blackosprey
Member
Just another banana in the tailpipe, nothing to see here, folks.
-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
MSNBC says Obama to legalize
- Thread starter Peacemonger
- Start date
As Smarter people than myself have said, "Anyone that wants the job should be disallowed from performing it." IMHO, this applies to Politicians and LEOs.
A Romney Win = terrible problems for Medical Marijuana People, involved on any level. It would be interesting to see how Local Enforcement changes, in places where Mj is so 'ingrained' into the local economy. My passport would be close at hand.
A BO Win = A slightly less corrupt Prez., who has to get things done with the "Co-operation" of the Party that yielded a Douchebag like Romney. Status quo in the Places that produce herb, most likely. Passport dusted off. In view.
No way would either of them choose the Distinguished Dr. Ron Paul as VP. I would choose him as Prez. He could make us proud to be Americans again. Passport stashed away for a later vacation.
MSNBC is a tool. FOX is a tool. Cable Networks are tools. Advertisers are working us. Sports, prescription drugs, and Alcohol are supposed to Dumb Us Down.
In fact almost all you see on the Glass Teat or hear on Radio is propaganda. Or in our case Pot-a-ganda. After reading the last 3 pages of this thread, it makes one want to throw up one's hands in resignation. Electoral College makes the Presidential Decision.
It is like the other November Event, the HT Cann Cup. The People do not make the decision.>!!
Peace.
A Romney Win = terrible problems for Medical Marijuana People, involved on any level. It would be interesting to see how Local Enforcement changes, in places where Mj is so 'ingrained' into the local economy. My passport would be close at hand.
A BO Win = A slightly less corrupt Prez., who has to get things done with the "Co-operation" of the Party that yielded a Douchebag like Romney. Status quo in the Places that produce herb, most likely. Passport dusted off. In view.
No way would either of them choose the Distinguished Dr. Ron Paul as VP. I would choose him as Prez. He could make us proud to be Americans again. Passport stashed away for a later vacation.
MSNBC is a tool. FOX is a tool. Cable Networks are tools. Advertisers are working us. Sports, prescription drugs, and Alcohol are supposed to Dumb Us Down.
In fact almost all you see on the Glass Teat or hear on Radio is propaganda. Or in our case Pot-a-ganda. After reading the last 3 pages of this thread, it makes one want to throw up one's hands in resignation. Electoral College makes the Presidential Decision.
It is like the other November Event, the HT Cann Cup. The People do not make the decision.>!!
Peace.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/pot-legalization-is-coming-20120726
Pot Legalization Is Coming
POSTED: July 26, 4:15 PM ET | By Julian Brookes
At least some able-bodied Americans may soon be able to score a bag of weed legally without having to fake a knee injury. In November, voters in three states could approve ballot measures to legalize marijuana, and not just for medical purposes – for getting-high purposes. Then again, they might chicken out, like California voters did in 2010. But sooner or later, and probably sooner, a state will go green.
About half of America will be fine with that. Support for legalization is (no other way to put it) higher than ever, and rising. That's partly demographics – the young are more into pot than their elders, who aren't sticking around. But it's something else, too: The status quo, people are starting to notice, is a total disaster.
The prohibition on marijuana – a relatively benign drug when used responsibly by adults, and a teddy bear compared to alcohol and tobacco – has done an impressive job of racking up racially-biased arrests; throwing people in jail; burning up police time and money; propping up a $30 billion illegal market; and enriching psychotic Mexican drug lords.
But it hasn't stopped Americans from smoking a ton of weed. We're up to 20-30 million users, 6 billion joints a year – and rising. And teenagers, who ideally shouldn't be toking up on a regular basis, say pot is easier to get than beer. "There's that Talmudic principle that a law that's not obeyed is a bad law," says Mark Kleiman, a drug policy expert at UCLA and co-author of the new book Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know. "And I think we're pretty much at that point."
So, let's try another approach, right? Legalization could come in many forms, but all would involve tradeoffs. And no doubt there are all sorts of ways to screw it up. But more power to the first state to give it a shot.
