the Logan Act.

        For that matter, what about the events of June 6 2008 in Chantilly, Virginia? Presidential hopefuls meeting in secret with the most wealthy and powerful people on the planet, whose gross worth is equivalent to whole geographic groups of nations? To paraphrase Ferris Bueller’s teacher, “Logan?…Logan?”

        Sorry, Logan ain’t been seen ’round for a long time, ’cause if he had, a lot of people would never have gotten to do a lot of mischief, and that didn’t suit the Powers That Be, hence his ‘missing person’ status. That it is being dusted off and used now, given the history that DID happen, is a farce.

        This petition could backfire, opening some very, very old historical wounds and create fresh ones. Excuse me; I need to make some popcorn. This could get real interesting.

    • DdC says:

      The open letter to Iran (PDF)

      Petition seeks treason charges against 47 GOP senators over Iran letter

      Republicans Admit: That Iran Letter Was a Dumb Idea
      The letter, spearheaded by Sen. Tom Cotton, was signed by 47 Republican senators.

      Signatories: Richard Shelby (Ala.) Jeff Sessions (Ala.) Dan Sullivan (Alaska) John McCain (Ariz.) John Boozman (Ark.) Tom Cotton (Ark.) Cory Gardner (Colo.) Marco Rubio (Fla.) Johnny Isakson (Ga.) David Perdue (Ga.) Mike Crapo (Idaho) Jim Risch (Idaho) Mark Kirk (Ill.) Chuck Grassley (Iowa) Joni Ernst (Iowa) Pat Roberts (Kansas) Jerry Moran (Kansas) Mitch McConnell (Ky.) Rand Paul (Ky.) David Vitter (La.) Bill Cassidy (La.) Roger Wicker (Miss.) Roy Blunt (Mo.) Steve Daines (Mont.) Deb Fischer (Neb.) Ben Sasse (Neb.) Dean Heller (Nev.) Kelly Ayotte (N.H.) Richard Burr (N.C.) Thom Tillis (N.C.) John Hoeven (N.D.) Rob Portman (Ohio) Jim Inhofe (Okla.) James Lankford (Okla.) Pat Toomey (Pa.) Lindsey Graham (S.C.) Tim Scott (S.C.) John Thune (S.D.) Mike Rounds (S.D.) John Cornyn (Texas) Ted Cruz (Texas)
      Orin Hatch (Utah) Mike Lee (Utah) Shelley Moore Capito (W.V.) Ron Johnson (Wis.) Mike Enzi (Wyo.) John Barrasso (Wyo.)

      Did not sign: Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) Jeff Flake (Ariz.) Daniel Coats (Ind.) Susan Collins (Maine) Thad Cochran (Miss.) Lamar Alexander (Tenn.) Bob Corker (Tenn.)

  19. DdC says:

    Toke-A-Day May Keep Old Memory Functioning

    I’ve used this Free forum to store articles and sites and a long time being a pack rat, saving bits and pics. Textedit to sort it out or code it before posting. FB’s handy and Twits are good for sending addresses. 100’s of forums to argue or use as ammo dumps. Many shutdown for various reasons so its good to have back ups. Google works. News articles have comments with many more articles and info sites.

    Drug worriers have a limited list so they have to repeat or tweak old gossip. Most of their gossip has been vetted out by real Science. I admit enjoying the moments when self appointed moralists are silenced with past references proving them idiotic even well intentioned, road pavers. Real time too. As long as the money drives the war there will be people saying what ever it takes to keep it going.

    The burden is still on us to disprove established laws that have not been changed and could resort back to the 90’s with Politicians and LEO’s disregard for state laws. Info is changing peoples attitudes for sure and drug worriers have been pushing internet censorship every year since the 90’s, Now with net neutrality saving us from corporate greed will the PCC program it as they have TV and the other sources of media? News (deemed by them) fit to print.

    Now the people know and see the results and lack of victims, with so much tax paid rhetoric. But that isn’t always enough. The Feds on both sides know cannabis is not qualified as a schedule #1 narcotic and neither has moved to change it in over 4 decades. But for now, I can have a dozen different strains, edibles, concentrates and paraphernalia delivered to my door and the doobies don’t taste any different illicitly, quasi-illicitly or Un-Illicitly.