When that happens, expect one of two things – either: the federal government, in deference to democratic principles, will decline to enforce its ban on marijuana, creating space for the state to be a "laboratory of democracy," working out its new policy by trial and error, learning as it goes, creating a trove of hard-earned lessons to guide the states that (inevitably) will follow; or: the federal government will bide its time and then come down hard, busting growers and retailers, seizing land and property (or, just as effective, threatening to), going after banks that serve pot businesses, and doing whatever else it takes to shut down the state's legalization push.
True, the feds would be within their rights to crack down. A state can legalize all it wants, but – incredibly – happy-go-lucky marijuana will still be a Schedule I substance, right up there on the federal shit list with heroin, LSD, and "ecstacy" – substances defined as having a "high potential for abuse" and "no currently accepted medical use."* And, no, this isn't some quaint, disregarded artifact from olden times: A personal stash can get you a year in federal prison, a single plant up to five.
And don't be surprised if Washington does crack down. As a candidate, "Choom Gang" alumnus Barack Obama talked a good game about bringing some sanity and proportion to drug enforcement. But during his term, federal prosecutors (who, in another complication, have wide discretion to pursue their own agendas) have cracked down hard on medical pot providers in states like California where it’s legal. The administration says it's surgically targeting front operations supplying recreational use, but it sure doesn't look like that on the ground. "Obama has been a terrible disappointment," says Keith Stroup, founder of the drug law reform group NORML.
But maybe the federal government will do the right thing and lay off. "There's a strong argument for trying it at the state level and for the feds getting out of the way," says Kleiman. "That seems unlikely, but I'd love to be proven wrong." (If the president in January 2013 is zero-tolerance drug warrior Mitt Romney, run for the hills.)
We might not have long to wait to find out. Of the three states where legalization is up for a vote in November – Colorado, Washington, and Oregon – Colorado "is definitely the best shot so far," says Steve Fox of the Marijuana Policy Project, a national lobby group that's kicking in about $1 million to support the measure. Under Amendment 64, the state would treat pot like alcohol – licenses for producers and sellers, 21-plus age restriction for buyers, and tax revenue government. Should it pass – and one poll has support up by 61-27– "We're hoping the federal government will not impose its will," says Fox, "and that there'll be an adult conversation about what Colorado has decided to do."
A lot depends on how things play out on the ground, which is hard to predict. A few things we can assume: the price of pot will plummet, since marijuana is incredibly inexpensive to produce if you don’t have to dodge the cops or schlep it up from Mexico. Consumption will surge, though by how much is hard to say (the consensus guesstimate predicts a doubling or tripling). Beyond that, nothing is clear.
Amendment 64 leaves a lot of the policy details to the state legislature, and one of its first tasks will be to figure out how big of a tax to slap on. It has to be large enough to generate revenue – Amendment 64 wisely stipulates that the first $40 million generated will go to public school construction! – but not so large that buyers prefer to take their chances on the (untaxed) black market. Another challenge: How do you do a better job than current policy of reducing teen use? Or combating abuse and dependency – a problem for only 2-3 percent of users, but not something you can ignore. And how do you prevent neighboring states, if not the entire country, from getting buried under mountains of cheap Colorado weed? If the state looks like becoming the nation's grow house, the feds will probably land hard.
Looking beyond this year, bear in mind that there’s more than one way to "legalize" pot. Colorado is going with the alcohol model, but there are other approaches, some more plausible than others. At one end of the spectrum there's full commercial legalization, where anyone can freely produce, distribute, market, sell, or buy pot, just like any other commodity (think: tomatoes) subject to certain regulations. Hard to see that flying politically. At the other end, there's "decriminalization," where you eliminate or reduce penalties for possession (say, to the level of a minor traffic violation), especially for first-time offenders, but retain the ban on production, distribution, and sale; fourteen states, including California and Massachusetts, have already gone this route, and some major politicians, like Mayor Rahm Emanuel in Chicago and Gov. Andrew Cuomo in New York, have lately come around to the idea. Other options include, on the production side, restricting the industry to nonprofits, or membership-based "clubs," or allowing profit-making but limiting or banning marketing and advertising.
There are tradeoffs: Legalize commercially, whether fully or on the alcohol model, and you add to the sum of freedom and pleasure in the world, wrestle an industry away from violent criminals, generate useful tax revenue, and spare a lot of people jail time and criminal records. But brace yourself for a huge upsurge in use and, possibly, a marketing blitz aimed at teens (see tobacco) and the "heavy" users who consume most of the product and therefore supply most of the profits (see alcohol); and say hello to a well-funded pot lobby bent on blocking regulations it doesn't like (see tobacco and alcohol). Decriminalize, and you save a lot of cop time and money and, again, human misery. But you’re leaving a lot of tax revenue on the table and, incoherently, nudging people to buy what's illegal to produce and sell.
Voters will have to weigh these and other factors and decide whether the (not-fully-knowable) benefits of legalization outstrip the (hard-to-anticipate) costs. No plausible scenario is all upside; but it's hard to see how we could make things worse. "We don't say there are no negative consequences to marijuana use, but there are much more effective ways of dealing with those," says Jill Harris of the Drug Policy Alliance, a group that advocates for more liberal drug laws. "It's just that the consequences of marijuana prohibition are just so much more severe that we feel it's worth the tradeoff."
Beau Kilmer, a researcher at RAND and co-author of Marijuana Legalization, says whatever a given state decides to do, lawmakers should make sure to give themselves an "escape clause," like a sunset provision that makes the laws go back to what they were after a certain number of years unless the voters or legislature decide to extend them. "There's no reason to believe they'll get it right on the first or even second try," he told me. But once the pot industry develops some lobbying muscle, the policy will be much harder to tweak. With an escape clause, he says, legislatures will be able to overcome the lobby "just by sitting still."
Of course, the federal government might decide not to tolerate legal marijuana under any circumstances, and all this will be moot. The only way to take the feds out of the mix is to change federal law, and only congress can do that.
But don't expect too much there. Last year, Reps. Barney Frank and Ron Paul introduced the first-ever federal legalization bill. It’s not going anywhere anytime soon; another Frank bill, the Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act, which would leave enforcement of medical pot to the states, has been kicking around the Hill since 1997, but has never made it to a vote. "Congress is several years behind the general public on this," says Rep. Jared Polis, a Colorado Democrat and a co-sponsor of both bills. But even congress is starting to come around. When he first came to Washington, in 2009, there were only "a handful" of lawmakers prepared to stand up for more liberal drug laws, says Polis. Today, most Democrats are on board.
The GOP, not so much. "I've been very disappointed with my fellow Republicans on this issue," says Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California, a co-author of the Frank-Paul bill and a rare pro-pot conservative. "I know that if this was a secret ballot, a majority of them would be voting on my side." Rohrabacher says a lot of his states-rights-and-small-government-minded colleagues agree that marijuana enforcement is a huge waste of tax dollars, but they're not willing to go there. "They’re are just terrified that in an election next time around there’ll be ads run against them about how they’re doing the bidding of the drug dealers."
So don’t look to Washington D.C. for action on this any time soon. Legalization, when it comes, will come at the state level. There's no guarantee it will happen this year, but there’ll be more initiatives on state ballots in 2014, and 2016, and beyond. Most pot activists and policy analysts I spoke to put the timeframe for legalization at 5-7 years, tops. "We’re guaranteed to win in the end because we’re winning the hearts and minds of the American public," says NORML’s Keith Stroup.
And then? "If we get state-level legalization and it doesn't turn into a total clusterfuck, we'll see more acceptance," Kleiman told me. In any event, he says, something's got to give. "Prohibition is falling apart, about the way alcohol prohibition fell apart. Legalization is eventually going to be a recognition of the facts on the ground."
... looks like we have momentum and numbers, now we need some lawmakers with intestinal fortitude.
i'll go toke and meditate on a propitious result.
Pot Legalization Is Coming
POSTED: July 26, 4:15 PM ET | By Julian Brookes
At least some able-bodied Americans may soon be able to score a bag of weed legally without having to fake a knee injury. In November, voters in three states could approve ballot measures to legalize marijuana, and not just for medical purposes – for getting-high purposes. Then again, they might chicken out, like California voters did in 2010. But sooner or later, and probably sooner, a state will go green.
About half of America will be fine with that. Support for legalization is (no other way to put it) higher than ever, and rising. That's partly demographics – the young are more into pot than their elders, who aren't sticking around. But it's something else, too: The status quo, people are starting to notice, is a total disaster.