    Guns, Drugs and Money
    BY Axel Gerdau and John Woo | Feb. 5, 2015

  20. Servetus says:

    VIENNA — March 9-17, 2015 — LEAP is working in partnership with the Czech Republic to introduce an amendment to United Nations treaties at the 58th session of the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) that would give greater sovereignty to countries choosing to base their drug policies on rules that best support public health.

    According to LEAP board member James Gierach:

    “Properly amending the UN drug control treaties next year at the United Nations Special Session of the General Assembly on the World Drug Problem (UNGASS 2016) will not only show respect for the right of member states to adopt their own solutions, it will also send a clear message that public health and safety take precedence over the tired rhetoric of prohibition and the war on drugs.”

    LEAP’s efforts to get the UN to address policies designed to eliminate drug war human rights crimes perpetrated by governments throughout the world is much needed and much appreciated.

  21. kaptinemo says:

    Since it is an Open Thread, I was surfing and found something interesting about the use of words WRT the various positions along different points in the debate spectrum.

    from the page:

    Drug War Buzzwords

    The biggest components of the drug debate is how to reduce drug usage: by prevention or by punishment.

    * Hard-line liberals and libertarians generally favor legalization. Look for buzz-phrases like “the failed Drug War” or “allow medical marijuana.”

    * Moderate liberals and libertarians will generally favor prevention of drug abuse. Look for buzzwords like “more treatment” or “reduce demand.”
    Describing drug use as a health problem (instead of a crime problem) is a buzzword for treatment. Seeking to reduce “prison overcrowding” by means such as “drug courts” (as opposed to building more prisons) is a call for drug tolerance or legalization.

    * Conservatives and populists generally favor punishment for all aspects of the Drug War. Look for buzzwords like “death penalty for drug dealers” or “the scourge of drugs.”

    * Moderate conservatives and populists favor punishment while paying lip-service to other aspects of dealing with drugs. Look for buzzwords like “reduce drug supply” or “protect our borders.”

    * Centrists nowadays are Drug War advocates — the New Democrats (led by Clinton and Gore) support maintaining funding for the War on Drugs.

    * Equating alcoholism with drug abuse is a buzzword for marijuana legalization, as is pointing out the hypocrisy of respecting the right of self-harm with alcohol but not of self-harm with drugs.

    I have always said this is as much about the connotations attached to the words as the words themselves.

    Take the word, ‘permissive’. It is a red cape waved in front of already perpetually angry NeoConservative bulls. It denotees a lack of control, of discipline, that threatens the social order – at least, the social order that resides in the thinking of such people. Anything that is symptomatic of ‘permissiveness’, like cannabis use, is to be eradicated, lest it corrode that (rigid) social order.

    Learn their language, learn the words they hate to hear, and you learn their vulnerabilities. But them? They can’t repeat our shibboleths properly; we spot their plodding heavy-handedness, every time.

  22. DdC says:

    Companies Drug Test a Lot Less Than They Used To
    — because it doesn’t really work

    Backdoor Medicine: How Cannabis Suppositories Can Save Lives via @@CannabisDigest1

  23. Here is an appropriately worded news story headline:

    “After losing at the ballot box, marijuana opponents make a hail mary pass to the courts”

    “The sheriffs’ lawsuit, for instance, is bankrolled by the Drug Free America Foundation. Among other things, this group advocates for broadening mandatory drug tests for public school students. The Foundation arose from the ashes of “Straight, Incorporated,” a coercive “drug rehabilitation” program for teens that faced numerous allegations of abuse and settled out of court to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars before closing its doors in 1993.” …

    “This is the last hurrah for a lot of individuals in the anti-marijuana community,” according to the Brookings Institution’s John Hudak. “It’s pretty clear that they’ve lost the battle for public opinion.”

    • kaptinemo says:

      Whahooo! They got it! I think they got it!