The prohibition on marijuana – a relatively benign drug when used responsibly by adults, and a teddy bear compared to alcohol and tobacco – has done an impressive job of racking up racially-biased arrests; throwing people in jail; burning up police time and money; propping up a $30 billion illegal market; and enriching psychotic Mexican drug lords.
But it hasn't stopped Americans from smoking a ton of weed. We're up to 20-30 million users, 6 billion joints a year – and rising. And teenagers, who ideally shouldn't be toking up on a regular basis, say pot is easier to get than beer. "There's that Talmudic principle that a law that's not obeyed is a bad law," says Mark Kleiman, a drug policy expert at UCLA and co-author of the new book Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know. "And I think we're pretty much at that point."
So, let's try another approach, right? Legalization could come in many forms, but all would involve tradeoffs. And no doubt there are all sorts of ways to screw it up. But more power to the first state to give it a shot.
When that happens, expect one of two things – either: the federal government, in deference to democratic principles, will decline to enforce its ban on marijuana, creating space for the state to be a "laboratory of democracy," working out its new policy by trial and error, learning as it goes, creating a trove of hard-earned lessons to guide the states that (inevitably) will follow; or: the federal government will bide its time and then come down hard, busting growers and retailers, seizing land and property (or, just as effective, threatening to), going after banks that serve pot businesses, and doing whatever else it takes to shut down the state's legalization push.
True, the feds would be within their rights to crack down. A state can legalize all it wants, but – incredibly – happy-go-lucky marijuana will still be a Schedule I substance, right up there on the federal shit list with heroin, LSD, and "ecstacy" – substances defined as having a "high potential for abuse" and "no currently accepted medical use."* And, no, this isn't some quaint, disregarded artifact from olden times: A personal stash can get you a year in federal prison, a single plant up to five.
And don't be surprised if Washington does crack down. As a candidate, "Choom Gang" alumnus Barack Obama talked a good game about bringing some sanity and proportion to drug enforcement. But during his term, federal prosecutors (who, in another complication, have wide discretion to pursue their own agendas) have cracked down hard on medical pot providers in states like California where it’s legal. The administration says it's surgically targeting front operations supplying recreational use, but it sure doesn't look like that on the ground. "Obama has been a terrible disappointment," says Keith Stroup, founder of the drug law reform group NORML.
But maybe the federal government will do the right thing and lay off. "There's a strong argument for trying it at the state level and for the feds getting out of the way," says Kleiman. "That seems unlikely, but I'd love to be proven wrong." (If the president in January 2013 is zero-tolerance drug warrior Mitt Romney, run for the hills.)
We might not have long to wait to find out. Of the three states where legalization is up for a vote in November – Colorado, Washington, and Oregon – Colorado "is definitely the best shot so far," says Steve Fox of the Marijuana Policy Project, a national lobby group that's kicking in about $1 million to support the measure. Under Amendment 64, the state would treat pot like alcohol – licenses for producers and sellers, 21-plus age restriction for buyers, and tax revenue government. Should it pass – and one poll has support up by 61-27– "We're hoping the federal government will not impose its will," says Fox, "and that there'll be an adult conversation about what Colorado has decided to do."
A lot depends on how things play out on the ground, which is hard to predict. A few things we can assume: the price of pot will plummet, since marijuana is incredibly inexpensive to produce if you don’t have to dodge the cops or schlep it up from Mexico. Consumption will surge, though by how much is hard to say (the consensus guesstimate predicts a doubling or tripling). Beyond that, nothing is clear.
Amendment 64 leaves a lot of the policy details to the state legislature, and one of its first tasks will be to figure out how big of a tax to slap on. It has to be large enough to generate revenue – Amendment 64 wisely stipulates that the first $40 million generated will go to public school construction! – but not so large that buyers prefer to take their chances on the (untaxed) black market. Another challenge: How do you do a better job than current policy of reducing teen use? Or combating abuse and dependency – a problem for only 2-3 percent of users, but not something you can ignore. And how do you prevent neighboring states, if not the entire country, from getting buried under mountains of cheap Colorado weed? If the state looks like becoming the nation's grow house, the feds will probably land hard.