      I’ll bet the phone lines between Sembler in FL and the WaPo are white-hot right now.

      Sembler is a (minor) member of the Elite (compared to say, Rockefellers or Morgans), and is probably raising all kinds of Hell for having his infamia aired in the Elite’s main East Coast political mouthpiece.

      If that was a deliberate move, then we really are seeing change.

  24. If Jeb Bush is on the advisory board of Drug Free America (thanks for the info Servetus), and they are bankrolling the sheriffs’ lawsuit, doesn’t that make Jeb Bush one big large huge liar about supporting states rights with regard to legalizing marijuana?

  25. Poca says:

    The much anticipated ruling that was due out today in Sacramento on the constitutionality of ganja’s schedule 1 status has been postponed.

    This morning, Judge Mueller issue a minute order postponing the status conference on her own in United States v. Schweder from March 11 to March 25, 2015, at 9:00 a.m. in courtroom 3. I’d guess she needs more time to finalize her ruling on defendants’ motion to dismiss that challenges (1) the constitutionality of classifying marijuana as a Schedule I controlled substance; and (2) the uneven enforcement of federal marijuana laws as violating the constitutional Equal Sovereignty principle. Still expect she will issue her ruling in writing before the March 25 status conference.

      • As an Obama appointee, I am hoping things will be in a different direction this time.

        • Windy says:

          Obama has done nothing to forward decrim or legalization, not in his appointments, not in his own actions. I wouldn’t base any hopes on any Obama appointee; if he had really wanted to decrim or legalize he would have removed cannabis from the CSA schedule his first day in office or any day since then, he has not even hinted that he could do that to Americans, let alone hinted he WOULD do it.

        • B. Snow says:

          Seriously Windy?

          Obama has done nothing to forward decrim or legalization, not in his appointments, not in his own actions.

          He’s carefully managed to not pull a Nixon-esque response to the incessant questions about legalizing cannabis.

          I didn’t like his 2009 “Electronic Town Hall” move of *making sure to asnswer this because it ranked fairly high among the questions…*

          And then, laughing-off the question in a seemingly non-serious manner, “No, I don’t think legalizing marijuana is a good way to grow our economy
          IIRC = They had asked for questions relating to the economy, and despite the “Green Rush” we’ve seen in some places that the President & AG Holder could’ve fought more actively.

          (They kind of ‘allowed’ it to happen, with the statements about *Limited Justice Dept. Resources* & chasing marijuana users as not being a priority or a wise use of said “resources”.)

          He was correct in that = at that time we needed alot more money than that – to even come close fix the housing/mortgage/derivatives bubble that had just gone kablooey!

          Granted how they handled that bank bailouts is debatable, esp. in hindsight. = At the time not many people understood the falsely/mistakenly? rated default-swap derivatives crap.

          One thing we all figured out soon enough & which I see ignored here is that = IF the President had pushed for legalization I have No Doubt – Whatsoever, that we’d not likely be where we are now.

          His comments in that “New Yorker” piece by David Remnick were very well measured and it’s publication was well-timed – “Going the Distance” – Jan. 27, 2014.

          Was he following along *just behind* public opinion polls? Yep, and IMO that is actually a very smart way to go about it = Knowing that the teabaggers in the House of Representatives will oppose him on literally everything!

          There have been a few things they agreed to pass in the last few years, but there was a good stretch of time where some Representatives had never voted to pass any sort of bill or legislation (beyond renaming post offices) that would go on to the Senate and then to the President to be signed into law.

          FFS, they had a FAKE “bill signing” ceremony for the Keystone pipeline last week!

          If Nixon had been in that 2009 E-Town Hall, one:
          He wouldn’t have knowingly had (IIRC Jared Bernstein) read out that question to him.

          And two:
          Had someone sprung it on him he wouldn’t have laughed = Nixon’s head would’ve just *Exploded* -Right There- on the spot!

          Barry was at least cool enough to handle it well, and made sure to “signal” he was *likely* – personally okay with it. And, Hence the lack of any *head-explosion*…

          It was “signaling” sorta like the Clay Hunt Bill that Tom Coburn blocked till the day he left D.C. (Ironically – to go deal with a recurrence of cancer.)