Looking beyond this year, bear in mind that there’s more than one way to "legalize" pot. Colorado is going with the alcohol model, but there are other approaches, some more plausible than others. At one end of the spectrum there's full commercial legalization, where anyone can freely produce, distribute, market, sell, or buy pot, just like any other commodity (think: tomatoes) subject to certain regulations. Hard to see that flying politically. At the other end, there's "decriminalization," where you eliminate or reduce penalties for possession (say, to the level of a minor traffic violation), especially for first-time offenders, but retain the ban on production, distribution, and sale; fourteen states, including California and Massachusetts, have already gone this route, and some major politicians, like Mayor Rahm Emanuel in Chicago and Gov. Andrew Cuomo in New York, have lately come around to the idea. Other options include, on the production side, restricting the industry to nonprofits, or membership-based "clubs," or allowing profit-making but limiting or banning marketing and advertising.
There are tradeoffs: Legalize commercially, whether fully or on the alcohol model, and you add to the sum of freedom and pleasure in the world, wrestle an industry away from violent criminals, generate useful tax revenue, and spare a lot of people jail time and criminal records. But brace yourself for a huge upsurge in use and, possibly, a marketing blitz aimed at teens (see tobacco) and the "heavy" users who consume most of the product and therefore supply most of the profits (see alcohol); and say hello to a well-funded pot lobby bent on blocking regulations it doesn't like (see tobacco and alcohol). Decriminalize, and you save a lot of cop time and money and, again, human misery. But you’re leaving a lot of tax revenue on the table and, incoherently, nudging people to buy what's illegal to produce and sell.
Voters will have to weigh these and other factors and decide whether the (not-fully-knowable) benefits of legalization outstrip the (hard-to-anticipate) costs. No plausible scenario is all upside; but it's hard to see how we could make things worse. "We don't say there are no negative consequences to marijuana use, but there are much more effective ways of dealing with those," says Jill Harris of the Drug Policy Alliance, a group that advocates for more liberal drug laws. "It's just that the consequences of marijuana prohibition are just so much more severe that we feel it's worth the tradeoff."
Beau Kilmer, a researcher at RAND and co-author of Marijuana Legalization, says whatever a given state decides to do, lawmakers should make sure to give themselves an "escape clause," like a sunset provision that makes the laws go back to what they were after a certain number of years unless the voters or legislature decide to extend them. "There's no reason to believe they'll get it right on the first or even second try," he told me. But once the pot industry develops some lobbying muscle, the policy will be much harder to tweak. With an escape clause, he says, legislatures will be able to overcome the lobby "just by sitting still."
Of course, the federal government might decide not to tolerate legal marijuana under any circumstances, and all this will be moot. The only way to take the feds out of the mix is to change federal law, and only congress can do that.
But don't expect too much there. Last year, Reps. Barney Frank and Ron Paul introduced the first-ever federal legalization bill. It’s not going anywhere anytime soon; another Frank bill, the Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act, which would leave enforcement of medical pot to the states, has been kicking around the Hill since 1997, but has never made it to a vote. "Congress is several years behind the general public on this," says Rep. Jared Polis, a Colorado Democrat and a co-sponsor of both bills. But even congress is starting to come around. When he first came to Washington, in 2009, there were only "a handful" of lawmakers prepared to stand up for more liberal drug laws, says Polis. Today, most Democrats are on board.
The GOP, not so much. "I've been very disappointed with my fellow Republicans on this issue," says Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California, a co-author of the Frank-Paul bill and a rare pro-pot conservative. "I know that if this was a secret ballot, a majority of them would be voting on my side." Rohrabacher says a lot of his states-rights-and-small-government-minded colleagues agree that marijuana enforcement is a huge waste of tax dollars, but they're not willing to go there. "They’re are just terrified that in an election next time around there’ll be ads run against them about how they’re doing the bidding of the drug dealers."
So don’t look to Washington D.C. for action on this any time soon. Legalization, when it comes, will come at the state level. There's no guarantee it will happen this year, but there’ll be more initiatives on state ballots in 2014, and 2016, and beyond. Most pot activists and policy analysts I spoke to put the timeframe for legalization at 5-7 years, tops. "We’re guaranteed to win in the end because we’re winning the hearts and minds of the American public," says NORML’s Keith Stroup.
And then? "If we get state-level legalization and it doesn't turn into a total clusterfuck, we'll see more acceptance," Kleiman told me. In any event, he says, something's got to give. "Prohibition is falling apart, about the way alcohol prohibition fell apart. Legalization is eventually going to be a recognition of the facts on the ground."
... looks like we have momentum and numbers, now we need some lawmakers with intestinal fortitude.
i'll go toke and meditate on a propitious result.
ClosetAdvocate
Member
This man speaks the truth!He will consider it, and after the elections he will tell: "I was just kidding"
The best predictor of the future is the past. Believe me I want legalization as much as the next guy, but I can't trust Obama.
How can you tell if a politician is lying? His lips are moving.
Two things I don't like about that rstone article.
1. Use will not double or triple. This is based on guesstimates, not studies. Use did not triple in portugal. Also, people will still be drug tested at work, this is probably the main reason people quit smoking in the first place. Drug tests will still exist.
2. Congress is not the only route to change marijuana enforcement. Of course rolling stone doesn't mention that because they are so far up obamas ass he needs a toothpick.
1. Use will not double or triple. This is based on guesstimates, not studies. Use did not triple in portugal. Also, people will still be drug tested at work, this is probably the main reason people quit smoking in the first place. Drug tests will still exist.
2. Congress is not the only route to change marijuana enforcement. Of course rolling stone doesn't mention that because they are so far up obamas ass he needs a toothpick.
Well in the good old days, when constituents felt there representatives were not listening to them, they gathered into an angry mob and went and hung the sons a bitches!
Now days it just takes a hell of a lot of money to have the same effect.
I don't think federal medical marijuana laws will change much until more of the old farts are gone, there are a lot of hard headed people that were brain washed into being afraid of marijuana and status quo also brings comfort to those who were raised during hard times regardless of political preference.
A pro Med MJ politician might get over 60% of the vote in Cali but would most likely be looking for another job after a nationwide election.
By the same token, I don't believe it matters who is president next year as long as we have the same old farts (Congress) running things, although the Republicans would be more likely to bend a few rules, plunder and pillage whatever resources we have to try to get folks working so the rich wouldn't have to pay them terrible high taxes, lol.
Could taxing Marijuana allow States to operate without Federal funding?
If so then IMO this would make the new industry appear more economically feasible, and the chances of having more lenient federal laws or less federal intervention would be much better!
Just don't see it happening, but maybe there could be a good case made for American people having the right to grow they're own, and licensed businesses supplying seeds/clones, just like the home brew industry but not just for yuppies, lol.
danut
Member
I caught a TON of flack for saying those kind of things in 08 ..
danut
Member
He is also the commander in chief.
He could ORDER the DEA to allow scheduling hearings.
There are many folks that try to claim he is helpless. That is simply his excuse.
Sessile G
Member
I remember when he first ran and talked about this, then the feds RAIDED MORE STATES!
as stated already money controls the pres, the last almost honest pres we had was shot in dallas, sinse then they do as there told and reap the rewards of millions of dollors from the money people of the world, you know and i know if the goverment wanted to, pot would be legal, there is simply to much money to be made by keeping it illeagle, besides what would all the dea agents do ? maybe fight real crime like cocaine, heroin ? nope there up to there ass's in making money on it to, i hate to think about it but the only true cure for america's problems is a complete revolution and that wont happen cause they have us exactly where they want us, broke, no job's, no hope for our kids, we are doomed for a complete economic collapes, also read where if obama is reelected he is going to try to disarm us, americans without a way to defend ourselves is a scary thought, fuck im going to go smoke one, my head hurts
P
Paco
every dem wants to disarm us, every repub pres pushes us to war. where oh, where is the difference. But hey, without OBAMA I wouldn't have a job doing what i do. so go figure....
G
greenmatter
THIS POST SHOULD NOT BE IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM AS ME SUPPORTING OBAMA!