          But, seemingly everyone knew that it involved VA Approval or at least some tolerance of research into PTSD treatments some of which would be done with Cannabis and/or Psilocybin mushrooms – But they didn’t talk about that bit till after it passed.

          Some of the clueless pols may have been in the dark about it, OR they wanted plausible deniability back home in the near future, But also didn’t want to be on the wrong side of history – down the road.

      • kaptinemo says:

        Behind Obama are the banksters, who got rich off of laundered drug money. They don’t want cannabis legal for obvious reasons.

        That’s who he met with in Chantilly, VA in 2008 before he became President…in order to become President. It’s why we’ve had such a hard time with this ‘progressive’, ‘liberal’ Administration on this issue. It would not have mattered if anyone else was in the same position. You have to kiss their rings – or something else – in order to be President.

        The most important event of that year, the Election, took place June 6, not in November. The Powers That Be cast their vote, and it was done. Obama got the nod, and Clinton had to settle for SecState and a shot at the title in 2016. And the Agenda rolls on, not a bump in its way…that is, until we began to win.

        Now all the masks that have hid what was going on for so long are slipping off to show the rigged game underneath. It’s getting harder and harder to hide it. More and more people are seeing very clearly what the DrugWar has done as opposed to its marketing spin as to what it is doing. They want cannabis legal again. Which is already cutting deep into the profits of the banksters, as the cartels phase out cannabis production and State by State goes ‘green’.

        All the low level actions in this battle, like the hopeless lawsuits, are actually very telling as to how desperate the Real Power is to slow down the inevitable. They know legal cannabis is the end of their gravy train, and that’s why we are meeting so much resistance despite it being obvious to all and sundry that prohibition’s days are numbered.

        • B. Snow says:

          “Bilderbergers” Kap?


          That’s kinda wandering out into Jesse Ventura territory there ain’t it.

          No offense, But…Really???

        • Chris says:

          Kap is by far my favorite regular poster on these comments (sorry everybody else!), but I don’t care for the Bilderbergers references either. Not saying anything about it either – I can’t claim to have done any more research than clicking his links occasionally on the subject. Everyone has their own interests and I can’t judge.

  26. claygooding says:

    Some may recall my pointing out HA has 12 marijuana bills they are considering,,TX now has 13,,the pebbles have turned into boulders methinks and it is too late too run ,,the lifeboats are already leaving.


    The big one to kick it all off is HB 2165 which would repeal marijuana prohibition in Texas by striking all references of marihuana from Texas law.
    HB 507 drops possession of an ounce or less of marijuana to a $100 fine with no jail time and provides an exception to prosecution for possession of associated drug paraphernalia.
    Rounding it out is HB 325 which reduces the penalty for possession of 0.35 ounces or less of marijuana to a Class C misdemeanor. It would also decrease possession of less than two ounces to a Class B misdemeanor, and less than four ounces to a Class A misdemeanor.

    On the medical side, expected to be introduced soon is a whole plant medical marijuana bill which would give access to patients with an array of illnesses. It will also provide the ability for people to petition that their illness be included as a qualifying condition. “snip”

    Tee-hee,,and pigs are excellent flyers.

    • Windy says:

      Were I a Texan, I would be activating for the HB 2165, which is what I wish would have happened in WA and also in congress.

      • claygooding says:

        Headed to Austin in 4 days to hit their offices,,unmedicated and pissed.

        • Will says:

          You do realize you’re heading into the maelstrom that is SXSW. If anything, stay well north of downtown. But you probably already know this. Good luck and have some fun.

    • Will says:

      Recently there was a ‘call to arms’ from Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick for Texans to become “good Christian soldiers” in the fight against allowing same sex marriage in the Lone Star State (I chose not to enlist). The reasoning behind this is based on 70% of Texans being against same sex marriage.