POTUS ....... lets take a look at their reality
the job itself pretty much means that you WILL be blamed for things that got started by presidents that were in office before you (maybe even before you were born)
you are forced to dance around several nasty tempered and self centered elephants in the room in the form of lobby fuckheads and special interest groups (one of the largest being law enforcement)
no matter what you do you WILL NOT please all the people all the time ( and most of the people are more than happy to look at the small picture )
..................
i have zero sympathy for anyone who has or will suck enough sweaty balls to get themselves into the white house, but i can't look at the clusterfuck they they are suppose to be in charge of and believe for a minute that it can be fixed without some drastic changes. trouble is change is not something humans adjust to real well ........ the winners gloat, the losers cry, and the folks in the middle are are ready to throw their hands in the air and say fuck it because they are sick and tired of hearing the same horse shit in 4 year cycles.
trying to be fair to the guys in charge is almost impossible. it is not like any of them get to start with a clean slate anyway.
the credit cards are maxed out, the bank does not mind fucking you a little harder, and the teenagers (read : house and senate) that have been at the mall with your card every day hate to hear the word no ......... and they will call CPS (read FOX or MSNBC) if they don't get what they want
i don't see any of that as "his excuse" ........ it's just a reality that nobody in their right mind would choose to deal with
and getting back to the point of legalization ....... does anyone really think mitt is going to do anything positive for our side?
i'm frustrated as hell with the whole game, but at least i know the flavor and effectiveness of the giant douche ....... that turd sandwich on the other hand has been spouting some scary shit. AND has already proven that he is as much of a liar as the douche
looks like i will be going for the write in AGAIN this time around
G
greenmatter
how did that post make you think i have any respect for the media outlets i mentioned? i was just trying to point out the spin in both directions.
for the record i don't see any network news to be the the truth ...... in fact i don't think they even try to be truthful anymore
Alex Jones says, that once marijuana is legalized, there are UFO's off the coast of california, wating to take Obama to.......
msnbc lolol
G
greenmatter
now there is a good TV commercial !!!!!
and the non smokers/thinkers are sitting and saying "but,but,but,but,but,how could we possibly regulate it?" and all they have to do is drink another fucking beer (that they drove a block to get, and remembered their wallet because they usually get carded) and think about it for a minute
but wait, weed is different right?
and it will stay that way as long as there is money to be made and/or jobs that depend on it being illegal. lots of folks depend on the status quo to put food on the table
i hope harry anslinger is having fun with the jumbo sized pineapple in hell
the system is corrupt and broken, EVERYBODY in the country knows that, too many morons maybe? lotta dumb people in this world slowing down progress on all kinds of fronts...and a government that's happy to rob us blind and blame the other guy...
what i have learned is there must be a lot of backroom meetings going on, i mean we know the parties have think tanks all over the country constantly scheming ways to subversively get their objectives accomplished (which often aren't what the party claims are their objectives)...we know better than to trust a word that ANY of them say regardless of party(but we still do!). basically everything is fucked, and it's probably not going to get any better till it gets a lot worse, there are a lot of fat lazy morons in this country that would not put up with the economy crashing again, i think it would take another crash, a much worse one, to get the populous to rise up against the government and make a whole new one like iceland did(and now has the fastest growing economy in the world).
legalization will come when public opinion polls start to attract these corrupt polititions, they aren't scared to back hot button issues, legalizing pot is nothing compared to abortion, union, and voter rights that are being taken from people all over the country...the key is the politicians need to think that backing the issue will get them elected...they don't care about these issues at all, they just pretend to so that they can pick up more votes.
Obama is trailing in Colorado, one of the most important states of the election, and in that state the democratic party is BACKING legalization...partially as a litmus test for the president...if the state dem's get MORE support by backing legalization, and Barack is still trailing in October, he will definitely back it...because like all other politicians, it doesn't matter to them if they do good or bad policy, as long as they get elected again...they don't really give a crap about our pot unless we can give them more time in office...
you can't trust politicians, and you can't trust corporations, together they are tearing this country apart, thread by thread...and of course all major media sources are owned by those huge corporations, so NO major media can be trusted to be fair and unbiased...just look at the coverage of Iceland...they got rid of their government and started over, they are doing better than the rest of the world now but they are being blackballed in the newsrooms, because politicians, bankers, and corporations don't want us to think that maybe we could do the same thing here... what is there then to do?
maybe put your trust in npr, though at times even they seem a bit corrupted, like when reporting on Monsanto and gmo's...they always put a positive slant on it and don't even talk about the fact that corporations are using these patented plants to enslave entire countries to their seeds and products...
in the end all you can really do is find a nice peaceful firefly strewn bluff or meadow, smoke a bowl, lay under a tree, and try to seek solace that no matter what those assclowns do to this country, you are probably safe under that tree for now, newt Gingrich isn't going to walk by and try to hustle you into funding his moon colony, and if the housing market poops again that tree will still be alive...of course eventually you have to go back home passing all the misleading bumper stickers and ignorant lawn signs, get home in time to file your taxes so a large portion can be spent to chase you down and arrest you for defiling that poor firefly bluff with your killer marihuana cigarettes...
happiness comes from within, and politics is a major drain...you should never give up, but you gotta realize that the more you let them stress your lives over things that don't directly affect you and your family day to day...the less happy a life you are living, and you being depressed and stressed is not making them want to stop their games...so don't give them that power, they are all just TOOLS, and we need to do the best we can to weed them out, but with so many people out there all with different opinions, it's not going to happen fast and we need to do our best to only stress about it just enough to make an informed decision in November...we need to do our best to ignore 95% of what they say...the useless, twisted polls and statistics, misleading adds, and the fear tactics they use so effectively to control the morons in this country...
what i have learned is there must be a lot of backroom meetings going on, i mean we know the parties have think tanks all over the country constantly scheming ways to subversively get their objectives accomplished (which often aren't what the party claims are their objectives)...we know better than to trust a word that ANY of them say regardless of party(but we still do!). basically everything is fucked, and it's probably not going to get any better till it gets a lot worse, there are a lot of fat lazy morons in this country that would not put up with the economy crashing again, i think it would take another crash, a much worse one, to get the populous to rise up against the government and make a whole new one like iceland did(and now has the fastest growing economy in the world).
legalization will come when public opinion polls start to attract these corrupt polititions, they aren't scared to back hot button issues, legalizing pot is nothing compared to abortion, union, and voter rights that are being taken from people all over the country...the key is the politicians need to think that backing the issue will get them elected...they don't care about these issues at all, they just pretend to so that they can pick up more votes.
Obama is trailing in Colorado, one of the most important states of the election, and in that state the democratic party is BACKING legalization...partially as a litmus test for the president...if the state dem's get MORE support by backing legalization, and Barack is still trailing in October, he will definitely back it...because like all other politicians, it doesn't matter to them if they do good or bad policy, as long as they get elected again...they don't really give a crap about our pot unless we can give them more time in office...
you can't trust politicians, and you can't trust corporations, together they are tearing this country apart, thread by thread...and of course all major media sources are owned by those huge corporations, so NO major media can be trusted to be fair and unbiased...just look at the coverage of Iceland...they got rid of their government and started over, they are doing better than the rest of the world now but they are being blackballed in the newsrooms, because politicians, bankers, and corporations don't want us to think that maybe we could do the same thing here... what is there then to do?
maybe put your trust in npr, though at times even they seem a bit corrupted, like when reporting on Monsanto and gmo's...they always put a positive slant on it and don't even talk about the fact that corporations are using these patented plants to enslave entire countries to their seeds and products...
in the end all you can really do is find a nice peaceful firefly strewn bluff or meadow, smoke a bowl, lay under a tree, and try to seek solace that no matter what those assclowns do to this country, you are probably safe under that tree for now, newt Gingrich isn't going to walk by and try to hustle you into funding his moon colony, and if the housing market poops again that tree will still be alive...of course eventually you have to go back home passing all the misleading bumper stickers and ignorant lawn signs, get home in time to file your taxes so a large portion can be spent to chase you down and arrest you for defiling that poor firefly bluff with your killer marihuana cigarettes...
happiness comes from within, and politics is a major drain...you should never give up, but you gotta realize that the more you let them stress your lives over things that don't directly affect you and your family day to day...the less happy a life you are living, and you being depressed and stressed is not making them want to stop their games...so don't give them that power, they are all just TOOLS, and we need to do the best we can to weed them out, but with so many people out there all with different opinions, it's not going to happen fast and we need to do our best to only stress about it just enough to make an informed decision in November...we need to do our best to ignore 95% of what they say...the useless, twisted polls and statistics, misleading adds, and the fear tactics they use so effectively to control the morons in this country...
Latest posts
-
The Real History Of Northern Lights, Written By The Guys Who Did It- Latest: CharlesU Farley
-
-
-
Latest posts
-
The Real History Of Northern Lights, Written By The Guys Who Did It
- Latest: CharlesU Farley
-
-
-