      However, both Governor Greg Abbot and Dan Patrick are opposed to legalizing cannabis in any form, in spite of the fact that a recent poll showed 77% of Texans are in favor of medical cannabis. And a majority are in favor of recreational use (though not as high as 77%). Will Dan Patrick call on Texans to become “good humane soldiers” to fight for access to medical cannabis for those Texans in need? Hardly (actually, no). At least the grand poobahs are consistent when it comes to “what Texans want”………:/. One of the most disingenuous claims by a Texas politician came from Gov. Abbot before the gubernatorial election last year. Abbot was asked by Texas Norml to explain his position on cannabis legalization. Abbot said that according to the Obama Administration, cannabis was a Schedule I controlled substance and that’s why he couldn’t endorse any change to Texas law. Here’s a guy who routinely battles the federal government at every turn (sometimes justifiably, often with pure demagoguery), but can’t help but fall in line with the feds when cannabis is mentioned. Jeeeesssusss.

      There has been considerable debate about HB 2165. Many, even in the cannabis law reform movement in Texas, feel that this bill goes too far too fast. Really? Since when does doing what’s long overdue require long, agonizingly slow progress? Well, when it comes to Texas citizens it’s not necessary. But for politicians and certain large campaign contributors, they just “can’t git their heads around it”. Yeah, those people.

      • claygooding says:

        Will,,tell them you are following the only real research ever done on marijuana legalization and it’s impact on our society but was ignored,,it is time to quit ignoring it.

      • QuaxMercy says:

        “Since when does doing what’s long overdue require long, agonizingly slow progress?”

        EGG zactly! he geiseled

        And why, as we establish a new regime around these questions, these issues – why would we need to pay attention – obeisance – anymore, to the concerns or priorities of those who have served us so long & so poorly these many years? They’ve invoked the Holy Concerns – for the Chilllldrennnn, the Future, Productivity – & they’ve stirred the Sacred Fears – Insanity! Testicular Cancer! Brain Malformation! – as needed, dear old standbys. But no more.

        Never. Anymore. & they really don’t get this part, yet. They still believe they must be consulted, revered, pensioned. But they needn’t be – & this is the reason: they have no stake.

        It won’t do to shame them; they have no shame – not prey to a thousand cares of Conscience – hey, it is easier, they say

        But neither are they prey to the cares of the stakeholder, the stake-carer, the stake-nurturer

        Some sincerely represented Untruth, many took Untruth on faith, but past a certain point, every knew or should have known, and therefore…they have no say in the matter. They can’t tell right from wrong & don’t care… seems fair

        • kaptinemo says:

          For too long, the word ‘stakeholder’ gave too much cachet to mere employees. Like Kevvie passing himself off as a ‘senior policy adviser’ when he was nothing but a professional BSer, a speechwriter. No different than calling garbagemen ‘sanitation engineers’.

          Time to remind them of their true status. Especially when the less-intelligent pols try to backpedal and use the stale old bit about ‘consulting the stakeholders’, meaning the parasites of prohibition, sucking out tax dollars as if they were (and are) our life’s-blood and giving the body politic the disease of fascism

          The only real ‘stakeholders’ are those who pay their salaries, the citizens. And we don’t need to be consulted. We’re directing them to get re-legalization done.

          It really, truly is that simple. We are the majority, now. They still don’t believe it. They still think they can carry on as always.

          So did Dwight Holton. So did that forgettable Councilwoman who crossed us. So do all those idiot Sheriffs that signed on to that idiotic lawsuit, especially the ones in CO. Every cannabist in CO has every reason to remove each and every one of them next election…unless they want to expedite the process and recall them.

          This whole business of allowing public servants to give themselves ‘airs’, as me Irish Mum used to put it, and to try to use that to somehow elevate themselves up and out of the usual control mechanisms, is part of the reason why a lot of this crap has gone on for as long as it has.

          Time to remind them the only stakeholder in this issue is the one holding their pink slips, the electorate, and the majority want cannabis legal again.

          So, both the civil servants and the pols better quit wasting our time and our dime, quit the tomfoolery, and get it done.

  27. DdC says:

    March 14, 2015, at 9:26.53 = Happy Pi Day! or 3.141592653

Comments are closed.